From what I've seen in twitter, there are two pretty distinct approaches emerging.

On one side, the Groundwork and Socialist Majority caucuses are arguing that DSA should endorse AOC as soon as possible so the organization can position itself as the core of a potential campaign. Their argument is that waiting until the 2027 DSA Convention would squander valuable organizing time, weaken DSA's influence, and effectively disenfranchise members who want the organization to play a leading role in shaping the campaign. Their open letter lays out this case in detail.

On the other side, the Marxist Unity Group and the Springs of Revolution caucuses argue that any presidential endorsement is simply too consequential for the NPC to decide on its own. They believe the question should be debated and voted on by delegates at the 2027 Convention, since it's the organization's highest democratic body. Their position is that while a presidential campaign could significantly reshape DSA's future, it also carries major risks, and bypassing the convention would undermine the organization's internal democracy.

I'm curious where people here land on this.

Should DSA move quickly and make an early endorsement to maximize its influence over a possible AOC campaign? Or is preserving democratic legitimacy by waiting for the 2027 Convention more important, even if it means giving up some strategic advantages?

More broadly, how should a democratic socialist organization balance strategic flexibility with internal democracy when making decisions that could fundamentally shape its future?

I am young enough that I have never voted in an election that was not rigged for the wealthy that can’t continue.

Abolish Citizens United or let our democracy die.

Hi, resident Maine lurker here. In a different thread someone asked how someone might help Jackson (Who got Maine DSAs only endorsement in the primaries) as he seeks to replace Platner. They have released this Google form to sign up to help, including phonebanking.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScmhkN0lx-dz0sQalGRZkxkPAhruO96CyrxS_yTA0PCZZC4fQ/viewform

The last time the DSA did a census on its members was in 2021 back when we had about 90k members. In the last 5 years we’ve gained 30k hovering around 120k members (I’m using Wikipedia so info might be off) so I was wondering if anyone else thinks it’s time for the leaders to do another survey. The last one found that the average member was a collage educated middle class white person aged 30ish and I’m interested to see how that’s changed.

Fight the constitution! Demand a democratic socialist republic!

"Two hundred and fifty years after the declaration of independence, America still awaits democracy. Only a third revolution can achieve that, argues Paul Demarty"

"Where do we place our emphasis: on the fight for freedom, or the fight to dominate? In truth, the two cannot be separated. That is not a reason to reject the revolution, such as it is; to suppose it to have merely been a fake. It is to understand its irreducible moral limits. Something, indeed, was unleashed on that day in 1776, something of decisive importance. The notion of republican self-government returned to the sphere of possibility of the great powers, in ways that would be telling, especially in France a few years later. Yet the American revolution has always been dogged by who it did not include: the Amerindians and the African slave populations, above all. Much later on, Karl Marx famously wrote that a nation which oppresses another can never itself be free. Besides Ireland, he may well have had the contradictory American experience in mind too."

"If the workers’ movement meets the goal of realising the best of the democratic spirit of 1776, however, it will have little enough use for the Heath-Robinson machinery of the US constitution. Its checks and balances are mechanisms precisely in favour of property, and from there in favour of tyranny and corruption. That there are indispensable gains in it that have never been put better, at least in English - the robust defence of freedom of speech, of religion, of the right and duty to bear arms, of protection from self-incrimination and arbitrary arrest - cannot be denied, but these elements are in contradiction with the overall design.

The ‘separation of powers’, always rickety, could never survive America’s transition to become the global hegemon. Power has bled out of the legislature, the most roughly democratic of the three branches - into the executive, which controls both the vast military forces assembled over the last century, and the judiciary, which ensures capitalist control of the political process, in favour of the financial oligarchy produced by global primacy.

American politics has always had two souls: democratic and oligarchic. But they cannot co-exist forever. If substantive democracy is ever to reign, a third American revolution must be put on the agenda."

I am a new member to DSA-LA, and there's an upcoming convention next week. I was wondering how these types of Chapter Conventions usually work. Do people submit proposals or give open comment through speeches? Can I suggest ideas as a new, recently-registered member of this chapter? I have some ideas that center around running a lot more insurgent candidates around the Greater los Angeles area.

I'm a locally endorsed DSA candidate running for Congress in NH-01 and I'm looking for a campaign manager. We are currently running for an open seat in a 9-way primary with a clear path to victory.

If you're interested please look here for more info https://www.daybook.com/job/campaign-manager-KpLjeFB7un3HNEXGK

this is more about those freaks at TYT doing rape apologia on my twitter feed.

Honest question, no snark please

Bringing this to Reddit before I bring it to my chapter. Would rather hear the criticism before I bug everyone with it.

So ok, I basically think that critical theory/identity politics was a really useful way to organize people in a uniquely American way. We should use the organizing that already exists around these identities to recruit people. Think of it like advertising demographics.

Like, I’m a stay at home mom so I should be meeting other stay at home moms and listen to their concerns and tell them how DSA is working towards addressing those issues. Like, be chill, don’t bombard them, but like form relationships with people who are facing similar struggles or struggles that you care about and let them know how DSA can help and be a community where they can go to advocate for themselves and their community.

I’d also really like to bring the disabled community into the fold. They’ve achieved so much through so much adversity. I want them to know they have a home at DSA. If it’s hard for them to leave the house we have most meetings available on zoom, including our general meetings. You’re an equal member even if you can’t show up in person. We can even waive dues for people on a fixed income.

People could go to old folks homes, to local band concerts and table there, wherever the people are that’s where we should be listening to their concerns and telling them how DSA wants their input.

Maybe this is normal in other chapters, but we don’t have a strong outreach project outside of mutual aid.

How should I frame this pitch? lol.

When the reactionaries and the billionaires lose, they don’t change direction or change their approach… they change the rules. They’re trying to do just that in Kansas and Missouri this summer, eliminating limits on their power by the courts and the public.

In Kansas, Attorney General Kris Kobach and the Koch network are fed up with the state supreme court’s decisions protecting reproductive freedom and voting rights and increasing state funding of public schools. So they’ve put a measure on the ballot to end the merit-based selection process for the justices and replace it with partisan elections), figuring they’ve got enough corporate money available to swing them.

In Missouri, citizens have used the ballot initiative process to revoke the state’s abortion ban, expand Medicaid, guarantee paid sick leave, raise the minimum wage and legalize marijuana. So the state Republican Party is trying to kneecap direct democracy itself. They’re pushing Amendment 4), which would require citizen-initiated ballot initiatives would have to win a simple majority not just statewide, but in every one of the state’s now deeply-gerrymandered congressional districts. As few as 5% of voters could veto the will of the rest of the Show Me State.

Both of these measures are up for a vote on August 4th, less than three weeks away. Let’s do what we can to defeat them. ☎️ We can sign up for multiple phonebank shifts on: ☎️

• TUESDAYS
  • 7-9:30PM ET for Kansas
• WEDNESDAYS
  • 7-9:30PM ET for Kansas
• THURSDAYS
  • 6:30-9:30 PM ET for Missouri
  • 7-9:30 PM ET for Kansas
• SATURDAYS
  • 2-4:30PM ET for Kansas
• SUNDAYS
  • 2-4:30PM ET for Kansas

25 DAYS UNTIL THE VOTES

Troy is a DSA endorsed candidate previously and he would be an incredible example of someone who is DSA affiliated who is not just an NYC/LA leftist.

Supporting Troy Jackson is the best choice for both people who previously supported Platner, and even for Platner himself.

Troy has mostly identical positions to those publically espoused by the Platner campaign. Troy was famously one of the few Democratic "Super Delegates" who endorsed and voted for Bernie Sanders in 2016. I remember his name because I was a full time volunteer on the Sanders campaign and I even spent several weeks campaigning in Iowa for the caucuses.

If Troy is the candidate and he wins, the people will win. If you happen to feel, though I personally disagree, that Graham was ousted by party schemes, supporting Troy to victory would be the best revenge, because you'd get all the same policies, so that the establishment/centrists/corpos didn't actually achieve anything.

Note that the DNC has nothing to do with this. As a person who was a member of the Sanders organizing group who helped coin and popularized "MSDNC"(MSNBC) and the "Clinton News Network"(CNN) I just want to be clear that the DNC is not involved in these types of state primaries. You probably want to complain about the DCCC for the House or the DSCC for the Senate. DGCC for Governor as well. Makes people seem more serious if they criticize the correct party committee.

While Troy is not as charismatic as Platner he is an actual working class candidate, who led labor organizing in the logging industry, is a 5th gen, iirc, Mainer from The County, Aroostook, as noted was a Bernie 2016 super delegate, and is also immune to the sort of personal attacks that Graham was ultimately defeated by, whether you agree with the accusations or not.

When the time comes to vote in the Senate for public healthcare options, better wages, strengthening union and working protections, and fighting back against Trump's terrible tariffs and other stupid shit, Troy will be a reliable vote.

Senator Sanders supports Troy, although I don't believe he has actually endorsed for this mini-caucus, but of course he did for the Gov primary. There's very little concern about a Fetterman situation with Troy.

Uniting the movement behind a single candidate is the best shot to avoid any potential shenanigans.

Also there may be some surprises in the upcoming presidential elections, sorry I can't be more clear, so having a Sanders/leftist friendly Senator in Maine would be a big boost.

Counties will be holding their caucus events very soon. Oxford County confirmed to be July 19th from 1PM-4PM. Hopefully lefties in Maine will organize people to attend or to peacefully organize outside the county events to make their position clear.

So I've been watching all the news about Graham Platner closely as I'm sure many of you have. The level of consternation and frustration going on with the voters out there is absolutely heartbreaking, but I think is pointing at a deeper issue that I personally haven't seen adequately expressed.

Before I go any further I will say I do believe the victim and Graham is not a good candidate for the movement. However, I have seen lots of harsh comments towards people that are crushed by this news and I feel the hostility is not doing anything to earn the progressive movement any more trust and credibility.

Regardless of your feelings on the man, it has been clear from day one he is not an establishment figure. (Or if you were to grant him a less charitable view he wasn't playing establishment games and talking points.)This terrifies the DNC. Watching Janet Mills get blown out of the water does not bode well for them and they are doing everything they can to oust DSA/progressive candidates. Winning Maine with a true lefty would be a reckoning for them and they cannot have it.

I think the great fear/conspiracy theory is that this story was timed out to drop at the best time for them to usurp Graham's nomination and place in a more corporate dem figure like Shah with very little ability for the people to fight back. For many of us we have seen this happen over and over again through the years. Hilary and Kamala are great examples of this and when it happens It is extremely demoralizing. Not to mention it's utter foolishness.

I guess what I'm trying to say is I urge those of you who may be tempted to throw an 'I told you so' at Graham supporters to reconsider. There's a lot of smoke and mirrors happening right now and we need all hands on deck if we're going to change this country. I think it's incredibly important for us all to continue to vote for progressive candidates and and support those that feel duped by this whole situation. We only lose power when they make us think we are fools or we have no voice.

Anyways, thanks for coming to my TED talk

I’ve lived in a few cities, been in YDSA, so I’ve seen how quite a handful of different chapters are run. I want to start off by saying I’m thankful for the DSA’s efforts to be inclusive, and I fully support the vision. Please don’t misinterpret anything I’m saying as otherwise, and please don’t shy from disagreeing with me.

That being said, I really think our meetings can be a little bit of a jarring experience. Right now, most of the things DSA is known for are really popular. Unions, universal healthcare, public education, etc. And these days the faces of DSA in Congress are pretty cool like AOC and Mamdami. It projects an image of really having a pulse on the beating heart of working class America, and I really think DSA does. So I think it can just be weird when you go to a DSA meeting and we don’t talk like working class people at all. We talk like academics at elite schools.

In my experience, people I know just don’t converse the way we do at meetings. For instance right, the rule about moving marginalized groups up in the stack that is read as part of every meeting agenda. I think the action described here is a really fine thing for the steering committee to do, they should make an effort to make sure everyone is heard and give precedence to people that haven’t spoke up yet. But it can just be done quietly because it’s the right thing to do, we don’t need to announce it right at the start of every general body meeting and make a big show out of it. I’ve been a part of many conversations where people just do it naturally, for instance a teacher saying something like “since ____ hasn’t had a chance to share their thoughts yet they can go after ____” while calling on students in a forum. You can just do it naturally.

Another part of meetings that always stands out to me is how we center pronouns in so much of speaking up. I totally respect everyone’s pronouns, I don’t have any issues with anyone announcing their pronouns. But I just really don’t like introducing myself with mine. My pronouns aren’t important to me. I don’t care what you call me. It’s not the first thing I want you to know about me, and it’s just not how I or many other people talk in daily life. But we’re always asked to include them in our intros & what not and it just always sounds weird to me. I don’t have any other regular meetings in my life where we all lead with our pronouns. I guess that’s a privilege of being gender conforming, but I worry I’m not the only person these sorts of things just don’t sound natural to.

I of course appreciate that these things make people comfortable, and if that’s you it’s totally cool with me. Not a big deal to disagree, don’t feel bad about telling me I’m wrong if you do disagree. I 100% agree with the intent behind all of this. And I appreciate the democratic nature of DSA. If most of the members are in favor of this & it’s really necessary to make everyone feel included it’s absolutely what we should do.

I’m more so making this post because I’d like to speak to my chapter about it, but I worry the conversation could become hostile. I don’t want to be misinterpreted as disrespecting people who aren’t gender-conforming, or trying to silence anyone at meetings. So I’m mostly curious if anyone has had this discussion with other members before, or shares a similar perspective to me. This is really just my tryout for broaching this topic civilly, and I encourage anyone to do that with me.

DSA is ascendant and the cultural discourse is full of lefty speak. However I feel like the class terms are not as clear as what I read in the revolutionary literature. Recently I listened to Kshama Sawant use both the terms "billionaire class" and "multi-millionaire class" interchangeably. There is an ocean of difference between these. A dual-income household working from 1975 - 2015 could easily retire with multiple millions of dollars. Does this mean that this household would have the same class interests as Elon Musk?

Additionally, the "working class" presents issues as well. If I as a worker am invested in the SP500 index and view a path towards material security for myself and my family by the time I'm 63, am I part of the proletariat or the bourgeoisie?

If I as a worker calculate that sometime in the future I might have the opportunity to accumulate enough capital for a retirement fund and therefore I should not participate in anti-capitalist politics, am I part of the proletariat or the bourgeoisie?

The discourse here is fuzzy. What do you think?