In the first week of our #DSA100k recruitment drive, 2500 new members joined! Stand with our 75,000+ fellow members to organize for the election and beyond. https://t.co/WBWtgQ1LUQ pic.twitter.com/IBPqnQZapq— DSA 🌹 (@DemSocialists) October 9, 2020
Idk where people get the idea that DSA is going to push me towards communism. Basically every single DSA person I've ever met is wholly subsumed by liberal hegemony and will drop everything to try and get a social fascist elected dogcatcher. Like they're still just trying to elect """"""""socialists"""""""" to city council here in Baltimore as if that's going to do a fucking thing. I know different chapters have different characteristics but honestly the class character of DSA as a whole is petit bourgeois. Isn't it like 30% of their members make over $100k/yr?
Alienating folks because they make a high wage is silly. If they work for a living then they likely identify more with you than their multi-millionaire CEO. Also, a post-revolution society will need individuals who are currently paid well under our capitalist system. Shunning potential class traitors moves them right.
Nothing is "leftist" because there is no such thing as "leftism". It's a bullshit meaningless term like "progressive".
If you don't understand how the petit bourgeois and PMC classes have different class interests than the actual Proletariat than honestly you should do some more reading. There is a very breadtube sentiment among the western left that "anyone who works for a wage/salary is a worker" or whatever and they're right but they're wrong to think that their interests align with those at the bottom. Even blue collar skilled workers who grew up poor but make $85k/yr now as a plumber or electrician have very few interests in common with the Proletariat and are usually the most reactionary segment of society. The reactionary nature of the Labor Aristocracy and Petit Bourgeoisie manifests as overt Fascism, while the "progressive" conservative nature of the PMC manifests as Social Fascism.
Having your organization be 30% petit bourgeois/PMC is going to effect the class character of its politics. If they're a small fraction that must be subordinate to a Proletarian majority that is fine but 30% is enough to pull any org in a certain direction.
Way more than 30% of DSA have a "PMC consciousness." Aspiring graphic designers working service "but it's just temporary" is a serious cohort in the org.
In their defense, a large portion of the college-educated proletariat thinks this way right now.
Sure but their CEO controls mass amounts of capital.
Yeah the DSA probably doesn't have great foreign policy, but it's one of the best places in the US to find politically active individuals who are going to be more open to leftward leaning ideologies.
This mentality is inherently liberal. You're putting the superstructure ahead of the base by assuming that people will become revolutionary by pure ideology alone rather than their material and class interests. Honestly it seems to me like most "leftists" would just rather talk to college educated peers than poor black and brown folks who make up the actual Proletariat in this country.
I think people can be radicalized by ideology or material conditions, mostly a combination thereof.
"Honestly it seems to me like most “leftists” would just rather talk to college educated peers than poor black and brown folks who make up the actual Proletariat in this country."
^I don't see what this has to do with my opinion that the DSA could help move people down a path of radicalization. Seems pretty ad hominem at that, you don't know anything about me dude.
This is definitely true in terms of electoralism but I can't really be entirely against them given how much their organising efforts are genuinely helping. They've got some good organisers that do good work and even if it's helping them grow I think it's helping all the left grow, particularly when libs show up to protests and get shot at by cops for doing nothing at all.
and will drop everything to try and get a social fascist elected dogcatcher.
I don't think we'll ever get to "vote" for socialism so in that sense I'm anti-electoralism... but how is this a bad thing? Someone like Lee Carter is able to get into the system and at least try and make things better for the working class. So it has the two-pronged effect of maybe improving people's lives a little and definitely showing the public that we care about the working class and want to fight for them.
I mean, DSA = electoralism. And while electoralism is limited, if you think it's a worthwhile endeavor then I dunno, DSA seems pretty alright to me.
It's not incorrect that the residue of McCarthyism and American culture has put up an obstacle between the working class and socialism.
People aren't going to have their material conditions deteriorate to an arbitrary point then suddenly say "hm, yes, time for Communism" if they've been primed to hate anything to do with socialism since birth.
But that's not how shit works though. It's not an either or, people with a certain class position will never go left. Pepe that radicalize to the right tend to be people who had major privilege but lost it to the liberal world order. This is why militias are so big in the rust belt states.
I see what you mean. So people who never had said material status would then radicalize to the left--unless they had been consumed by Horatio Alger propaganda or other American exceptionalist thinking.
I suppose the question is not only how to support and militarize the working class where they are, but how to toss stones into the turbine of the rightward radicalization pipeline... if it can be done in the imperial core.
Yeah they may not be communists but they have a place in shifting the overall perception of socialism to the point where we can introduce communism.
Idk where people get the idea that DSA is going to push me towards communism. Basically every single DSA person I've ever met is wholly subsumed by liberal hegemony and will drop everything to try and get a social fascist elected dogcatcher. Like they're still just trying to elect """"""""socialists"""""""" to city council here in Baltimore as if that's going to do a fucking thing. I know different chapters have different characteristics but honestly the class character of DSA as a whole is petit bourgeois. Isn't it like 30% of their members make over $100k/yr?
Alienating folks because they make a high wage is silly. If they work for a living then they likely identify more with you than their multi-millionaire CEO. Also, a post-revolution society will need individuals who are currently paid well under our capitalist system. Shunning potential class traitors moves them right.
The CEO also "works for a living."
It's not about shunning people, but recognizing how the class composition of an organization affects it's politics
deleted by creator
If you're making over $100k a year, you're either a professional, in tech, or in management
deleted by creator
Lol. Don't be so dense. I didn't say the PMC are "the enemy." Just that they have distinct class characteristics that affect their politics.
Nothing is "leftist" because there is no such thing as "leftism". It's a bullshit meaningless term like "progressive".
If you don't understand how the petit bourgeois and PMC classes have different class interests than the actual Proletariat than honestly you should do some more reading. There is a very breadtube sentiment among the western left that "anyone who works for a wage/salary is a worker" or whatever and they're right but they're wrong to think that their interests align with those at the bottom. Even blue collar skilled workers who grew up poor but make $85k/yr now as a plumber or electrician have very few interests in common with the Proletariat and are usually the most reactionary segment of society. The reactionary nature of the Labor Aristocracy and Petit Bourgeoisie manifests as overt Fascism, while the "progressive" conservative nature of the PMC manifests as Social Fascism.
Having your organization be 30% petit bourgeois/PMC is going to effect the class character of its politics. If they're a small fraction that must be subordinate to a Proletarian majority that is fine but 30% is enough to pull any org in a certain direction.
Way more than 30% of DSA have a "PMC consciousness." Aspiring graphic designers working service "but it's just temporary" is a serious cohort in the org.
In their defense, a large portion of the college-educated proletariat thinks this way right now.
"workers of the world, unite with bourgeois college kids!"
I'd be fine with uniting with them, just not being subordinate to them lol.
Sure but their CEO controls mass amounts of capital.
Yeah the DSA probably doesn't have great foreign policy, but it's one of the best places in the US to find politically active individuals who are going to be more open to leftward leaning ideologies.
This mentality is inherently liberal. You're putting the superstructure ahead of the base by assuming that people will become revolutionary by pure ideology alone rather than their material and class interests. Honestly it seems to me like most "leftists" would just rather talk to college educated peers than poor black and brown folks who make up the actual Proletariat in this country.
First off, thank you for the compliment.
I think people can be radicalized by ideology or material conditions, mostly a combination thereof.
"Honestly it seems to me like most “leftists” would just rather talk to college educated peers than poor black and brown folks who make up the actual Proletariat in this country."
^I don't see what this has to do with my opinion that the DSA could help move people down a path of radicalization. Seems pretty ad hominem at that, you don't know anything about me dude.
Yes, this is the divide between the intelligentsia consciousness & the proletariat consciousness in communist parties.
Revolutions do not succeed when led by the intelligentsia, because they are not materially driven.
And yet pretty much all successful socialist revolutions up till now were led by the intelligencia 🤔
Not everything is about you personally lol. The only thing I said about you personally I'd that your analysis is wrong.
Eh. That wasn't the main point but whatever.
Sorry man, I don't really get your point then in context to what I was trying to tell the original comment I replied to.
The point is that it's worth considering how the class composition affects the DSA as an organization
I think that's a fair point.
All I was trying to say to the original comment was that just because people get paid doesn't mean they can't also be comrades.
We will need engineers and programmers
Totally, also pharmacists, dentists, doctors. All kinds of folks.
This is definitely true in terms of electoralism but I can't really be entirely against them given how much their organising efforts are genuinely helping. They've got some good organisers that do good work and even if it's helping them grow I think it's helping all the left grow, particularly when libs show up to protests and get shot at by cops for doing nothing at all.
I don't think we'll ever get to "vote" for socialism so in that sense I'm anti-electoralism... but how is this a bad thing? Someone like Lee Carter is able to get into the system and at least try and make things better for the working class. So it has the two-pronged effect of maybe improving people's lives a little and definitely showing the public that we care about the working class and want to fight for them.
I mean, DSA = electoralism. And while electoralism is limited, if you think it's a worthwhile endeavor then I dunno, DSA seems pretty alright to me.
Electoralism is only a small portion of what the DSA actually does.
Social Democrats America tbh
Who else is gonna shell out $50 annually to join a political party?
I make less than half that and I spent $50 on Uber eats this week
Yep. Whatever you think of the DSA, this is good.
deleted by creator
the Overton Window is idealism not materialism
Norms and mores of a society aren't material?
Maybe if we just change the ideas in everyone's heads the material reality will change :liberalism:
It's not incorrect that the residue of McCarthyism and American culture has put up an obstacle between the working class and socialism.
People aren't going to have their material conditions deteriorate to an arbitrary point then suddenly say "hm, yes, time for Communism" if they've been primed to hate anything to do with socialism since birth.
No, but when people's material reality conflicts with the prevailing narrative they question it.
Right... but leftward, or rightward?
One has the path of the least resistance.
But that's not how shit works though. It's not an either or, people with a certain class position will never go left. Pepe that radicalize to the right tend to be people who had major privilege but lost it to the liberal world order. This is why militias are so big in the rust belt states.
I see what you mean. So people who never had said material status would then radicalize to the left--unless they had been consumed by Horatio Alger propaganda or other American exceptionalist thinking.
I suppose the question is not only how to support and militarize the working class where they are, but how to toss stones into the turbine of the rightward radicalization pipeline... if it can be done in the imperial core.
Why?