In what way? Are you saying that the left of DSA has gone liquidationist into a fundamentally reformist org? Like given up their left principles in order to participate in a project that could only amount to betrayal of the working class?
If so I’d challenge you to be more concrete, so we can have an actual discussion. I’d also wager that the average member of SoR would humiliate you in practical experience in liberation struggles. I think there’s grounds to criticize them, but that’s not what you’re doing. You sound like a Bad Empanada cut out talking shit about people who have been in Israeli and American prisons, or had their first experiences organizing in the Arab Spring. I don’t know you, but the cuck claim really comes off as a self report.
By all means criticize DSA, nobody criticizes DSA more than DSA members. But criticize based on what it is, not what gets “based” reacts in discord servers full of ultraleft furniture salespeople.
The left caucuses keep participating in an org whose politics is dominated by the dem party entryists that are its largest member groups. They could be using the time and energy they waste in DSA can be used in an actual Socialist org or party. The left caucuses of the DSA destined to be cucked by the bourgeois electoralist caucuses like SMC.
This is demonstrably false. There is currently a left wing majority on the National political committee, and many major committees that make up the national org. The 2025 convention saw absolutely abhorrent and bad faith behavior from SMC specifically, which damaged them politically so much that the other right-moderate caucus, Groundwork, broke with them and drifted closer to (Marxist caucus) Bread and Roses which at the time was, and still is, the dead center of DSA in practically very way. On the other hand, the left was united in purpose and expanded the already left NPC with more left members. I’ll admit, this dynamic exists in some places, NYC for example, but the left is still highly active and gaining strength and momentum.
Meanwhile the right of DSA basically has nothing but dirty tricks. The more the left grows, the more the right exposes themselves as unprincipled opportunists. The defeat of the One member, one vote resolution, which would empower them to whip inactive members to pass their own agenda was close but ultimately defeated by the united Left of the org which values direct participation over liquidating of democratic processes into whoever has the most resources to bend the org to its will. And the majority of membership sides with the left in preserving the active base of DSA.
The left has only gained ground in DSA. What is far more likely is that the reformist elements will try to break from the org to go over to the progressive wing of the Democratic party. The right has many good activists and organizers so I don’t want to slander too much, but at the end of the day they still need to warp reality and play political games in order to hold onto power. In NYC, its different but OTOH, NYC has gained incredible electoral ground that has garnered lots of new membership for the national org. In most chapters, those new members are getting their political education from leftists. Even the NYC chapter is like 5 branches, each larger than most chapters, and each one with a distinct character.
If the left loses to the right in '27, it wouldn’t surprise me since the new members coming in are from the broader, somewhat affluent layers of the working class, which is probably the biggest weakness of the org. But practically, nobody joins DSA and becomes more right wing. Don’t underestimate how easy it is to engage new members in a discussion about “moving the Democrats left,” and without being dogmatic and just letting members talk through the possibility of it, watch their minds change in a more radical direction. I’ve personally helped lead discussions like this in a pretty conservative area and watched minds changed organically with very little input.
I think one of the best arguments we could make against DSA, is that while it occupies the left of the working class unpopular consciousness, it is in practice often to the right of even the moderate-left of the working class. But this too can be remedied with just good old fashioned ground game. The work of building coalitions in a city can discipline the reformist elements, especially when a chapter or branch votes, for example, to accept a compromise deal from local establishment democrats, just to have the rest of the coalition – made up of moderate union members and even fucking Indivisible – vote down the compromise deal and stay with the principled direction for the campaign.
The left of DSA is facing the actual contradictions in the system and winning within the org. Maybe that changes, I’ve def seen the signs and heard solid arguments for why a split is inevitable. But so far, I really haven’t seen evidence of it, especially where the left is active and working together. When I read comments like yours, its like you don’t even believe in the power of Marxism, like its some ideas that get defeated by power. But Marxism has the truth on our side, and the right can only win through dirty tricks. The left at DSA has gotten quite good at thwarting the infiltrators, opportunists and reformists, though obvs there is still ground for criticism and development.
When I read comments like yours, its like you don’t even believe in the power of Marxism, like its some ideas that get defeated by power. But Marxism has the truth on our side, and the right can only win through dirty tricks.
The online-left has quite a few armchair MLs who clearly have no on the ground political praxis whatsoever. If you present yourself as a leader in any part of your social bubble right now, it is actually quite easy to get people on your side, sometimes they just do it on their own, just like you brought up in your post.
The US left has so much momentum right now, but instead of using a Marxist based analysis to discuss what the move should be to effectively direct that momentum, some seem to want the left to lose until they decide to do it “the right way”. This is overly dogmatic, a lot of materialist analysis has to do with “working with what you got”! We know that the imperial core is naturally a limiting environment when it comes to revolutionary potential.
How are you communicating with the working class around you? They arent going to read theory, so it is on people like us to walk them through it. I would imagine that you are starting that conversation with Mamdani before you get to Lenin, but maybe that’s just me.
Def good points. I try to remind myself that sectarianism is actually a structural consequence of divisions of labor under capitalism rather than this or that member of the class having bad ideas. Confusion and idealism are forced upon us by a ruling class that wants to dominate not just our time and labor, but our minds and our spirit. As a class they are structurally incapable of sharing power. Some people I think have had heinous experiences, and I’ve def seen those people being told that they are “too radical” or whatever by leaders of other orgs outside of DSA. I’ve been able to recruit those people on many occasions to more radical political work! But I’m sure to the people who I also call ultraleft, mostly because of their refusal to work within a workers movement not because of any position, buy I’m sure I just seem like one of those people too.
But because sectarianism is structural, then there is ultraleft opportunism, which I’m especially worried that a lot of people fall for while they’re just trying to be on the right side.
DSA forbid Demcent, but the left has gotten that rule rescinded as part of a larger effort to build DSA into an actual socialist party. It is an encouraging development if one practices a principled theory of change. But admittedly there is a long way to go toward actual discipline within the org.
Also the Bolsheviks had sects too, some had to be dealt with and others worked the self out over the course of active political struggle. It takes time to build durable organization, and its particularly frustrating as time seems to be running out. But demcent isn’t an ideal, it is a dynamic strategy that ensures the actual leaders of a section of the org are actually elected with broad support rather than creating informal power structures which drive political divisions. The factionalism in DSA I believe is just a stage necessary to move from the sect that it was toward the revolutionary party it will need to become.
The fact is, sectarianism is a structural condition imposed on us by our conditions. DSA is breaking down those divisions, not sustaining them. Idk how else it would possibly go down trying to organize extremely idealist, confused class on a mass level without having to organically working through that confusion, via struggle. You can slap a demcent label on an org, but that doesn’t make it part of the workers movement. You know, there is another definition of sectarian that doesn’t mean “full of sects” but rather a sect that stands separated from the mass movement. Revolution def isn’t a popularity contest, but ideas only prove themselves in practice.
In what way? Are you saying that the left of DSA has gone liquidationist into a fundamentally reformist org? Like given up their left principles in order to participate in a project that could only amount to betrayal of the working class?
If so I’d challenge you to be more concrete, so we can have an actual discussion. I’d also wager that the average member of SoR would humiliate you in practical experience in liberation struggles. I think there’s grounds to criticize them, but that’s not what you’re doing. You sound like a Bad Empanada cut out talking shit about people who have been in Israeli and American prisons, or had their first experiences organizing in the Arab Spring. I don’t know you, but the cuck claim really comes off as a self report.
By all means criticize DSA, nobody criticizes DSA more than DSA members. But criticize based on what it is, not what gets “based” reacts in discord servers full of ultraleft furniture salespeople.
The left caucuses keep participating in an org whose politics is dominated by the dem party entryists that are its largest member groups. They could be using the time and energy they waste in DSA can be used in an actual Socialist org or party. The left caucuses of the DSA destined to be cucked by the bourgeois electoralist caucuses like SMC.
This is demonstrably false. There is currently a left wing majority on the National political committee, and many major committees that make up the national org. The 2025 convention saw absolutely abhorrent and bad faith behavior from SMC specifically, which damaged them politically so much that the other right-moderate caucus, Groundwork, broke with them and drifted closer to (Marxist caucus) Bread and Roses which at the time was, and still is, the dead center of DSA in practically very way. On the other hand, the left was united in purpose and expanded the already left NPC with more left members. I’ll admit, this dynamic exists in some places, NYC for example, but the left is still highly active and gaining strength and momentum.
Meanwhile the right of DSA basically has nothing but dirty tricks. The more the left grows, the more the right exposes themselves as unprincipled opportunists. The defeat of the One member, one vote resolution, which would empower them to whip inactive members to pass their own agenda was close but ultimately defeated by the united Left of the org which values direct participation over liquidating of democratic processes into whoever has the most resources to bend the org to its will. And the majority of membership sides with the left in preserving the active base of DSA.
The left has only gained ground in DSA. What is far more likely is that the reformist elements will try to break from the org to go over to the progressive wing of the Democratic party. The right has many good activists and organizers so I don’t want to slander too much, but at the end of the day they still need to warp reality and play political games in order to hold onto power. In NYC, its different but OTOH, NYC has gained incredible electoral ground that has garnered lots of new membership for the national org. In most chapters, those new members are getting their political education from leftists. Even the NYC chapter is like 5 branches, each larger than most chapters, and each one with a distinct character.
If the left loses to the right in '27, it wouldn’t surprise me since the new members coming in are from the broader, somewhat affluent layers of the working class, which is probably the biggest weakness of the org. But practically, nobody joins DSA and becomes more right wing. Don’t underestimate how easy it is to engage new members in a discussion about “moving the Democrats left,” and without being dogmatic and just letting members talk through the possibility of it, watch their minds change in a more radical direction. I’ve personally helped lead discussions like this in a pretty conservative area and watched minds changed organically with very little input.
I think one of the best arguments we could make against DSA, is that while it occupies the left of the working class unpopular consciousness, it is in practice often to the right of even the moderate-left of the working class. But this too can be remedied with just good old fashioned ground game. The work of building coalitions in a city can discipline the reformist elements, especially when a chapter or branch votes, for example, to accept a compromise deal from local establishment democrats, just to have the rest of the coalition – made up of moderate union members and even fucking Indivisible – vote down the compromise deal and stay with the principled direction for the campaign.
The left of DSA is facing the actual contradictions in the system and winning within the org. Maybe that changes, I’ve def seen the signs and heard solid arguments for why a split is inevitable. But so far, I really haven’t seen evidence of it, especially where the left is active and working together. When I read comments like yours, its like you don’t even believe in the power of Marxism, like its some ideas that get defeated by power. But Marxism has the truth on our side, and the right can only win through dirty tricks. The left at DSA has gotten quite good at thwarting the infiltrators, opportunists and reformists, though obvs there is still ground for criticism and development.
The online-left has quite a few armchair MLs who clearly have no on the ground political praxis whatsoever. If you present yourself as a leader in any part of your social bubble right now, it is actually quite easy to get people on your side, sometimes they just do it on their own, just like you brought up in your post.
The US left has so much momentum right now, but instead of using a Marxist based analysis to discuss what the move should be to effectively direct that momentum, some seem to want the left to lose until they decide to do it “the right way”. This is overly dogmatic, a lot of materialist analysis has to do with “working with what you got”! We know that the imperial core is naturally a limiting environment when it comes to revolutionary potential.
How are you communicating with the working class around you? They arent going to read theory, so it is on people like us to walk them through it. I would imagine that you are starting that conversation with Mamdani before you get to Lenin, but maybe that’s just me.
Def good points. I try to remind myself that sectarianism is actually a structural consequence of divisions of labor under capitalism rather than this or that member of the class having bad ideas. Confusion and idealism are forced upon us by a ruling class that wants to dominate not just our time and labor, but our minds and our spirit. As a class they are structurally incapable of sharing power. Some people I think have had heinous experiences, and I’ve def seen those people being told that they are “too radical” or whatever by leaders of other orgs outside of DSA. I’ve been able to recruit those people on many occasions to more radical political work! But I’m sure to the people who I also call ultraleft, mostly because of their refusal to work within a workers movement not because of any position, buy I’m sure I just seem like one of those people too.
But because sectarianism is structural, then there is ultraleft opportunism, which I’m especially worried that a lot of people fall for while they’re just trying to be on the right side.
Removed by mod
DSA forbid Demcent, but the left has gotten that rule rescinded as part of a larger effort to build DSA into an actual socialist party. It is an encouraging development if one practices a principled theory of change. But admittedly there is a long way to go toward actual discipline within the org.
Also the Bolsheviks had sects too, some had to be dealt with and others worked the self out over the course of active political struggle. It takes time to build durable organization, and its particularly frustrating as time seems to be running out. But demcent isn’t an ideal, it is a dynamic strategy that ensures the actual leaders of a section of the org are actually elected with broad support rather than creating informal power structures which drive political divisions. The factionalism in DSA I believe is just a stage necessary to move from the sect that it was toward the revolutionary party it will need to become.
The fact is, sectarianism is a structural condition imposed on us by our conditions. DSA is breaking down those divisions, not sustaining them. Idk how else it would possibly go down trying to organize extremely idealist, confused class on a mass level without having to organically working through that confusion, via struggle. You can slap a demcent label on an org, but that doesn’t make it part of the workers movement. You know, there is another definition of sectarian that doesn’t mean “full of sects” but rather a sect that stands separated from the mass movement. Revolution def isn’t a popularity contest, but ideas only prove themselves in practice.