Why Socialist Alternative Members are Joining DSA
www.socialistalternative.org
We are in a new historical period, and socialists must adjust to this deeply changed situation. 2020 will be remembered as a crucial turning point worldwide with the pandemic, economic crash, the biggest protests in U.S. history after George Floyd’s racist murder, and of course the end of the Trump

Looks like Socialist Alternative is going to try to make DSA form a workers party by having some of it's members join DSA.

Current DSA by-laws allow for chapters to expel members for being in Democratic Centralist organizations but its not automatic. It also seems like SAlt isn't telling their members to join en-masse, just a few to push for a new workers party at meetings.

My DSA chapter isn't happy about this but it seems like most apprehension seems to be from their experience with individual SAlt members, first and the rudeness of the tactic, second. But there seems to be little consideration of their goals.

  • mrbigcheese [he/him]
    1·
    4 years ago

    The fact that the bylaw specifically signals out dem centralist affiliations as a reason that can be used for expulsion specifically is pretty incoherent and needlessly antagonistic. Expulsion for outside interference can apply to any group that enters DSA including people from like the green party, democrats, etc. with the purpose of specifically making a front group or influencing internal affairs at the behest of a different outside group. If people from those groups can be stopped it doesnt make sense to then also signal out specifically dem centralism as another reason in it of itself. Also people should know DSA has no bylaws against dual carding with other orgs. People being outraged that socialists are joining a catch all socialist org seems silly to me. Did people just expect the 25+ other socialist orgs that exist to not eventually consolidate in certain ways once DSA grows larger in size?

    • gammison [none/use name]
      2·
      4 years ago

      I would support some changes to the clause, but the text

      Members can be expelled if they are found to be in substantial disagreement with the principles or policies of the organization or if they consistently engage in undemocratic, disruptive behavior or if they are under the discipline of any self-defined democratic-centralist organization. Members facing expulsion must receive written notice of charges against them and must be given the opportunity to be heard before the NPC or a subcommittee thereof, appointed for the purpose of considering expulsion.

      is imo not that bad. I see it as a tool in the toolbox for a chapter to kick someone out and discourage dualcarding in orgs that are opposed to how DSA operates. If someone in SAlt wants to join DSA, it should be because they think SAlt is not working and they need to try something else, they should not be torn between both orgs. It's a can clause, not a will. No chapter is just going to chuck someone because they're dual carding in like Solidarity, because Solidarity doesn't act to undermine DSA. Nor is someone dualcarding with SAlt going to be removed by their chapter unless they start shit. The only people that would get auto thrown out are like WWP members.

      I could support changing the text to be something stronger though, like being under the discipline of a demcent organization historically antagonistic to DSA.

      • mrbigcheese [he/him]
        ·
        4 years ago

        If you want to ban dual carding than submit that as a proposal, but since there is no such bylaw, it just feels like a bad faith argument. If someone is in a socialist org thats not too big and the local dsa chapter also isnt too big but growing faster, they could very well want to start getting involved with DSA too since for the most part we all undertake similar strategies. Also if there is a party that someone is more interested in and DSA doesnt really have people of that tendency or a local caucus or something beyond electoral someone might have a reason to join another org as well and work with them on different things than what dsa is doing. Why would we demand that person break ties and have to leave their org and the people they knew? Realistically that just discourages people from joining and it hinders growth.

        • gammison [none/use name]
          1·
          4 years ago

          I think that's a vanishingly small amount of people. I mean NYC DSA added more than 1000 people during the recruitment drive. That's more than the membership of every other socialist organization in the city. In my own chapter we've only ever had a single person ever that was torn between joining DSA and another org, and it was IMT. The smaller parties are not active except in large democratic cities, there's nowhere where the local PSL or SAlt chapter is larger than the local DSA one, or where the DSA one is small enough that it has no working groups outside of an electoral one and there's another org present in appreciable numbers.

          • mrbigcheese [he/him]
            ·
            4 years ago

            Yeah but it varies from city to city, some dsa chapters just dont have what to offer to people like NYC does, and if people want for whatever reason to also be involved with a different party I dont see why that would matter. I just dont see how people see a downside to more socialists joining and organizing within DSA, or why we would deter people from doing that. I know people in the MC that are in DSA as well, i could certainly see it consolidating more if marxist caucuses in dsa grow further.