He was one of six socialists elected to the City Council
The other five voted against this. If 80%+ of your politicians vote the way you want them to, that's a pretty good start.
And of course the DSA immediately censured him, demanded his resignation, and will likely expel him from the party if he fails to resign.
That's literally what the DSA needs to start doing. If you take their backing (they should be running their own candidates), then you vote how the DSA tells you to vote. The DSA membership will set the party line (obviously not a "central committee" or whatever. If you want to be taken seriously as a political org, you gotta play hardball that way.
Overall, from what we know of this story today, it looks like the DSA is doing a decent job of that. The vast majority of their elected members are voting how the DSA tells them to vote, and they promptly took action against the one who didn't. We'll see how the situation plays out over the next few weeks, but one week into this thing I don't see too much room for criticism.
they just need some core tenants and some leeway on the rest really. having a mandated policy for everything is a bad take for large organization with little governmental power
the problem is that even if he's expelled from the party, he's still got a 4 year term.
they gotta vet their people harder, or it's just going to be a way for the dnc to infiltrate and sabotage progressives.
I was part of the electoral process this year for the NYC DSA city council slate for the Brooklyn members. We got something like 20 applications and each questionnaire they have to fill out is like 20 pages long. There is a several week process of figuring out whether that race is a good one to run and which of the several candidates that applied would make sense to run. Theres tons of factors to consider, in one district this year 5 people had applied for example. The process is very detailed in trying to do our best to pick both whoever has the most clear socialist, marxist, etc views and who actually has been an engaged dsa member and who has the organizational and community background or ability to mount a successful campaign there. I might have more concrete ideological views than some of these candidates but im no city council material.
Then of course there's the matter of whether DSA helps their campaign or basically runs it. For most local races in most cities DSA can basically run the campaign so they're very engaged and we build a close relationship with the candidate and they become very engaged with DSA like in the recent NYC DSA state slate. For people like aoc and bowman we're definitely just engaged along the campaign and not have much to do with running it, so our relation isn't the same as with local ones. After all the initial process and interviews and forums the electoral group votes who to recommend to endorse, and then the branch electoral committee votes who to recommend, and then the entire chapter votes to endorse. So its a very thorough process imo.
In Chicago i believe they endorsed him in 2018, not saying that things are drastically different today but in many ways they are and the process always get improved from experience. I know with that race there was contention between him and endorsing Ugo which I thought was a much better choice but he lost the primary so Vasquez got the nod for the general. idk much details on the local chapter or what they thought. If a certain branch of a chapter is smaller they might have a smaller capacity to thoroughly vet or less of an ability to endorse a less well known person or someone that requires a lot more campaigning to win than someone who might already have experience or something. Once they win, just like with virtually any other candidate in any party, we can't control their thoughts lol, if someone decides they dont want to abide by the orgs base and go off to do something like this i mean breaking ties is the only thing to do. Its a shame but thats what happens when we still dont have any serious established political influence and institutional power. I'm glad DSA is holding him accountable on it though.
To be fair the other remaining 4 DSA alder people did vote no for this budget as they should have. So fortunately it's just one bad dude out of 5. It's not ideal but its still a really good effort by the DSA here in Chicago and I hope they can flip more seats in the next election too. If 4/5 seats the DSA earn each election actually stick with the DSA we're like 20 years away from full communism with just that. So. Critical support for CDSA right now with this
There's no amount of vetting that will stop this, an entirely different organizational structure is necessary.
Trail and error, we'll get there. Unlike the OG's, we have a century of real world examples to point to. We're building up from practically nothing. We'll get there, and I'm not just comforting myself by saying that. We'll definitely get there, you'll see....
Wow, America's largest leftist organization that was essentially a book club with 5000 members nationally 4 years ago might have some bad eggs slipping through the cracks. Unacceptable.
largest leftist organization
You mean the official radlib wing of the dnc lmao
Eh, depends on where you are. Mine's full of MLs and our chapter leadership is all very pro soviet/china.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, even if your local chapters of DSA are filled with kick-ass revolutionaries, it doesn't change the character of the national level organization as a radlib non-independant-party and a non-workers-party.
And unless you're using your membership in such an organization as a means of driving people further towards joining/forming revolutionary workers parties/unions/councils, you're reinforcing bougeoise power through participation of electoralist theater politics
Oh, DSA is seen as a stepping stone. Our leadership is actually really intertwined with SRA and we have active relationships with some newly formed unions (nurses and an upstart service union). The service union is overtly socialist in their messaging.
DSA is prime ground for radicalizing people.
Goodgoodgood, don't forget to suggest to your leadership to reach out and make connections with your local PSL, PCUSA chapters, and other revleft orgs so you can help/get helped on building up that good old dual power in your region.
The SRA guy is big on left unity and is involved with all the local orgs. We have a PSL chapter, but it's only like 20 people that chill at our local Kava lounge.
It's alright, I usually get kratom if I'm going. It gets you a little high, but nothing crazy. It's basically a methadone alternative
I am once again asking you libs to read more than just the damn title.
for those who missed it
https://www.chicagodsa.org/2020/11/24/chicago-democratic-socialists-censures-alderman-andre-vasquez/
Im not a fan of Left Voice, its a trot rag and they always try to start this dumb drama. This for example is just not true, there is a process to expel a member and its been used before. Literally the second he voted yes DSA moved to censure and start the process to expel him.
Vasquez, although censured, remains a DSA member. This highlights that the DSA has absolutely no mechanisms to hold elected officials accountable, even if they clearly vote against the interests of oppressed people.
Also something I learned is that Vasquez wasnt even the CDSA endorsed candidate, Ugo was in the primary but he lost and Vasquez was also running as a socialist and he was going on to the runoff so they gave him the nod for the general, but he didnt have his campaign run entirely by dsa as some candidates like the nyc dsa slate did.
Thanks for this response. Its way more useful than my comment. :af-heart:
DSA has some serious problems with telling people to fuck off. The bylaws are meant to make it hard to expel people as their goal is to grow as much as possible. This leads to all sorts of weird issues like people accused of sexual assault not being expelled until it's called to a vote in a general meeting and there's an official vote with a 2/3rds chapter majority with the offender present.
If they pay their dues, you can't really do much without active vocal outcry for their expulsion.
how else other than a chapter basically holding a trial and voting on it would you kick someone out? there was a guy recently in nyc dsa that was doing shady shit and promoting things he shouldn't have that got kicked and hes like suing dsa now lol. idk much about the process but its not much more complicated than leadership holding a vote to kick them out. theres a specific process to expel anyone accused of anything like sexual harassment or something like that too. i mean i suppose basically anyone can join dsa and then purposefully be a wrecker, idk how we keep that from happening actually, tho new members cant really do much other than show up to meetings and help with campaigns
I wasn't saying there's really a better way to do it, I think DSA handles it pretty well especially considering how large the org is. Chapters have a lot of power to just suspend members and basically cut them out of any leadership positions immediately, but actual removal from the org takes a bit more. For us, the sexual harassment stuff was horrifyingly ingrained in the chapter. 2 years of a couple members in leadership basically using their elevated privileges to delete emails about their behavior and silence victims. When it all came out, they were pulled from their positions and took about 1 week to get to the vote and another week to have them expelled.
There are definitely situations where I think certain actions should immediately nullify your DSA membership, like being a representative and going against your chapter's interests or stuff like sexual harassment. Where reinstatement should be contingent upon a chapter meeting rather than the other way around.
DSA has some serious problems with telling people to fuck off.
I wasn’t saying there’s really a better way to do it, I think DSA handles it pretty well especially considering how large the org is.
Wait, which is it?
When it all came out, they were pulled from their positions and took about 1 week to get to the vote and another week to have them expelled.
There are definitely situations where I think certain actions should immediately nullify your DSA membership, like being a representative and going against your chapter’s interests or stuff like sexual harassment. Where reinstatement should be contingent upon a chapter meeting rather than the other way around.
A one-week turnaround is as close as you can get to immediate if you're a large group and you do even basic fact finding about the issue. And a "guilty until proven innocent" rule is far too easy for wreckers and feds to exploit.
Let me live in my contradictions damn it!
(You're totally right)
Has he been expelled already, or are they just at the censure stage?
Not sure, but I know there have been calls for him to resign from DSA.
https://www.wbez.org/stories/alderman-andre-vasquez-censured-by-chicago-democratic-socialists/b73021ed-ece0-4fcc-99a6-817684023cbb?player=open
Here is an interview where he justifies it. His central argument is lesser-evilism. He thought he was voting against an even worse budget, because allegedly the other budget option being discussed involved cutting 350-1000 city jobs, largely union. Now I don't know what those jobs are - they very well may have been Police or police adjacent jobs, which I mean, GOOD. But that's his argument.
idk anything about the votes they had but sometimes theres a possibility that people are voting no because some think theres too much austerity and no because some think theres not enough austerity. in nyc for the police budget a lot of people voted no because they didnt want to "cut $1b" but progressives insisted on voting no because the "cut" was just moving money around and didnt actually cut anything. the budget passed and it didn't cut shit. I know this chicago budget passed by a small margin, and idk if for the second budget they might have actually had votes to pass an even worse budget. I mean if all the dsa candidates were voting no id assume that wouldnt be the case tho i have no idea on the details
i agree that entryism as a means to "take over the party" is a dumb idea that wont ever play out in that way, but entryism whereby running candidates on democratic ballot lines to get socialists in office is still in most places the only thing to do. theres something like 155 DSA endorsed elected candidates on federal, state, and local levels and im certain maybe only a handful of them would win reelection if running 3rd party
https://www.chicagodsa.org/2020/11/24/chicago-democratic-socialists-censures-alderman-andre-vasquez/
He has been called on to resign his membership with the DSA. If he doesn't resign he's likely getting expelled. The motion to censure and demand his resignation passed 107-2.
The motion to censure and demand his resignation passed 107-2.
the DSA has to purge him and two other people
It's one thing to kick out members who don't follow the party line when the party line has already been established; it's another thing entirely to start purging people on the losing end of internal votes. The goal isn't to have unanimous consent on every party vote; the goal is to get your top-level politicians to act as a disciplined block that maximizes the influence of the party.
From what I can recall of the original threads that popped up when this became an issue a few days ago, the dissenters' best argument was that the party should have some form of punishment short of expulsion. Without knowing all the details of the situation, that's not an unreasonable point.
the party should have some form of punishment short of expulsion
Having them forfeit their salary would be a good start.
I wonder how ironclad you could make that sort of contract.
Not that I'm aware of. The full text of the statement is still available on their twitter and the Red Star (the news bulletin run by the CDSA mentions it) https://midwestsocialist.com/2020/12/01/red-star-bulletin-issue-19/
The site did get a redesign so that's probably why it 404s now. Last I heard of the issue was Alderwoman Rossana publicly saying Andre needs to be held accountable and needs to either resign or be expelled.
“Respectfully, no organization can decide who is and isn’t a socialist,” Ald. Andre Vasquez said.
[laughs in democratic centralism]
HAHAHA
please mr politician remember your solemn oath to democratic socialism! oh no don’t get corrupted by the bourgeois system, everybody will be mad at you! this is going on your socialist permanent record! fuck
we repeatedly asked him if he supported socialism and he kept saying yes, the workers should control the means of production (a good sign)
then we went deeper into investigating his political beliefs - are cops bad? yes, he nodded - all of them are bastards.
what about violence, we asked, that’s bad, right? he didn’t get tripped up at all - he said it’s only sometimes bad, and never when the oppressed are acting against an oppressor.
at that point, we were feeling certain he was a Real Leftist and a Good Person, and had no inkling that we were in fact dealing with a shrewd political operator who would go rogue - in the future we will add more trick questions, and maybe make members do harder things, like graffiti and protests, or shake on a blood pact
oh so you mean once people grift us and acquire power, they’ll just pursue political self-interest or otherwise integrate into the electoral system? all of the purity testing is beyond pointless without real systems of accountability and control?
hmm, well, fuck
