The PSL just released two documents related to the recent Marissa Sanchez post detailing her experiences at the national level of the PSL. I’m going to be posting both of them as well as their full text for archival purposes.
I should note a couple things before I link these things:
- At multiple points, the report mentions that Marissa was reportedly fine and thankful during and after the immediate events of this incident and it’s cover up. This is shown to be an example of proof that she was fine at the time, and leads into building the case that this is a factional decision. However, I am not convinced that this means she is cynically using this to split the party for her own ends. Betrayal Blindness is a collection of responses and symptoms broadly related to a person being betrayed by someone whom they rely on for financial, personal, romantic, or political needs. In order to come to terms with my experience of the same exact tendencies on a local level I read the book “Betrayal Blindness” by Jennifer Freyd, and I implore everyone to read it as well.
- Repeatedly they claim this is the result of a factional dispute. That might even be true in some ways, perhaps Marissa saw that there was a different way to organize going forward and it gave her the ability to be able to accept the abuse she faced. This, however, doesn’t have to only come from a sense of macabre cynicism, being able to finally use her trauma as a loaded gun to split the party for her own selfish ends as described in the article. For myself, when I stepped away from the party for my Leave of Absence, I was able to begin to be engaged in mass organizing work that I wasn’t in prior, that I didn’t have the time for. This has given me the courage to be able to stand up and say that I don’t think is acceptable at all.
- I am not in a faction, have not been in communication with anyone in a faction, and my disgust is only colored by my own similar experiences and emotional waves being thrown right back in my face as someone who’s faced the exact same tactics myself. I’m genuinely just a trans woman by myself, I have some friends and comrades, but our local branch is still up in the air
The party routinely expects things like this to be leaked, so they prepare for the possibility. Given they already know we’re going to do this, I’m just going to share the documents here for you and others here, and I leave it up to you and your comrades to decide how you feel about the party and it’s current leadership. For me, the emphasis on how this fits into factional warfare is not only not convincing, but honestly disgusting.
Comprehensive Report from the Central Committee in Response to Marissa Sanchez’s Letter
NDC Statement (Sept. 2026), the password is ndcstatement
c\main so main
character assassination painting the victim as an irrational, cynical bad actor & the leadership clique playing the victim of a sinister factional clique (rich coming from an org born out of a split), revolted but wish i could say i was surprised.
@gayspacemarxist@hexbear.net re: the faction/split, i can guarantee firsthand that many, many members quit after the actual factional split who had nothing to do with it because of the A) noxious, accountability-dodging, character assassinating, and deflecting way leadership handled it in what should have been a moment of collective reflection and improvement and B) because the complaints outlined across multiple different documents (not just Walter’s letter) showed a pattern and gave voice to exploitation, mistreatment, & an undemocratic posture many of us had experienced from Party leadership.
i have mixed feelings about how those comrades handled things myself, but that’s not the point. it’s completely cynical and ugly of PSL leadership to use as a smokescreen in what should be a moment of reckoning with how the Party navigates SA (even if it’s true that Marissa sympathizes with the folks who left! beside the point and completely tone deaf of them to bring up in this context).
i’d also just add that, across all of these different complaints, there are milder-but-still-fucked harmful, consistent patterns of behavior outlined: bunch of times you’ll see accusations of Brian openly reprimanding, yelling at, and demeaning comrades beneath him in spaces supposedly dedicated to dissent and internal democracy for the crime of…expressing a dissenting opinion. Not to mention Walter’s charges that he was called into three on one screaming meetings with other Party leaders about strategic disagreements, which given my much more limited firsthand experience I do believe happened.
that’s my take & firsthand experience with all that, you can take it or leave it. i also don’t intend to call you out, it’s just that you were the main person i saw to mention the issue around the faction and i didn’t want my own firsthand experiences as a former member to get buried in the thread (and i know you and i both have skin in the game). PSL’s leadership structures and its central leaders create the exact kind of domineering, high control environment that breeds coverups over more grievous harms like this one. probably gonna tap out for a bit after this cuz this shit is making me feel sick.
I feel exactly the same. Locally we had no kind of faction or factional behavior as far as I was aware of at the current moment, but this is outrageous and indicates that this isn’t a tent to healthily stay under any more. It’s been something that feels really raw considering how much of my life and myself I’ve put into this party and movement, but it’s also kind of cathartic to know I wasn’t alone. Wish you peace comrade
right back at ya comrade

on one hand i feel almost ashamed that this was an org i was once proud to be a part of. but on the other hand, i think we should both be proud of ourselves for taking a leap of faith into trying to be part of the struggle. and at the end of the day, the organizations/organs/specific forms are just means to an end, just bridges to the end goal of a better, more just, more humane, and more loving world. the struggle for that world will always be there for us, when we’re ready and should the right circumstance/opportunity come knocking

Locally, as someone in another org? Fuck those Stalinist-positioned, Trot-tactic douchebags.
My local DSA was doing good work among community direct service, and the PSL came in to EAT the DSA at the expense of the work. When we all quit instead of following orders nobody discussed first, we’re all “factionalists”.
Oh wait, they split from their previous org to adopt the Stalinist positions, but changed little else. Who themselves split from Trots. Who themselves split from Trots. The “central committee” at the core of a “central committee” probably has a secret third, deeper “central committee” that’s just a clique of yes-comrades.
And we wonder why the membership knows nothing, but the leadership is this foul.
The fact that any of this backs up your wild assumptions about ML parties and gives you fuel to talk like this only furthers my disappointment
deleted by creator
i appreciate your perspective comrade. im not anti-centralized leadership either, i just think there needs to be coherent & robust mechanisms of internal democracy to keep them accountable (whether this would be more direct say in how representatives are chosen or something else, i don’t know for sure, figuring out the shape of things like that would be a collective process). i think we’re both in agreement that PSL rank and file deserve much better than the current crop of leaders, though, and i hope changes are made there.
don’t blame you at all for seeing something worth fixing and fighting for, even if i came to different conclusions (at least with the org as it exists right now), particularly considering the existential threats you face in this hellscape by simple virtue of existing as the person you are. while i feel demoralized by what a deeply sorry situation this is, i hope something good can come of all this and that our institutions can improve.
Lol they pulled a Platner. I mean they used his excuse almost exactly, splitters instead of Republican operatives though.
It isnt worth rehabbing PSL, orgs are a dime a dozen and that IMO is a good thing. Organizers, however, are valuable. We should not waste their potential in a place where reporting SA will be used against them.
This is a fucking terrible response. Frankly they need to just let new people take charge, this is dogshit.
Removed by mod
Every time someone is sexually assaulted they need to replace everyone in the entire leadership of the organization?
The central committee is mostly just one family who are apparently very enamored with a self admitted sexual predator. By not removing Eugene they endangered every woman in the organization. Hopefully, a new committee would simply ostracize the predator immediately rather than constantly making excuses for them. Real justice against an abuser should be much more violent than that, but I recognize the constraints we’re under.
I don’t support splitting, but I do support getting rid of weak links.
mostly just one family
Who is the family?
Anyone following this even remotely closely is aware of the Becker clique. Sanchez’s piece this week mentions Ben Becker (who is married to Karina Garcia), Brian Becker, and Dick Becker (who is married to Gloria La Riva).
If you know anything about the PSL, you know about the Beckers. They sit in the public-facing and powerful positions quite disproportionately.
I have a comrade from Chicago who was often saying “Brian Becker feels really creepy” since at least 2019.
The Beckers
If the whole leadership knowingly collaborated on the cover up and so on, yes, they should be replaced. If the org cannot handle that, it should not exist as a national org.
The rebuttal pretty clearly lays out why there wasn’t a “cover up”.
I don’t think it does that at all, but regardless can you see how the point that I was making wasn’t really about that but rather a hypothetical? Granted, I agree with the hypothetical, but my point in discussing it isn’t to prove what did or didn’t happen but to explain what would be appropriate if it did happen.
This might seem obtuse to you, but can you see the difference? The reason that I am explaining this to you is that I don’t have the slightest interest in your opinion on what actually happened, given what you have said so far. I am just commenting on an issue with significance “downstream of” the real point of dispute.
Well it seems pretty unhelpful to entertain vague “hypotheticals” when there is an actual real scenario being discussed from multiple points-of-view. It seems appropriate to try to avoid FUD and casting aspersions on entire organizations.
Do people just say FUD now? I thought that was reserved for those weird internet cultists living in denial about something they are compromisingly invested in. You know, crypto guys.
My initial comment was not casting aspersions at any organization nor was it doing “FUD,” it was explaining part of the framework for how these issues should be dealt with in general, which here is relevant to because if one side of the debate is right, then clearly the relevant leadership would need to go.
If someone is on trial and you point out the severity of the minimum sentence for the alleged crime, is that casting aspersions? No, obviously not, it’s explaining some of the significance of the trial.
I would further add that the initial comment that I responded to was unhelpfully flippant because it totally sidestepped these exact terms by question-begging the issue of culpability (to deny it) while insisting that the person you are responding to is saying we should punish people who we aren’t holding as culpable. I think this is indefensible and rhetorically underhanded.
How many times are these organizations going to claim “everyone that says something bad about me are only doing so as a differing political faction” The Communist Party of Canada did the same thing when one of their male members was a serial creep to other male members. So it’s not even just misogyny here, male members aren’t safe either and will thrown under the bus as political outsiders.
deleted by creator
Dude, I’d probably want to split too, this is ridiculous
deleted by creator
What exactly are you suggesting they do?
And no one in good faith would attempt to basically steal organization resources for some new org that has nebulous goals.
How often is a party split a good thing? There is a long history of this stuff happening and it’s why you have a bunch of tiny impotent left-wing orgs that achieve nothing (as designed).
Also where is the evidence that any issue with this process cannot simply be resolved with an election or resolution or something? You’re basically accusing the entire structure of the organization of being irreparably broken, which seems obviously false.
Exactly!
Marissa continues to say she never wanted Eugene’s expulsion or punishment, nor does she want it to “define the rest of his life.” If that were the case, this is not how she would have gone about things.
Fuck you.
I didn’t read the full timeline of the party’s handling of the assault - I’m confident that it’s a very convincing account and gives evidence that she was happy with how things were handled. But regardless of all their evidence, if she says it was insufficient, then it was insufficient.
The hardest part about this and the other recent break from PSL is that the party alleges state interference, and there’s not a good way to discern if that’s the case.
I think both of the folks that made statements as they left were acting in good faith, and wanted what’s best to advance socialism.
They decided that PSL is not be the vanguard party that the US needs, and that making a public post criticising the party was the best way to advance socialism.
That is consistent with what I’d do if I thought people should leave the organization, though I would probably direct them to other organizations that I believed in.
On the other hand, I get straight up scared when I think about what we’re up against. This is exactly how the state would try to neutralize a threatening party.
So we’re left with a spectrum that everyone gets to pick their preferred place on. On one end, we have “PSL leadership is corrupt” and on the other we have “PSL is subject to state attack”. Choose your own reality!
PSL members will skew towards the latter and further PSL’s reputation as a “cult”, skeptics will flock to the former, and future issues will further cement each side’s views.
I don’t know what the best thing to do is, but just crying “cointelpro” isn’t sufficient. In my opinion, the top leadership needs to be replaced - at this point the reputation of the party is being harmed by their continued leadership, and I’m confident that there are many capable party members that would be able to run the organization just as effectively.
I think you nailed the core challenge. It’s hard to doubt that the PSL is subject to deliberate and active sabotage by motivated parties like intel agencies and factions. That said the key issue is really one of professionalism. The point about creating the NDC is a good one and indicates that they see a problem and are working to address it. The issue I see, and that this statement shows, isn’t that there’s necessarily a cult around the central committee, it’s that there are social cliques throughout the leadership. Another commenter alluded to facebook drama and I think that’s a good way of describing it.
The PSLs goal is to build a cadre of professional revolutionaries, which is a good goal and it’s something that they seem to do fairly well. What this incident and response indicate is that, regardless of hostile external parties, an organization with leadership bodies that have a number of insular social circles will necessarily be vulnerable to this sort of problem. It seems to me that it would be worth the PSLs time to investigate how other ML parties have acted to avoid these kind of issues and implement steps to mitigate against future incidents.
Last but not least, while the restorative justice angle they reference in the letter is a good one it’s still reasonable to hold leadership to an extremely high standard. I personally agree with the approach they describe in the initial response but at the same time the fact that a central committee member got drunk and acted inappropriately at a party function should be sufficient to remove that person from leadership going forward. As Mao said, “a revolution is not a tea party.” We can hold leaders to our highest standards without undermining the process of restorative justice.
The leadership should’ve realized these two things:
-
Puryear almost certainly have sexually harassed other women besides Marissa. You don’t go from being an upstanding man who respects people’s boundaries to grabbing women’s genitals. Like the vast majority of sexual predators, there’s almost certainly cases where he tests the boundaries of other women before making a move on Marissa. Puryear almost certainly have copped a feel before or use the excuse of being touchy-feely when he’s drunk or any other excuse. Perhaps Marissa isn’t even his first genital-fondling victim.
-
Just because Marissa was cool immediately after experiencing this traumatic experience doesn’t mean that she would cool after she began processing what actually happened. Most people don’t actually process much of what happened while or immediately after the traumatic experience happened. It takes time before they truly understand what has happened to them and what happened wasn’t right. They should’ve made their decision based on what Marissa five years after the incident would act. And I don’t think Marissa or most SA victims would be cool with their predator having their reputation completely intact.
-
“No you can’t just call out me being a massive sex pest, that’s called splitting the party!”
Removed by mod
One member groping someone at a party 6 years ago is a “massive sex pest”?
Yes… that is called sexual assault. Are you diminishing sexual assault?
It’s also not the first time this exact thing has happened in recent memory.
The PSL has a long established history of dismissing sexual assault and then attacking the victims.
Hell it’s well known enough that it’s in their description on prolewiki
“The PSL has been accused for decades of being cult-like in its organization methods and permitting sexual harassment and protecting sexual abusers (in locations across the country including Philadelphia, Carbondale, Chicago, Atlanta, Los Angeles, Sacramento, and Albuquerque).[16][17]”.
Removed by mod
Please listen to the women in this post with regard to your misogyny, this is an official warning.
Massive does not imply repeat offense. You can be a sex pest by “merely” harassing someone. Groping someone’s genitals nonconsensually is several steps worse.
I think you need to step away from the thread. You’re making an ass out of yourself.
Do you believe in the coincidence of a man doing this just once, and not having a pattern of similar behaviors?
do better, PSL
Well, it looks like the PSL core have opted to dig themselves in over this.
The Central Committee is calling this a hit piece, but what they are publishing could also be a tactically-motivated statement. They could just as easily be inventing a story
Without perfect knowledge, we are left to assess two main possibilities:
- Marissa is twisting the narrative to backstab the Party because she is a factionalist splitter, and became one after 8+ years in the party.
- Marissa is giving an accurate picture of how the PSL functions; the national party apparatus is sclerotic and nepotistic, it chronically protects abusers, it uses extensive secrecy and information control against its own members, and uses allegations of “splitting” as a cudgel against people who complain too much.
Apply a motivations analysis. Cui bono? What does Marissa have at stake here? She spent 10 years of her life building this party, just to throw it away over trying to vie for something… that put her in a higher position? She was in quite high positions. What do the Central Committee have at stake here? They have faced allegations like this before, and are justifying their positions in the face of criticism. They also have the image of the Party to uphold. Might they have something up their sleeve ready for just an occasion such as this? Might they lie about this former member’s motivations to try to clear themselves of guilt? Also consider the recently split faction. Does it make sense for them to use this as a vector, and market themselves as “people who were suckers in that party full of sex pests”?
Or, apply a power analysis. Is it more plausible that this woman is the victim, by being mistreated in the wake of the assault, or is it more plausible that the Party’s core is just a magnet for haters, and is the victim by having stories spun up against them?
Maybe even apply an analysis of what a base rate of incidents like this would be if it was part of a Cointelpro-style operation. Would you see public accusations coming up every few years, or would you see stories about it as frequently as the feds could pump them out?
Marissa alleges that the women on the NDC are there as tokens and effectively subservient to Ben. If they were, wouldn’t they vehemently say “We are not tokens and we don’t just do what Ben says”?
Old heads will remember what happened here with the allegations against Beatnik. I think there’s a remarkable contrast between those and what we’re seeing here.
My personal opinion is that if the PSL core was vindictively clinging to power and maintaining optics and the subservience and loyalty of its members, and more interested in convincing people that things had been appropriately dealt with rather than appropriately dealing with them, this is exactly what they would do: deny any substantial problems, make counter-accusations, and double down on the rigidity of the chain of command.
I highly recommend this Article that breaks down how the PSL handled the allegations surrounding the sexual assault at the Philly chapter. It clearly outlines a pattern of abusive cover ups that go to the very core of the leadership of the party
This is what the pls leadership thinks counts as consent.
The messages stated, “So Friday, when he was being overly coercive to get me to have unprotected sex— I was patient with him. I said no 10 times before I would literally move away from him— and that happened like 5 separate times on Friday. Pushing his boner into me, putting my hand on his cock. Because I thought that this is just how he grieves, and that he needs to feel connected to me this way and he needs this escapism.” Aclarado went on to text that she eventually relented and coercively agreed to sex for an “escape.” In PSL’s statement they referenced these text messages of Aclarado saying they had sex for an “escape” as consent, however, this shows the text messages were taken out of context and that the consent was being coerced.
This is the party leadership claiming it was a one time thing, the last time they attempted to cover up rape.
De la Cruz asked if Gnvinfo was aware of how long PSL was a party and told no, and she responded 20 years. She made it a point saying this incident was “one thing” in 20 years. De la Cruz was then told there was knowledge that it was not “one thing” as the document also included allegations of misconduct in Chicago. De la Cruz said the Chicago branch should be asked. Gnvinfo told her it was presumed to be appropriate to ask her as she’s a leader in PSL. Presently, allegations of misconduct into the PSL Chicago branch have not been looked into by GnvInfo to the same extent of research done into the Powers case in Philadelphia, however, transphobia is alleged along with allegations of an alleged abuser in PSL Chicago being transferred to the PSL Atlanta branch. De la Cruz implied that GnvInfo was getting misinformation from federal agents on medium, possibly in reference to Shae’s article. Gnvinfo referenced the larger document which contained text messages from Aclarado that directly conflicted with PSL’s statement.
If they were, wouldn’t they vehemently say “We are not tokens and we don’t just do what Ben says”?
Let’s be fair, they did exactly that. Did you read the statement?
“We are not pawns or pieces to be moved by some small cabal of men who supposedly predetermine our actions, but revolutionary socialists in our own right. Very few women in the party and in society do not have some experience of sexist violation. We are committed to building a world free from the exploitation and violence and abuse that we ourselves have suffered. Yet in a post that claims to seek a better world, those who are named are described as only extensions of the desires of our male comrades. Any serious leftist should think twice about this. We too lead the party. We make up the National Disciplinary Committee. We have spent hours on investigations and interviews and in discussions to ensure our party treats sexual misconduct with care, empathy and on principled views of what it means to transform our class and our society. We strategize the struggles in our workplaces and in our schools and in our communities. We play a visible and necessary role in the struggle and in the Party. It is unconscionable that we are repeatedly denied the right to visibility in attacks that claim to speak against the very violence that women are subjected to in society.”
That’s my point.
Someone who is hiding something from you is going to say “I’m not hiding anything from you, nothing at all”.
They deny everything and frame it as inappropriate to even make the consideration. That’s what an adept deceiver does.
This is embarrassing… Sexual assault survivor publicly expresses disillusionment with an accountability process, so you go to discredit her? As others have pointed out, sexually assaulting someone doesn’t come out of nowhere, it exists as a part of a pattern of behavior and cannot be treated as a single incident. Ideally I would like to see serious reeducation in a case like this, not just take a break and pinkie promise to stop drinking, then go back to same leadership role like nothing happened. (I forgot the go to therapy lol). Dogshit “accountability processes” are embarrassing and do a disservice to our movements and to survivors. Obviously In cases where reeducation is not feasible for any number of reasons expulsion is the reasonable course of action to protect other members. This is better than a shitty accountability process that doesn’t thoroughly reeducate.
They even went on to whinge about how the sexual predators poor little heart was failing due to the stress of all of this. Good! Maybe the universe will enact justice.
Its not my org but from the outside looking in… yeah. I don’t know if PSL has the capacity to do that kind of reeducation or how exactly they’d go about it, but it seems like the least you could do is demote the guy and do something a little longer lasting than “some therapy and sobriety, tapering off at 6 months”. Top leadership roles need to be able to change over time, if he’s so indispensible let him work his way back up from the lower levels by demonstrating better behavior and continued good work. Also like, if you couldn’t possibly tell the full central committee about this incident without word getting out and damaging the party publicly, then clearly your security and discipline is not up to the task of being a revolutionary vanguard party? Maybe they claim that was all Marissa’s wishes, but it seems to me like they may have an over-emphasis on keeping disciplinary action private and behind closed doors.
Rather than an org addressing the issue of a member accusing another member of sexual assault. This comes across as a faction accusing another faction of engaging in factional battle. The response itself is therefore part of that factional battle also.
An org shouldn’t operate that way. If a member(former or otherwise) accuses another member of something, org processes should handle that in the form of an investigatory committee being formed, then a cold PR statement, then pretty much nothing until the investigatory committee releases their findings and advice, followed by a final outcome in whatever form. And fine, if that ends up looking similar to this Report then that’s at the very least been produced by an investigatory committee spun off specifically for that job rather than by people directly involved.
The report even talks about the disciplinary process that exists now being different to then? So why is this being put out instead of just kicking it to the new process? As an excuse for not engaging those new processes with the issue? Just throw it into the process and what happens will happen. If they decide it’s been handled already then fine, if they decide it requires further action then also fine.
So why is this being put out instead of just kicking it to the new process?
Because Marissa released a public statement. They obviously have to release a statement giving PSL’s side.
Marissa’s statement also included factional language so that’s obviously going to be part of the conversation.
Why? No matured organisation does this. It goes into the organisational processes and follows the pipelines then out comes a brief professional public statement while the rest remains among those that need it.
Big public airing of this stuff in this way is just indicative of an org that has not matured past the point of feeling threatened by what is fundamentally social drama. Not to make light of the nature of the social drama, but it is fundamentally a social drama. There is no social drama threatening the existence of matured parties, so no matured parties feel the need to make big huge statements about it and stick to their rigid processes and professional PR statements.
For me it’s an indication of weakness and a lack of confidence in party structures or procedures that these issues should be sent into. A lack of confidence that’s probably held by both the membership and the leadership. That lack of confidence in the structures to handle the issue is what needs addressing to build a party that takes these things on the chin and keeps marching forwards. They’re not going to stop as the party gets bigger, they will increase as numbers increase.
I don’t think they can wait for something like this. You can tell by the response on hexbear alone this is a big deal, and the faction has used it as an opportunity to poach people as well. Hell, I received a message from one of the former PSL members trying to poach me with a link to this statement.
Whether you think they suck or not, PSL has to respond to this quickly or risk losing a sizable chunk of people to this newly developed faction, which seems to be targeting them as they’re growing in popularity and getting a bigger target on them as well.
Jesus, this reads like a teenagers Facebook drama post. Who the fuck thought it was a good idea to to publish this?
NDC Statement (Sept. 2026)
spoiler
The following statement was prepared by the National Disciplinary Committee to give our members an accurate account of the investigative and disciplinary process around an incident involving Eugene P. in 2020.
Marissa S., a former member of the PSL, posted a Substack article about this incident on September 7. The letter’s contents are understandably distressing. However, the letter seriously mischaracterizes the party’s actions and procedures. The article itself not only mischaracterizes the accountability process and events following the incident in 2020, but also attacks the central Party leadership and the NDC and undermines the PSL’s history in dealing with incidents of sexual misconduct, which are taken very seriously. It is important for members of the PSL to understand the context. The Party leadership is aware that Marissa has been communicating and working with the leaders of the recent faction, and former members are sharing the article online and sending it to current members across the country. The following document is not a comprehensive response to all the mischaracterizations in her article but rather an account of the investigative and disciplinary process related to the incident raised.
We also would like to make clear, for the sake of people having a full understanding of what happened, Marissa was an active participant in the entire process. She repeatedly expressed to multiple people, both in the immediate aftermath of the incident and in the years following it, that she felt supported by the Party and that she supported the process.
2020 Incident & Accountability
On March 29, 2026, the Standing Committee became aware that Marissa, a former Central Committee member considered a disciplinary incident involving Eugene in 2020 to have been mishandled, the accountability not severe enough, and the support for her to be inadequate.
The incident took place at a house party in** **November 2020. Marissa brought the incident to the attention of members of the Executive Committee at the time, which prompted an immediate investigation and disciplinary action. We do not share details of incidents widely, primarily out of respect for the comrades most affected by it. In the Party, the norms of our practices regarding disciplinary matters goes as follows: An investigation is conducted by the appropriate body, timeline is collected from all parties involved, disciplinary action is proposed. The proposed disciplinary action is typically brought to the victim before it is carried out. If any disagreements arise, we work through those disagreements with a path forward. Once a decision is made and the disciplinary action is carried out, it is not customarily re-litigated.
During the initial investigation, Eugene claimed he had been too intoxicated to recall the incident, but he did not contest it, and said he would comply with any accountability measure. He offered to resign from the Party. Marissa was involved in each decision made about Eugene’s punishment, and helped craft the decision that Eugene would be suspended from Party activity and leadership for six months. Eugene apologized to Marissa in a meeting she agreed to and facilitated by a leading Party member. Marissa made it clear she did not want Eugene to resign.
In the over five years, from the disciplinary action in 2020-21 to right before she resigned in 2026, Marissa never made the Party leadership aware that she had become dissatisfied about the disciplinary action taken. While she had been part of the accountability process at each step in 2020 and 2021, we only learned in March of 2026, six years after the incident, that Marissa now considered it insufficient and handled wrongly. Every victim, including Marissa, has the right to assert this and to look back on things differently with time. After Party leadership was made aware, the leadership reached out to discuss the matter. Marissa chose not to discuss this further and resigned from the Party. Following her resignation, the National Disciplinary Committee reached out again during the review period. She declined to participate.
As soon as Eugene heard that Marissa felt dissatisfied with the 2020 outcome, Eugene offered to resign from the Party. The Standing Committee accepted the resignation that same day.
Strengthening and Affirming the National Disciplinary Committee
At the time of the 2020 incident, the Party process in place to adjudicate misconduct was for a higher body to handle the charge. There had not previously been charges within the top leadership, and it was handled inside the top leadership as an uncontested charge.
In 2021, the Party initiated an independent National Disciplinary Committe, which was ratified by the Party Congress in 2022 with independent authority. Marissa was one of the founding members of this Committee and helped draft its protocols and processes based on the Party’s history in dealing with these matters. These norms have been used by other Party bodies to deal with new cases.
Following Marissa’s resignation, the NDC initiated a thorough review of the 2020 incident. The incident occurred before the NDC’s existence. The NDC reviewed notes and interviewed comrades involved to the extent possible. In its review, the committee found no evidence that the processes following the 2020 incident had been mishandled. It was particularly important that the accountability process had been swift. Marissa had been engaged at each step. Multiple people who were close to her at the time have independently confirmed that she expressed support for the disciplinary outcome, did not seek a different outcome and expressed she was being supported by the Party.
The NDC has, since its initial formation, been strengthened as a necessary step as the Party continues to grow. It is now institutionalized as a permanent standing and empowered body, composed of long-time women cadres. It has independent authority vested by the Party Congress. Any issues related to sexual assault go to it, bypassing all other leadership bodies, and all comrades must submit to its rulings. The NDC has the right to review all cases of sexual misconduct.
To emphasize, while we do share summaries and decisions of the NDC with the appropriate leadership bodies and occasionally members of the body most impacted, the NDC does not share details of its work or investigations with the wider membership. The primary reasons are to protect the privacy of the victims and to protect the Party from the machinations of the repressive state apparatus. Serious violations and egregious misconduct, which are not common in our party, are expediently investigated and lead to swift disciplinary action up to termination of membership. More often, the charges require time to conduct an investigation and understand the impact of any incident on those involved and on the work of the Party. Fundamental to our approach to these incidents is our understanding as Marxists that people can and do change. Comrades who violate Party norms, but remain in the organization, are punished appropriately and held accountable to ensure that they are meeting set expectations or terms of conduct. The victim(s) of those actions is(are) offered the ability to be involved in the determination of that punishment and the path forward.
The NDC has been working to standardize protocols and practices for all leadership bodies and develop leadership trainings on our protocol. This statement is accompanied by a short version of the protocols and practices of the NDC: https://drive.proton.me/urls/JZ1BYEFE28#RK4fFJa63hIa.
Signed by: Karla, Nathalie, Satya, and Sheila, on behalf of the National Disciplinary Committee.
I think the lesson we’re learning here is that a mechanism that is intended to protect the party seems to instead be causing harm to it. If this had been more widely known it would have defanged a number of the criticisms that have emerged here. Most of us understand that SA and other interpersonal transgressions will occur in any body of people. Being visibly proactive, taking a restorative justice approach, and having visible accountability aren’t necessarily incompatible and serve to demonstrate that the party is taking the correct line on important issues.
Exactly! Exactly exactly exactly; it’s inevitable that these things will happen, but my logic going into the party was that if these things occured prior and were learned from, then that’s a sign of positive development. But they clearly weren’t learned from at all; instead they rely on the same mechanical structure and thinking that honestly just comes across as deny, defend, discredit.
I joined the party wanting to give it a fair shot, and I did. I even figured that my experiences were either justified, then simply a hard call, then a mistake made by my direct leadership. However, this clearly goes to the core. This is fucking nuts and wild, these guys fucking suck and have shown they’re not above wasting everybody’s time by making the promise and building the platform for us USians to finally have the party we all desperately need while not having the integrity to practice the self sacrifice and honesty that leadership requires. Fuck these guys
Comprehensive Report from the Central Committee in Response to Marissa Sanchez’s Post
spoiler
This document was approved unanimously by the Central Committee on Sept. 10. It represents the most comprehensive report we can provide to members.
The Party for Socialism and Liberation has never taken the issues of sexual assault and misconduct lightly. The entirety of our politics is grounded in a well-developed understanding of the nature of oppression and exploitation in capitalist society. Sexual violence affects all people, but it does not affect all people equally. Women are, because of the system’s reliance on patriarchy, subjected to the most horrific forms of sexual violence to keep them dehumanized, isolated from society and the struggles of our class, and highly exploited within the political and economic system. Addressing the manifestations of oppression and the sexual violence that occurs is a requirement of the highest order. We have a proud 22-year history of confronting, rooting out and appropriately addressing these issues.
On Sept. 7, a lengthy article was published on Substack by-lined by former PSL member Marissa which relates a 2020 incident involving Eugene Puryear, a long-time Party leader who resigned in March of this year. That a woman worker who experienced violence as a young person, and then experienced a violation from a trusted leading comrade, is disturbing, and hard to read for all of us — including those of us who were aware of the incident and did not speak of it widely out of respect for confidentiality of the victim. The Party leadership has maintained, from the moment it took place to now, that this was an absolute violation, which required a swift response, and that Marissa should be supported.
At the same time, the narrative that she now develops, six years later, about what took place after the incident, is false. The history is rewritten to erase the actual care that was provided, to erase the accountability that took place, and to erase what Marissa communicated then and her feelings expressed for years afterwards of feeling supported by the Party leadership. The agreed upon norms of confidentiality in this and other accountability processes — which she helped devise — she now falsely portrays as a cover up.
As written, it appears as an unrelated exposé independently confirming the allegations of the faction that the Party’s elected leaders are nefarious, undemocratic individuals who cannot be trusted. In fact, it was released in a coordinated plan with the same factional operation that goes back as far back as March — which we document at the end.
We respect the right of all people to change their feelings and opinions over time about such traumatic incidents in their lives. But there are significant factual inaccuracies in what she has related about the accountability process that followed, the level of support she received and about the internal institutions of the Party. These must be corrected, and more information must be provided for accuracy. Due to the high-profile nature of this case, and the fact that we are currently under the highest form of state scrutiny and attack, letting a false narrative like this stand would only serve to sow greater confusion and provide a basis for the opportunistic larger attacks working to disrupt the Party and members’ work at this critical time.
Under our norms, the details of disciplinary matters and outcomes are kept confidential — especially out of respect to the privacy of someone subjected to sexual misconduct. But given that she has published an article, it is clear that at this time, six years later, we have no choice but to respond.
The incident and immediate aftermath
There has never been any effort to deny or question what happened to Marissa in November 2020. Eugene sexually groped Marissa at a holiday party. She was believed and not disputed. The Party leaders were shocked and angered that this could take place. Eugene, having been heavily intoxicated, said he did not remember the assault, but did not contest what Marissa said. He accepted responsibility and offered to resign immediately. Marissa said she did not want his resignation, and so another accountability process would be devised in discussions with her. Marissa was at no point challenged or questioned about the incident, as so often otherwise happens in society when women bring serious allegations against men in leadership. There was no foot-dragging or bureaucratic process. We moved swiftly and decisively in support of her and for accountability. The quickness of moving towards a resolution was not a form of pressure, but rather ensured real and immediate accountability from Eugene, and support to her. It was not an option to delay. He was immediately suspended and removed from the situation.
Before leaving the building, they had a brief meeting where he accepted responsibility, and said he would do whatever he could to remedy the harm; she told him why his actions were hurtful and disappointing, especially as a leader that she had looked up to previously, and with whom she worked so closely almost every day. She wanted to be able to work with him in the future, but it would take time and he would need to get professional help and work on himself. At the end, they tearfully embraced.
Screenshots of her messages to a confidant that day read, “The meeting went good. I said what I needed to say and feel that I got a very genuine apology. He is suspended. No clear time when he will be back.”
When such acts of sexual misconduct take place, there is no perfect process to repair the harm. Engaging the victim in the accountability process is important to restorative justice. In this case, the resolution, worked out with Marissa in the days that followed, was not that Eugene would “not chair CC meetings for a while,” as she says now. Eugene was suspended from all Party activities for six months — public meetings, internal branch meetings, all bodies of the leadership he sat on, all protests, etc. He was mandated to go into therapy, to try to get to the root of how this happened, and told to give up alcohol for the duration of the suspension, and not go to social activities where Party members would be present. This was developed in discussions with Marissa as an appropriate punishment and response for an offense of this type. She was adamant that Eugene not be expelled, as she told both Ben and the people she confided in at the time. The idea that Ben proposed to just “move on” and never speak of it again is totally untrue.
After taking some time off after the incident, Marissa insisted on returning to her work. Eugene returned to his office for his professional work, five weeks later, but remained under suspension from all Party work.
Eugene complied with the terms of the suspension. During this period, he forwarded on all speaking invitations he received, refusing all but one, which Marissa authorized in advance. He signed up for therapy and showed documentation of his visits. He swore off alcohol for the duration. In a series of private conversations, including in the debrief at the end of his suspension, he demonstrated genuine remorse and understanding of the harm he had committed, volunteered to do whatever else was needed, and affirmed that such heavy drinking was unacceptable. The Party leadership had confidence such a violation would not recur and was not a threat to the safety of others — and there have been no charges against Eugene in the years since.
After six months out of Party leadership and all Party activity, Eugene was reintegrated into Party life and resumed the many responsibilities he had been elected to perform. Under the practices and principles of our Party, leadership is not an “elevated status” but an embrace of more responsibilities — chief among them the development of more leaders. In the years after he returned, Eugene played a key role in recruiting, mentoring and training many new cadres, and Black cadres in particular, bringing them into the spaces of the Black freedom movement where he was already the Party’s most well-known figure. From that position of leadership, as a popular communicator and first rate historian of Black history, American history and global politics in the Marxist tradition, he resumed to make a significant contribution to the movement for socialism. Long-term demotions take place in the Party only when the assessment is that the person has a pattern of bad judgment or untrustworthy behavior, or has not adequately learned from their mistakes. In general, after an accountability process is completed, the Party puts members back to work to serve wherever they can best advance the struggle. For people who remain in the organization, there are no forever punishments.
At this time, there was no National Disciplinary Committee. The National Disciplinary Commission (NDC) was formed in 2021 and ratified by the 5th Party Congress in 2022 to institutionalize the accountability and disciplinary practices the PSL has engaged in since its founding to address any issues of sexual misconduct. If such an incident were to take place today, it would go directly to the all-women National Disciplinary Committee, which has independent authority vested by the Congress, and which all members, including Central Committee members, are subject to. Its decisions are final, and can only be overturned by the Party Congress itself.
cont below.
spoiler
Prior to the formation of the NDC, when any charges came up, the existing process over the preceding 15 years was for a higher body to handle the charge. There had never been a charge against someone in the top leadership itself. Marissa at this time was one of three observers to the five-person national leadership, which Eugene was a part of and which met remotely. The only other full-time national leaders in NYC were Ben and Marissa, which is why Marissa came to Ben and he responded to the situation the same day. To give a sense of the scale of the organization at that time, the two of them had been working out of Ben’s apartment in the years before COVID as the “national staff.”
At the time, two elected members of that leadership on the West Coast were told over the phone that Eugene had been suspended for six months due to misconduct at a party while heavily inebriated, without divulging the name of the victim, and he should not be contacted. The observer members of the leadership were told that he was being put into mandatory therapy including for alcohol abuse, and so would not be in the meetings for six months and was not to be contacted so he could focus on that. Marissa had input in what would be told to others, and what would not be shared.
Marissa’s letter includes supposed quotes from a conversation with Gloria La Riva shortly after her resignation in 2026. Gloria has replied, “The quotes Marissa provided are totally untrue and the description of the conversation is an outrageous distortion. While I knew Eugene had been suspended in 2020, I had not known it involved Marissa in particular. I did not say Ben and Brian mishandled disciplinary cases – leaders who I have total confidence in. The call turned to something I now realize had a deeper purpose on her part. In my conversation she began to say, ‘Everyone knows you and Richard were pushed out from the leadership.’ I said, ‘who says that?’ I was incredulous. When she insisted that was the case, without naming anyone, I told her that he and I are in California, and are in the Central Committee, and the Executive Committee is based in New York, as it should be. Even if I didn’t have a leadership post, I told her I have plenty of work in the party, and I am very satisfied with what I do. It was clear to me she was trying to turn me against the party, by appealing to what she assumed would be unhappiness on my part. I realized what she was doing. But what I didn’t know was the extent she was in ongoing communication with a group intending to rip apart the party. That became clear in the following weeks and I deeply resent her trying to use me against the Party leadership.”
To go back to the events of 2020: under Party norms, confidentiality is a central part of accountability proceedings, especially in sensitive issues. There was nothing unusual about that, then or now, and this did not constitute a “cover up.” She did not object to this norm. As someone who directed many disciplinary processes herself in the years before and after this incident, she always insisted on the same for others in her situation. Marissa helped write those very disciplinary norms into the Party By-laws, and into the National Disciplinary Committee protocols. In some cases, but not all, depending on the wishes of the impacted person, an apology and resolution may be communicated to a wider group of members. We make exceptions to confidentiality where we believe someone poses an ongoing threat to others’ safety, in which case they are expelled and other members, and others in the movement, are notified. When that is not the assessment, as in this case with Eugene, our process is informed by restorative accountability. Unlike the traditional retributive justice system—which relies on public record, public shaming, and punishment—restorative accountability relies upon confidentiality: for the privacy of the wronged party, for repairing harm, for creating space for honest self-reflection, and for successfully reintegrating the individual into work after they have sufficiently complied with the accountability process. An additional dimension in radical political work is that any and all sensitive information can and will be utilized by anti-Party forces, and state agents, to inflame internal contradictions or defame an organization publicly.
With that said, when Marissa expressed that she would like to confide in some more people, she then did so without any reprisal whatsoever. First she told two of the comrades she most trusted about what had happened, and her boyfriend at the time already knew. To the three of them, she said she felt supported by the Party leadership, and supported by Ben in particular, saying she had been treated with great sensitivity. She told a third leading member the same thing about suffering an assault and being well-supported by the Party leadership, without naming Eugene. She apparently told a fourth leader, also a close friend in the Party leadership, shortly after the suspension was over, naming Eugene. None of these confidants of hers were coached in any respect. When she expressed that the Party had supported her, these appear to be her genuine feelings at the time, confirmed by multiple people, including her then-boyfriend and closest confidants. Three of the comrades she brought into her confidence about this incident remained close with her for years afterwards; while she continued to confide in them about any range of personal things troubling her, no one has any recollection of the 2020 incident as one of them. All this was independently verified by the NDC in a 2026 review of the case. The NDC did not exist in 2020.
The following months and years: care and support in NYC and Los Angeles
In January and February 2021, Marissa went through a difficult and intense break-up in her relationship with her boyfriend. She confided in Ben repeatedly during this period, including coming to his house to talk about her relationship and personal struggles. During this emotionally challenging period, she received extensive care, attention and support – and expressed no dissatisfaction about the handling of the incident with Eugene. Her boyfriend, now ex, was also a co-worker in the same building. She had been doing intense Party work for a few years, which is a common cutoff time period for a staffperson. All this was impacting her work and happiness, and she expressed that it was time for a new chapter. Over time, she expressed the conclusion that perhaps leaving NYC would be preferable. The Party leadership thought of Los Angeles as a place she could make a big impact.
Contrary to her narrative, she was supported throughout this process. A comrade was assigned to drive her around full-time to see if she would like the city. When she did, she was given the apartment of a comrade in Los Angeles, money for rent and to buy a car — since in L.A. she would need one, and it is difficult to save enough as a staff person to buy a car. This was a sign of care and appreciation – and we have similarly provided relocation expenses for other former staff people after years of service to the Party. It is outrageous to now twist this into “hush money.” In Los Angeles, she was immediately integrated into the branch leadership, and her presence was celebrated as a newly arrived national leader.
Of course, with a new teaching job, and later grad school, while living thousands of miles away, the frequency of her communications with the party leadership in NYC changed. But it remained very warm, personal and caring. Below are just some of the exchanges. In 2022, while waiting to start back up at her job, she reached out for financial help from Ben, and he loaned her his own personal money. In 2023, after a tragedy in her family, she reached out to Ben for comfort: “I know we don’t talk as often as we used to, but you’ve always been in my corner so I wanted to reach out about this tough situation.” He immediately responded.
In 2023, after Ben helped her resolve a series of issues she was having in the Los Angeles branch, she wrote to express her gratitude: “I know you’re super busy, but it means the world to me that we have leaders like you that always make time for people.” When she heard Ben and his family were coming to Los Angeles that year, she invited them over for the holidays, and to meet her new partner.
All of this was in the years after the 2020 incident, at Marissa’s own initiative. This is not the behavior and words of someone who was shunned or grievously wronged. Although less frequent than when she was in New York, she still called Ben about major life decisions, and questions she was struggling with personally and organizationally. She did not bring up the 2020 incident in any of these discussions. If she had, there is nothing to indicate she would not have received the same sensitivity and attention she received in every other area of her life where she asked for support.
Marissa remained active in the National Disciplinary Committee throughout this period, and did not at any point ask to reopen or revise the remedies she sought from Eugene or the Party, nor did she advocate to revisit any of the Party’s disciplinary norms or procedures. It is not true that Ben and Brian directed the NDC’s work, nor did they overrule its findings and the targeted demonization of both in the letter is without factual foundation. It is also insulting to the members of the NDC who are strong and principled women comrades. The NDC, including Marissa, handled several complex cases during this period with great sensitivity and principle, providing a sense of justice and accountability to people seeking redress, while also upholding due process and Party norms. The NDC, founded in 2021, only was in session in the event of a serious case of misconduct, and none of the cases it has handled have brought disrepute to the Party.
The NDC, including Marissa, handled several complex cases during this period with great sensitivity and principle,
Wait wdym several???
To be honest, with everything said, I don’t think the issue is that it occurred. We’re organizing among the working class, and the working class will inevitably inherit many of the flaws of the world it is in as well as the world that came before. That there is a struggle, desire, and need to do better is a good sign. But the issue is that this statement doesn’t reflect the struggle to become better, it reflects a desire to bunker down and not engage with this on the level that is required as its considered dangerous to hold leadership to account; fucking somehow
What exactly do you want to see happen? To live in a perfect world where nobody is ever harming anyone? You’re seriously ???ing an organization establishing structures to handle disciplinary action to deal with sexual abuse and using those structures to appropriately deal with them when it happens?
I’m wondering how endemic the sexual predators are in PSL
I think to start I’d like to see them publicly oust anyone that admits they’re a sexual predator for the sake of women in the movement knowing who to avoid
Not to pile on here but I do think it’s really important to recognize how common a problem this is. Any organization needs to have robust procedures for investigating and addressing this sort of thing. If anything it is a lack of a strong and transparent process that caused this issue in the first place. If you haven’t taking the time to read the statement in full you may want to do so. The second time I read it I did so from the perspective of how could this particular situation, not the groping but the statement and counter statement, be avoided. It seems to me that better accountability and transparency would go a long way.
Sexual abuse can occur with any group of more than 1 person. It’s going to happen at some point or another when you have thousands of people together in proximity. That fact doesn’t mean it’s “endemic” any more than it is in society at large. What’s important is that the organization has structures in place to address it when it does happen.
I think to start I’d like to see them publicly oust anyone that admits they’re a sexual predator for the sake of women in the movement knowing who to avoid
So if you’d read the statement, you’d know that this is the actual official policy.
If that structure only leads to a half year suspension from a leadership position then it’s not an adequate structure and it’s reasonable to conclude that this organisation is not safe for women.
That structure isn’t what came up with that suspension because it didn’t exist yet. It was created at the first party congress after it happened when it was clear a stronger structure was needed.
spoiler
So something changed to cause this presentation after 5-6 years about both the NDC and the support she received. Marissa had remained in the Central Committee, and was re-elected to it in 2022, having been motivated by other national leaders at the Congress. But afterwards in Los Angeles, other local leaders began to find her less responsive to the needs of leadership, and hard to work with when she did show up. With interpersonal tensions rising, which had nothing to do with anyone in New York, she left the Los Angeles Steering Committee and became much less active in the Party, focusing on her work and family life. After a while, in December 2024, she requested to be re-integrated into national work, and was immediately added back in. She reported to a confidant that her meeting with Brian “went good!” “I feel proud of doing what I had to do [in her personal life] and am deeply thankful I can integrate back in.”
At that point, she understood she was not going to be re-elected by her branch to the Party Congress, and would therefore not be eligible to be in the Central Committee anymore. She made an appeal to Ben to have the Central Committee directly elect her to the 2025 Congress. The National Organization Department discussed this and decided that this would not be appropriate because such positions are reserved for people who had been primarily active in national areas of work, which she hadn’t been over the preceding period. Ben communicated this to Marissa, but explained if she were now able to be more active in other areas of national work, there were many projects she could contribute to for the next few years. She said then that she accepted this, and was excited to rebuild her level of activity. In retrospect, she later told multiple people, she felt not being specially elected by the Central Committee to the Congress as a voting-delegate was a breaking point in her feelings towards the leadership.
According to Marissa’s own narrative, in 2025 before the Congress, her feelings about the Party as a whole started to change, and now she looked back on the 2020 incident with Eugene totally differently.
But this feeling was still unknown to the leadership. In January 2026, Ben wrote to Marissa to wish her a happy new year, and that all the anti-war activity around Venezuela reminded him of her, and how we are still fighting the same battle all these years later. She wrote back “Man unfortunately yes. It makes me think of being in NYC with you all [and your daughter], but she was so little! Miss everyone. Hope you and the family are well 💗.”
How we learned of Marissa’s changed position, and our response
In March 2026, we received a call from one of Marissa’s closest friends that she had privately told him a factional operation was being prepared to break away multiple branches across the country. She had just met secretly with a Party leader who was covertly working with others to break away branches and members, who have since left to do precisely that. In this context of considering an effort to split the Party, she stated for the first time in over five years that she felt the 2020 accountability process was insufficient, and no longer believed it should have been kept so private. He alerted the party of the factional operation, but also mentioned her remarks about 2020. The Party leadership began to investigate the factional operation as this was the first time it learned there was a potential plot to break the Party apart. Marissa’s friend told her that he had reported back their conversation about the factional plot for the good of the organization, which upset her very much. Ben, still hoping that he and Marissa had a close bond and that the factional plot was untrue, sent her a message offering to come talk to her in person in Los Angeles if she did not want to talk on the phone. She did not respond. Then a few days later, she replied that she did not want to talk, had been harmed in 2020, and left all Party chats, resigning.
Marissa’s recounting of how this happened, and her subsequent resignation, leaves out the factional plot entirely.
As soon as this happened, the Party leadership informed Eugene that Marissa had told others she was no longer satisfied with the 2020 resolution, although had not indicated what other remedies would be. He again offered his resignation on the spot, and this time it was accepted. As in 2020, the Party leadership moved swiftly and decisively out of principle, again based on what we believed Marissa wanted. This too has been twisted into its opposite.
About a month before the leadership became aware of Marissa’s changed position, Eugene received an advanced, potentially life-threatening health diagnosis, which he is still dealing with, and which can be exacerbated by intense stress. He had already stopped coming into the office. We hoped that this ultimate political decision — leaving the organization he helped build his whole adult life — would demonstrate to Marissa his sincere contrition, and show that her concerns, even as they changed, were taken seriously. The NDC reached out to Marissa again to talk after the resignation, but she did not reply.
What we did hear from other friends of hers is that she expressed that more leaders should know the story. Knowing that, the Central Committee was informed about the incident that had occurred in 2020. We recognized that all victims have a right to change their opinions and feelings about past wrongs, and she should not be judged for that. We did not disclose to any comrades the reports of a factional operation, which we were still attempting to verify and unravel. We did not speak badly about Marissa at all, and continued to respect her confidentiality and request for space. All Central Committee members were under discipline, if asked, to not break the confidentiality of a situation that Marissa had not yet widely disclosed. Therefore, they were only authorized to disclose that Eugene has a severe health situation. We have had no contact with Marissa since.
Marissa continues to say she never wanted Eugene’s expulsion or punishment, nor does she want it to “define the rest of his life.” If that were the case, this is not how she would have gone about things.
Women’s leadership
The letter appears designed to direct the shock about the awful incident in 2020 into distrust of two members of its current elected leadership, Ben and Brian, and to completely deny the reality of the PSL’s collective leadership. This can only be achieved by repeating the factional operation’s narrative that erases the role of women in building, maintaining and developing the practices and policies of our party. That is now a common theme in all the attacks.
In addition to co-drafting this statement, the women members of the Central Committee want to speak separately in their own name on this point, “We are not pawns or pieces to be moved by some small cabal of men who supposedly predetermine our actions, but revolutionary socialists in our own right. Very few women in the party and in society do not have some experience of sexist violation. We are committed to building a world free from the exploitation and violence and abuse that we ourselves have suffered. Yet in a post that claims to seek a better world, those who are named are described as only extensions of the desires of our male comrades. Any serious leftist should think twice about this. We too lead the party. We make up the National Disciplinary Committee. We have spent hours on investigations and interviews and in discussions to ensure our party treats sexual misconduct with care, empathy and on principled views of what it means to transform our class and our society. We strategize the struggles in our workplaces and in our schools and in our communities. We play a visible and necessary role in the struggle and in the Party. It is unconscionable that we are repeatedly denied the right to visibility in attacks that claim to speak against the very violence that women are subjected to in society.”
For 22 years, the PSL has built a foundation we can be proud of. We have had significant growth over the few years as the popularity of socialism rises among millions, and contributed massively to a range of movements for justice. We have built institutions and processes internally along the way to strengthen the Party, and we remain fully committed to always improving on what exists. We have proven this in practice. Through every stage and phase of the Party’s development, the Party has nurtured a culture inside our organization to not tolerate bourgeois-capitalist attitudes and behaviors of patriarchal violence, misogyny and sexism. The Party has a democratically developed Constitution and Bylaws that empower our members and give legitimacy to our institutions and elected leaders to defend these norms.
This is core to realizing our shared goal of building a genuine socialist party that can, standing with our class, build the movement for a socialist reconstruction in the United States.
Connection to the factional operation
Marissa has the right to change her feelings about a traumatic incident in her life. But why distort and misrepresent what did take place in the accountability process, the care provided and the reasons she either lost or stepped down from her leadership positions in the Party – which had no connection to the incident with Eugene?
That the letter’s broadside attack on the PSL leadership and institutions coincides with the narratives that are already circulating online against the Party leadership is not just coincidence; it is by design and coordinated.
spoiler
In June, a faction of PSL members who had become dedicated to the destruction of the Party announced their resignations and characterized the PSL as a moribund organization arguing that they would commit themselves to “mass organizing” of the working class, and not Party-building or spreading socialist consciousness. Since resigning, the anti-PSL grouping has carried out a coordinated attempt to split members from the Party where they believe they find weaknesses. It seems instead of trying to organize and recruit among the 150 million unorganized workers, their only recruitment targets are existing PSL members. After leaving, they conspired to encourage a grouping in a new city to conceal their political differences and then resign; a battle over control of Party dues and offices ensued. In another city, a factional member used a false name to rejoin the Party in a new branch, and then helped organize the resignation of members. They claimed they would not stoop to personal intrigue and scandal to build their organization, but that is now demonstrably untrue. Factional leader Walter Smolarek was reported as “giddy” about Marissa’s letter, and started calling around to identify weak spots, and has been talking with current PSL members to uncover their most salacious stories, personal intrigue, old traumas and is seeking details in past internal disciplinary proceedings, presumably to prepare another round of attacks. It’s clear that the grouping has adopted a method to drive a wedge in the PSL, encourage resignations and to break trust with Party leaders using shocking “tell-all” innuendo.
In the last few days we have confirmed more about the connections to the factional conspiracy:
- Summer 2025: Leaders of the future faction began quietly spreading gossip about the 2020 disciplinary incident involving Eugene and Marissa to grow their secret grouping. This was the same time that Marissa says her trust in the national leadership changed and is when she was not specially elected to the Congress.
- March 2026: When Marissa’s apparent dissatisfaction about 2020 first came out, via a trusted friend, it was after she had just met with a leader of the future faction, where they were discussing how to best break apart the PSL. Marissa resigned shortly after this was reported back.
- March-April 2026: Marissa told friends in the PSL, people she was trying to win over, that she had agreed to publish in “six months” to let the factional leaders in the CC “get their projects out of the Party first.” This roughly corresponds to the eventual publication date.
- In the Brooklyn faction’s internal documents, they instructed their group not to “mention EP” while “consolidating” PSL members to the faction— and other faction leaders told people they did not want their larger organizational-political attack to be immediately overshadowed by a case of sexual misconduct. Proverbially speaking, they wanted to keep this bullet in the chamber for a few months later.
- In the week before Marissa’s letter, factional leaders suddenly restarted communications with current PSL organizers who they had once been close friends with, “just to catch up” — a coordinated probing operation.
- On Sept. 7, the date Marissa released her letter, these same ex-members from around the country had a national in-person gathering. Several of them immediately began firing off messages to current PSL members and leaders encouraging their resignation and to not trust the NDC or the CC to protect women. Another faction adherent immediately posted on X screenshots of the Party’s membership figures from the last Party Congress, emphasizing how many are new recruits, and thus potentially vulnerable to not trusting the Party leadership.
Final thoughts: NSPM-7
Right now, at a moment of intensifying repression, the PSL is playing a leading role in so many vital struggles. Some comrades have asked whether we believe any of this involves the state. It is not possible to know this with certainty at this stage. What we know for certain is that A) there is a multi-billion dollar law enforcement operation to “destroy and dismantle” the “far left” under NSPM-7 (COINTELPRO 2.0), a document operationalized by a Department of Justice memo to use the full range of tools and methods at their disposal. B) According to media reports, the PSL was specifically named by senior Department of Justice official Harmeet Dhillon as a target to be “dismantled,” a federal grand jury has been convened in the Southern District of New York, and we have faced an unprecedented range of state and Congressional attacks in the last 9 months. C) There is a multi-layered ongoing factional operation underway, that has been rolled out over many months and across many cities, focused on trying to dismantle the PSL from within — rather than focus on organizing towards their own vision.
Predictably, a right-wing media activist, who funnels stories to FoxNews and the Department of Justice, was the first to post Marissa’s letter. We believe the hidden hand of where state forces are operating will be inevitably revealed in due time. We know from history that COINTELPRO’s favored methods are not overt repression but covert acts to “foster factionalism and cause confusion within the targeted organization,” specifically aiming to discredit its leaders. That requires identifying and manipulating any existing or potential contradictions or grievances, and then hitting relentlessly so that a sensation develops of “where there’s smoke, there must be fire.” The history of COINTELPRO shows that many activists were manipulated by bad actors without any knowledge this was happening – that was in fact the most common form of sabotage. Members and former members have informed Party leadership that the anti-PSL grouping has approached them sowing discontent, searching for potential inflammatory or negative information, and trying to recruit them to the project of taking down the Party.
When a radical organization is facing a multi-layered operation to discredit it, there is nothing it can do or say to stop the attacks from coming. That is because the operation has a mission — not to improve the PSL or make it stronger, but to make it weaker and collapse the bonds of trust that hold it together. We know the state and far-right want nothing more than to tear apart the largest Marxist party that is playing a critical role in the fight-back against massive right-wing attacks. Building a mass movement against genocide in Gaza, against ICE terror directed at immigrant families, and in defense of democratic rights is the PSL’s real fight, and we aren’t going to back down from it, even in the face of a discrediting, disruption campaign.
Across the country, comrades are collectively and individually grappling with the shocking news that Marissa publicized on Monday. It is distressing to read, as we are sure parts of this document have been too. But it is critical we not concede to a false narrative intended to decapitate the Party and undermine our ability to continue contributing to the struggle. The true narrative presented here will take time to process. We encourage comrades to read this multiple times and to engage in discussion with the leaders in your branch and city.
Can any of this be independently corroborated? Cuz otherwise its just she said they said, right?
The Party is obviously going to be on edge after a faction led by a relatively high ranking party member split publicly. Especially if it seems like people are coming out to stir the pot!
None of this changes what I think or said in the other thread about this incident. NDC needs to continuously raise their standards and improve their operating procedures. The background misogyny andremoved culture in the US is intense. I fully expect SA to happen all the time in big groups of Americans, its an extremely and unfortunately common occurrence. The fact that it happens in the party shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone who takes SA seriously. Not because the party is especially bad, but because its made of people living in a country where SA happens all the time.
We also need to get all parties involved into some kind of therapy to help them process their behavior and their trauma.
For my part, I know vaguely that Chris either left or was suspended from the DFW Branch last year over matters related to sexual misconduct. I was never told the full story, but I know those tendencies to be true.
Further, I think the issue is not completely that it occurred in the first place. Organizations should and need to plan for the inevitability that sexual harassment, assault, andremoved will occur, and it’s not a complete condemnation of an organization if a member, even a founding member, was found to have done this. However it’s condemning if the organization did not respond adequately, and after the fact still insists on belittling the person who was abused, I do not feel it’s safe. I also can’t say this enough, I did experience many of the same tendencies from my national liaison which is part of what makes this so convincing for me.
I’m not trying to discount your experiences! I think raising the standards is the only way to ensure that these damaging tendencies are eliminated. I also get why you feel the way you do. I’m not trying to be combative, I’m just a really analytical person so sometimes I can come across a little abrasive.
Maybe the party cannot be fixed, but I’m still trying to determine if that is the case or not.
It’s not he said she said, the reality is the central committee and Marissa and Eugene himself agreed that what Eugene did was wrong. The committee for some bizarre reason kept him on. They then go on to wax poetic about how great Eugene, the admitted sexual predator, is. The whole committee needs to be removed to avoid a split.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
Because they thought they could use the sexual predator to their advantage, and unsurprisingly that backfired
in american politics you usually can’t win elections if you can’t get away with SA.
Removed by mod
please stay the fuck away from women
It’s kinda been a long running open secret that the org is pretty terrible when it comes to this specific topic. A similar scenario from a couple years ago.
A description of controversy on Prolewiki “The PSL has been accused for decades of being cult-like in its organization methods and permitting sexual harassment and protecting sexual abusers (in locations across the country including Philadelphia, Carbondale, Chicago, Atlanta, Los Angeles, Sacramento, and Albuquerque).[16][17]”
Other thread? Where can I get more info on this factional split? First I have heard of it
I received a message the other day trying to convince me to split. The faction stuff mentioned in this letter is real. I think you can read more about it in an old post I made with the committee’s responding to Walter’s letter, too, but idk if a lot of the faction stuff has made it out of internal PSL discussions yet. It seems to be an ongoing thing considering I just got the message a couple days ago.
deleted by creator















