With the membership approaching 100k, and with the structure of the organization being democratic and up for revision given a strong enough push from the internal caucuses, why are there still unaffiliated american socialists?
 I think the predominate view on this website is that DSA is a monolithic organization that is simply full of radlibs and social democrats or democratic socialists, however the richness of the caucuses and the amount of local marxist caucuses which are attempting to reform the DSA is in my opinion largely ignored here.
 The Democratic Socialists of America is *our* organization as socialists of america and if you critique it without affiliating yourself and without acting to change it, than what are you truly doing? It is definitely one of the twelve types of liberalism for you criticize in private but not to the collective itself. Problems you have with the DSA from your critical perspective should be brought up every month at your local general meeting. Critique from outside the organization, as if you were not a socialist, is not going to affect change. 

tl;dr: as a chapo who didn’t join DSA for years bc of the stigma here calling them radlibs, i ask of you, why are you seriously not in the DSA. for if you don’t like it, then join and act in the oppositional caucuses; and if you do like it but just haven’t joined, then come on comrade follow suit.

edit: This struggle session has been quite bountiful I will say. We have learned that there are three instances in the DSA's constitution that allow for (1) the expulsion of members that are under the discipline of democratic-centralist organizations (2) local charters will be revoked if the majority of members become under the discipline of democratic-centralism and that (3) local youth charters will be revoked if majority of members become. dem-cent.

  • PermaculturalMarxist [they/them]
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 years ago

    I feel like you're kind of downplaying the genuine differences people have on the question of how to organise. Some people don't like the hierarchical structure and prefer horizontal organising, others don't want to deal with the ideological ecclectisism and prefer to organise among people with similar ideology. Also, I think people can totally critique an org without affiliating with it so long as it is a critique grounded in what actually is materially going on and comes from a principled, non-sectarian place. I don't affiliate with DSA because I'm an ML who really values organising in a democratic centralist, bolshevik style party. Maybe you dont agree that MLs should be doing that and they should join the DSA instead, but if I was in DSA in the communist caucus I would just wish I was in an ML party instead.

    • PaulWall [he/him]
      hexagon
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 years ago

      My point is why can you not do both? Being in the DSA isn’t mutually exclusive with being active in the PSL or other democratic centralist organization. You would be able to at least vote in national and local DSA internal matters. The DSA should serve as a catch all for anti-capitalist politics wherein we can all have congregation. There is no reason to prevent organizing outside of that scope also.

      edit: also even the bolsheviks were affiliated with the larger Russian Social Democratic Labor Party as the vehicle through which they practiced mass membership politics and as the vehicle through which the early stages of the revolution was organized

      • PermaculturalMarxist [they/them]
        ·
        4 years ago

        You're right, and I know people that do that where I'm at but some of us only have time to be in a single org. DSA would absolutely be part of the united front as that formation becomes more concrete so I understand where you're coming from though.

        • PaulWall [he/him]
          hexagon
          ·
          4 years ago

          I appreciate that comrade, joining and contributing no time at all still affords you voting rights by the way! Something to consider in the effort to de-liberalize the united front!

      • PhaseFour [he/him]
        ·
        edit-2
        4 years ago

        Being in the DSA isn’t mutually exclusive with being active in the PSL or other democratic centralist organization

        PSL considers DSA a political party, not a "catch all for anti-capitalist politics." This is different than how DSA views itself. The consequence is that PSL members cannot also be members of DSA. Your proposal would require delegates to the PSL National Congress to approve a motion that recognizes the DSA as a broad coalition that the PSL wants to enter.

        I feel like this would be disastrous to the relationship between PSL and DSA. Most DSA members I know would, rightfully, see this as an attempt to co-opt DSA. We can cooperate and coalition without PSL becoming a bloc within DSA.

        Even the bolsheviks were affiliated with the larger Russian Social Democratic Labor Party as the vehicle through which they practiced mass membership politics

        The Bolsheviks, as a bloc, decided to participate in the coalition RSDLP until 1912. That is a little different than individual Bolsheviks choosing to also be members of the RSDLP.

        • PaulWall [he/him]
          hexagon
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 years ago

          It seems also that in the DSA constitution bylaws Article 1 Section 3 members who are under the discipline of a democratic centralist party are subject to expulsion from the DSA. So it isnt just the PSL preventing members from joining DSA, the DSA can expulse members who are in PSL if it is found out. You learn something new everyday

          • PhaseFour [he/him]
            ·
            4 years ago

            Hopefully that never gets used against DemCen caucuses within DSA.

        • PaulWall [he/him]
          hexagon
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 years ago

          I guess at that point I would critique the PSL's designating of the DSA as a sectarian political party; however you are right in the sense that I cannot critique members for following party discipline as they of course should do.

          • PhaseFour [he/him]
            ·
            edit-2
            4 years ago

            I understand that criticism. Having been in DSA and other political parties, DSA is something different.

            A major reason I chose to join PSL is that the party provides significantly more national support than DSA in my experience. When I was in DSA, our branch was isolated from other branches, and our members were generally distrustful of the national organization.

            In my experience, PSL has a very supportive national structure. There is regular coordination between the branches, the party provides a lot of helpful resources, the central committee seems to faithfully carry out the platform voted on at the last congress, and the trust branches place in the central committee leads to a strong unity in action. The party has a much larger influence than its membership would imply.

            IIRC, the attempt within DSA to do this is to take advantage of their massive membership. DSA does have impressive membership numbers. But here are my criticisms:

            • There are no expectations of members in DSA, so the number does not say much. My local chapter claims 500 members, but most of those people were not active organizers. I met around 75 people during my time in DSA.
            • Building a nation-wide democratic centralist structure from the ground-up is not easy. I was involved with getting a police abolition organization off the ground in just my city. The hardest part, by far, was building the structure of the organization. Recruiting has been comparatively easier.

            Also, I don't feel like I have lost much from leaving DSA. I still have a strong relationship with many of the members, and we still coalition together. I don't remember casting any particularly important votes during my time.