I'll plug the IWW, I guess. Landback is a little out of scope, but we do try to address settler colonial issues, we've made some resolutions on that, and we have the Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee which ends up doing a lot of work with empoc people (given the nature of the American prison system and all).

The IWW won't endorse lib politicians or campaign for them, which can be a concern for other socialist orgs. We have quite a few union shops, and even recently we've won actual material benefits for workers. And, of course, the IWW makes an explicit rejection of "a fair days wage for a fair days work", and calls for the abolition of the wage system (and capitalism).

The IWW doesn't have any issue with dual-carding or being a member of other socialist organizations (if I remember right, DSA doesn't allow PSL members, or something), it isn't trying to be a political party, but instead a labor union.

It's not without issues, of course, but those are mostly at the national level (and should hopefully be less of an issue next year). Major conduct violations (harassment, SA, etc.) pretty quickly lead to expulsion, but such violations aren't that frequent. There isn't screening to become a member, but joining an organizing unit (GMB, IU, etc.) generally requires an interview.

As far as I can tell from an outsider viewpoint PSL is the org with the best lines and also has electric growth energy. The latter being incredibly important in terms of motivation of the membership and future prospects of the org.

It's doing something right to be an ML org actually seeing growth and popularity within the US.

If you mean a national org I guess PSL would be it. FRSO is mostly irrelevant and varies a lot chapter to chapter, some of which are even endorsing local lib politicians which at least PSL never does. WWP is also irrelevant and mostly boomers, albeit nice ones. DSA is a colonial project masquerading as leftist to trick newly radicalized people.

As far as upholding treaties goes, this is one of the most common and largest rallying cries of Indigenous people in the US today, so that position is probably taken up by orgs like FRSO because they do not have Indigenous people internally to rely on for this and it is what a lot of Indigenous people openly advocate for. It isn't revolutionary compared to the abolition of the US government entirely and return of all land to the formerly colonized subjects but it is revolutionary if you think about how the new democracy movement in china was revolutionary for the time.

I think you're a bit confused about FRSO's line. It's extensively documented here: https://frso.org/main-documents/immediate-demands-for-u-s-colonies-indigenous-peoples-and-oppressed-nationalities/

We support the full sovereignty of all oppressed nations within the US

2. Full Sovereignty and National Development for Indigenous Peoples! The United States is based on theft of land, genocide, and destruction of culture of the Alaskan Native, Native American, and Native Hawaiian peoples. Today indigenous peoples have the highest rates of poverty, the poorest health care and housing, and the least education in the United States. Stereotyping and commercialization of their culture and continued loss of land are commonplace. The FRSO supports:

   Full sovereignty for Alaskan Natives, Native Americans, and Native Hawaiians. This includes upholding past treaties and abolishing the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the exercise of local political power. The right to national development. In the current period, this includes gaming and especially the return of indigenous peoples’ land and natural resources to make their sovereign areas economically viable. Protection for indigenous peoples’ traditions and culture, including full equality of languages, support for indigenous education, and an end to stereotyping and exploitation of their culture.

I recently wrote up my thoughts on FRSO as an org, if anyone is curious, here

😠

My experience with the PSL has been good as far as democracy goes, I feel like my ideas and the ideas of my comrades are taken into account and used to shape the overall structure which we work in and novel ideas are often celebrated internally, and while I want to say "this is just my experience with my branch" I've found the same experience when working with other branches in other geographic areas. However, as with all things, there's constant improvements that need to be made always, but this is recognized by almost everyone I work with.

In regards to indigenous issues however, these things are touched on in the party's book Socialist Reconstruction (available on your libgen instance of choice) in which it was openly recognized that much future indigenous policy would have to then be shaped by working with indigenous organizations and people. However I'd certainly not say from my experience that there's a colonist chauvanism character to the party or it's leadership, this has not been my experience.

Ultimately I joined the party because it's the most visible, largest, and most dynamic socialist party and organization in the United States; while like all things in reality admittedly imperfect. Since joining I've been nothing but impressed with the people I work with, with the like-mindedness, and the really productive work ethic and desire towards building a revolutionary consciousness in this country and a revolutionary party ready to confront the next crisis of capitalism the US faces. I shouldn't be taken at face value though, you should speak to others who're active in the PSL or a potential recruiter if you're interested by signing up at pslweb.org/join. If you find that it's not a good fit for you it's okay.

WWP are good comrades with good principles, but the organization isn't quite there imo. I tried joining as a candidate, found out that their candidate classes were only on a day I was unavailable, and they were like "okay, that's no problem!" Which seems like pretty poor standards to me. Also they kept asking me if I could be a delegate on international trips, on very short notice, despite being a new candidate and not having a passport.

PSL seems to have standards for their members and are trying to form organizational infrastructure in the form Liberation Centers. Definitely strike me as a more serious party.

why would you think "upholding past treaties" is a red flag? all of them were broken by the US goverment to take land from indigenous people

Where and what did you hear about the PSL's stances on settler-colonialism? I've learned to generally be cautious about any self-professed communist party in Seppoland, but my impression is that the PSL is one of the better parties yonder wrt Indigenous issues. It's really the CPUSA and "American Communist Party" that I've heard bad things about, while people generally seem to only praise the PSL in my experience.

"upholding past treaties" with native Americans, which is a red flag

Why is that? It would immediately be an enormous land back program