u/MarxistUnity

"Jibreel Kateb argues that the pragmatist idealism advocated by Geese Magazine leaves Marxism defenseless against attacks on science in an age of irrationalism and climate crisis."

"The philosophical problems of science, which were once central to the thinking of the great Marxists, have for Marxists faded to the periphery, and in that nether zone have often been downgraded to either object of derision or the subject of panegyrics within the left. No sober philosophical and historical reflection on science seems to exist and the concept of a scientific socialism is treated either as a given or as risible. The left proceeds anti-scientifically, lacking scientific culture and anything resembling a contemporary politics of science. In doing so, it cripples its own strategic and organizational efforts and cedes the field to all sorts of reactionary misanthropes and cranks.

Cosmonaut is in part trying to rectify this problem and apparently Geese have joined in the effort but in a very different way. Yet, the problem of Geese is that despite recent attempts to engage with these philosophical questions of science, they do injustice to science in an age where its defense is paramount. They enjoy a rather peculiar species of idealism which I will term pragmatist idealism and this concoction is ill suited to the present tasks: one can substitute the word “practice” for “mind” or “spirit” or “god”, a substitutive trick of language similar to a Sartrean reversal, and yet one does nothing to escape the problems of idealism."

"What I mean by pragmatic idealism is that Geese couples a practical ontology with a pragmatist epistemology. Ontology is the study of the fundamental citizens or furniture of reality"

"Their philosophical pragmatism is in fact nothing but the deeper justification for their liberal populism, a deeper continuation of their theoretical justifications of the most right-wing elements of DSA. Since political antagonism is discursively constructed, since it is, in a sense, purely discursive acts, a purely subjective act with no real basis in something non-discursive and extra-personal, what matters is that the political leader congeals the “people” by saying the right words. It does not matter that independent of political discourse there is a class structure; it does not matter that position in that class structure constrains one's material interests, it does not matter that this structure heavily constrains collective political agency, and that those interests are antagonistic with other classes. It does not matter that there is an objective state of affairs that we must adapt to, and whose adaptation we must furthermore respond to. It simply matters that one “articulates” the right enemy-friend distinction on the basis of current popular discourse. Social theory becomes not an arm to understand the objective (non-elective) conditions under which Marxists operate, an arm which can elevate the proletariat to a position of genuine social understanding, but a piece of demagogy to get the working-class to march in line with the wordsmith. After all, the wordsmith constructs reality. In the beginning, there was the word, and the word is God."

"A growing army of canvassers isn't enough. Greg C. argues that DSA needs deeper, more permanent roots in the working class to build a lasting socialist constituency."

"The sudden string of DSA victories at the ballot box has sent the Democratic Party bigwigs and their cable TV friends into a delightful fit of hysteria. Former DNC chair Jaime Harrison and ex-Maoist turned CNN pundit Van Jones are shrieking about the “army of on-the-ground organizers” knocking at their doors. Equally, DSA members across factional lines are taking advantage of the political shift to spread the gospel of field."

"Whatever happens, organizing a popular constituency for socialism will require more than growing our army of canvassers. It will also involve more than building a “Tammandani Hall,” where voters remain loyal through a feedback loop of positive legislation and magnetic political personalities. Building a socialist political machine (in the traditional sense) will be frustrated by the political compromises required to pass legislation and expand funding for community services. The goal is not to replicate the machines of old, but to consolidate our project into an alternative society. We need a network of party-led organizations with deep and personal roots in the community for workers to engage in class struggle on a mass scale and connect socialist ideas to their daily lives."

"The purpose here is not simply to offer much-needed aid or even bump up recruitment for DSA and other orgs, but to politicize the community. DSA members discussing NYCHA privatization or semi-privatization with tenants could be elevated by our electeds acting as public tribunes for the tenant movement—whether it’s speaking at anti-demolition rallies or proposing legislation to refund and expand fully public housing. And the importance of this approach doesn’t end with public housing either. In April, DSA councilmember Chi Ossé was thrown to the ground and arrested by the NYPD for protesting against deed theft against Black homeowners in Bed-Stuy. The goal of tying deep community organizing to political office serves to heighten the difference between our political platform and the neoliberal consensus, and to connect the immediate needs of the people with the goal of democratic socialism."

"Whether DSA will plant deep roots or dissipate after this new era of ascendance will be determined by the work we do between elections. Individual efforts need to be linked up into a coherent and permanent strategy that builds buy-in for our program in apartment complexes, workplaces, and community spaces across the city. This requires that NYC-DSA prioritize more than electoral and legislative campaigns. Proposals to this effect have come and gone, but any strategic coherence to bind them together has yet to emerge. Whatever the circumstances, overcoming a transient canvassing operation requires a long-term strategy focused on building deep relationships with the sections of the working class beyond our sphere of influence, built around an uncompromising and distinctly socialist political platform."

To support or not support AOC? Should DSA distance themselves from the Democratic party or embrace the left populist wave? What is really at stake?

"Replying to Sarkozy of Geese Magazine's objections to his arguments regarding the dangers of an AOC presidency, Noah Emke challenges four key assumptions in Sarkozy's response."

"I found that the article presents my argument faithfully before beginning to counter it, and I would even go so far as to agree with the author's assessment that supporting our most prominent politician for a Presidential campaign is simply “common sense.” However, when it comes to common sense, I agree with fellow democratic socialist Albert Einstein: it is essentially a collection of assumptions. By unpacking some of the assumptions contained in the "Just Say Yes" article, I hope to clarify the strategic frailty of an AOC Presidential campaign."

Assumption 1: Liberal Governance is Good Governance

"One such assumption is that a progressive liberal "good governance" is possible for an American President elected in 2028. "The only thing that will truly turn the masses away from socialism," Sarkozy claims, "is if AOC simply fails at deliverism, at good governance." This is brought up only to dismiss it, taking it for granted that AOC's Presidency would be successful from the standpoint of most Americans, "delivering" the goods through her center-left policies. From here, he argues that we can build on the example of AOC's Presidential success to introduce more radical policies. However, what is being glossed over so easily here is the hinge point of the entire "Just Say No" argument: liberalism is not capable of good governance, at least not from the standpoint of working people."

Assumption 2: American workers would be understanding of our shortcomings

"Just as the "Just Say No" argument rests upon the understanding that social democracy too wedded to liberalism would fail and discredit socialism, the "Just Say Yes" argument relies on a belief in its general success, paving the way for more socialism. However, the idea that AOC would govern without "betrayal" strains the credulity of any informed reader, so Sarkozy asserts that this "... would make the masses more aligned with socialism, for they would desire a president who goes further than her." This is wishful thinking."

Assumption 3: An AOC Presidency would avert fascism

"If fascism is indeed imminent, DSA needs to be preparing to protect our physical survival. We should be organizing and training ourselves for armed self-defense, preparing safehouses, fostering connections to people who can hide us or smuggle us out of the country. In short, we should be acting in total opposition to direct instructions from NYC-DSA's leadership in 2025, going in a direction which I think the AOC for President boosters might find objectionable."

"I know Sarkozy has a similar perspective, or else he would not be participating in this conversation about Presidential campaigns. Therefore, since both of us are writing about the 2028 election rather than preparing to evade the authorities, this article will proceed with the understanding that we more or less agree that DSA will not be completely proscribed before the next election. "

Assumption 4: Opposition to liberalism is "Purity Politics

"The last assumption is not an assumption about political conditions, but about the "Just Say No" argument itself, or perhaps arguments from DSA's left faction in general. The framing of Sarkozy's argument is very familiar: everyone involved wants progress, but the radicals are prioritizing moral purity over pragmatism."

"By casting only one side as pragmatic, the other as moralistic, the former can win the strategic argument by default. However, as we saw with the Clinton campaign, the Biden Presidency, and the Harris campaign, the “pragmatists” often fail to get results. Meanwhile, the longshot Mamdani campaign, initially decried by many progressives as ultra-left (I remember distinctly hearing that Brad Lander was clearly the only sensible choice), served as the tip of the spear for the current DSA primary blitz."

"we need a Presidential candidate who is personally more loyal to democratic socialism than to the Democratic Party. This would have to be a "cadre candidate," like Mamdani. If we cannot do any of this yet, we need to be thinking and discussing how to get there. Rushing ahead with a force unequal to the task simply because we can rather than because it advances our plans is not common sense strategy; it is the absence of strategy."

"American air superiority is overwhelming, but it cannot stop retaliation or open the Strait of Hormuz. Meanwhile, civilian targets are increasingly being hit, warns Yassamine Mather"

"Since the fragile US-Iran ceasefire broke down in early July, the United States has conducted consecutive nights of military strikes across Iran. The campaign has concentrated on missile and drone launch sites, command centres, naval infrastructure, coastal surveillance, transport routes and facilities linked to Iran’s ability to contest navigation through the Strait of Hormuz. In response, Iran continues to launch missiles and drones at US bases situated in the region and commercial shipping. The central strategic fact is not American air superiority, which is clear, but the failure of air power alone to eliminate Iran’s capacity for retaliation or compel it to give up its leverage over the strait."

"It looks as if the war has reached a strategic deadlock. The United States can destroy fixed targets and impose extensive economic and infrastructural damage, but it has not forced Iran to relinquish control of the strait or stop retaliating. Iran cannot defeat the US conventionally, but it can impose casualties, disrupt shipping, raise energy prices and expand the conflict to US bases and allied states."

"This is a war of aggression, and its implications extend well beyond Iran. It forms part of the wider confrontation between the US and China. The left cannot afford to retreat into historically thin, politically evasive or factually incoherent commentary if it wants to retain any credibility."

"It is entirely possible to describe this war as an act of imperialist aggression without thereby endorsing the Islamic Republic. The correct position is to recognise that even a reactionary capitalist state has the right to resist military attack by Israel and the US, while creating no political or strategic illusions about that state itself.

Defence of the Iranian and Palestinian peoples requires mass mobilisation - not only against foreign aggression, but also against nationalist and religious forces within their own societies. In the final analysis, such forces either accommodate imperialism or pursue a catastrophic strategy of ‘victory’ at all costs, while in reality supporting regimes whose corruption, inequality and repression generate the very social discontent that helps to destabilise them."

​

"The history of working-class politics is inseparable from the struggle for democratic rights. Steven R. analyzes the tasks facing DSA in today’s democratic movement."

"In the shadow of the unfinished democratic revolution in this country, the working class has decomposed and needs to be recomposed. To rediscover ourselves as a class, we must once again rally around the vision of a society where working people are free to rule ourselves as equals."

"To recompose a fighting working class in the US, socialists must take a leading role in the next great uprising for political democracy. By organizing masses of ordinary people around the idea that this country is not a democracy and only they possess the power to make it one, we can bring our class back to life as history’s revolutionary protagonist."

"The content of our program is not an abstract question. To face our tasks we must be able to articulate a vision of what the working class is and can be that millions of people will find compelling. The answer to “who’s in the working class?” is the same as it ever was: the disfranchised many who are exploited and abused because of the arbitrary power of the privileged few.

Though we are wildly diverse, we share a fate as people trapped in a society made by us but not for us. Fighting to take back everything stolen from us under capitalism—healthcare, housing, education, and more—is necessary but insufficient. We must have an answer for how we are robbed of these things and how justice can be done. To convince people that to be a part of the working class is something worth embracing, we need clarity that it will take a completely new political order to set the world to rights, and that those of us who constitute the working majority have the unique power to win one.

To do so we must bury the old Constitution with a new democratic order based on the principle of majority rule. That means replacing minoritarian institutions like the Presidency, Senate, and Supreme Court with a single popular assembly elected by free, equal, and proportional suffrage for all who live here. It would also mean abolishing capitalist tools of coercion like the police, ending all forms of second-class citizenship, and enshrining our rights to organize and seize capitalist property for the common good."

"Realistically, a Third Reconstruction is unlikely to unfold between now and 2029. The present constitutional crisis will reach a different resolution, on terms decided by different class forces. But the urgency facing us is this: wherever the cards fall in the coming years, the new order will either be worse than the present disorder, or it will be an illusory “return to normalcy” waiting to collapse into another, more severe crisis. The liberal reformers and left-populists do not have what it takes to lead us out of these days of catastrophe to a rational and humane world. The question of democracy will confront us, again and again, for as long as the class struggle persists. It is vital to humanity’s survival that the working class learns how to answer it."

"DSA's new program has enraged reactionaries. Marisa M. introduces Wilhelm Liebknecht's socialist defense of universal public education and makes the case for reforms that undermine the capitalist political order."

"DSA’s return to national prominence has caused a frenzy on the far right. In the past few weeks, we have seen Fox News broadcast leaked demands from DSA’s new Workers Deserve More program and read from Marxist Unity Group’s points of unity. For the right, it feels like opening the basement door in search of an imaginary monster and discovering that all along, the monster was real—Socialists do want to see the downfall of everything you hold dear: voter suppression, AI art, paying for healthcare. "

"Wilhelm Liebknecht, a radical parliamentarian in the Social Democratic Party of Germany, observed the same phenomenon in 1871, at the birth of socialist mass politics. DSA members have circulated screenshots of the title for his speech; Yes, We Want to Destroy What Our Enemies Call “Culture,” “Civilization” in response to the right’s panic. The article itself, one may be surprised, is a defense of universal public school and curriculum reform. For German conservatives, universal public education was an extremist attack on traditional national values. For the Social Democrats, it was a tool to create a new culture: one where everyone had the expertise to make industrial civilization their own. So is education a modest reform, or the end of a civilization?"

"For Liebknecht, the revolutionary struggle is alive in every demand. If there is a tension between a reformist campaign and a revolutionary horizon, it was to be embraced and overcome. Yes, we want universal public school. Why? For the working class to develop the tools to bring capitalist society to an end. Schooling becomes contested territory between the new world and the old, and for socialists, there is no reason to compromise on how much funding to allocate or what model of instruction to practice. Knowledge must become common property."

"Workers Deserve More will pose the same problems for our own movement in the coming years. The ruling class will call it a threat to civilization. Our reformist comrades will call it a reasonable package of policy reform. We will be forced by the nature of our ultimate socialist and democratic aims to bring the program through to its revolutionary conclusion; to prove the reactionary wing of the ruling class right."

Democratic Socialists of America has a goal, the realization of a dream now quietly shared by millions of people in this country: the dream of a socialist revolution in the United States.

Workers deserve more! Let our voices be heard and share the program with your friends and coworkers! Fight for a democratic socialist republic!

"The world is in chaos, but for the bosses, it’s all going according to plan. We can see their plan in the countless heartbreaking images coming out of war zones like Beirut, Gaza, and Tehran. We can hear it in the rumble of bulldozers making way to build detention camps and data centers. We can feel it in the air as the summer heat becomes unbearable, and in the pits of our stomachs when faced with the price of gas and rent. We’re promised magical technology with AI, but in reality, the bosses lay us off and track our every move. The billionaire class is dividing workers against each other, and it’s making us desperate and miserable.

The political and economic system under which we live is built on private ownership and profit at all costs. As capitalism fails to solve problems of its own making, it turns to right-wing authoritarianism. Big business makes deals with the government to line their pockets, and politicians stoke hatred between working people. Instead of offering real solutions to unemployment and the cost of living, they attack immigrants, communities of color, and trans people. Rather than fixing our broken healthcare system, they push snake oil and circulate conspiracy theories. The Republicans are in on it, the Democratic Party is asleep at the wheel, and both are funded by the same criminal class of billionaires and war profiteers.

Democratic socialists know that no one has to live like this. If we lived in a classless society and governed ourselves, we could freely build a world without war or poverty. We could build a world where no one suffers for their race, gender, or religion, and everyone is free, equal, and cared for. Building this world is the guiding star of our movement. When we labor for our common good instead of private profit, we can all have a secure and dignified life, and use our time and talents how we wish.

To achieve this future, our class must organize. The Democratic Socialists of America is building a party whose goal is a democratic society of the working class. Our enemies are not just individual bosses, but the entire global system of capital; not just this or that cop, judge, or president, but the entire anti-democratic structure of our society. We are workers fighting to transform society: to win the battle for democracy, draft a new constitution, and create a democratic socialist republic.

DSA has written this program for ending capitalist oligarchy and creating a real democracy. Some of these demands may be won under our current system, but we know complete victory will require building a new society from the ground up. We push these demands to their furthest extent today, so we can fight for their fullest realization in a socialist future. Join us.

What We Fight For

THRIVING WORKING CLASS COMMUNITIES

Freedom To Flourish

Expand public resources to support recreation, learning, and social spaces accessible to all. Establish paid family leave for all workers, a 32 hour work week with full pay and benefits, and a living minimum wage. Provide free, quality public education from pre-K to college and cancel all student debt.

Healthcare For All

Guarantee universal healthcare at no cost to individuals, including complete access to reproductive and gender-affirming care. Expand healthcare access and quality by investing in new public hospitals and clinics. Make all medical education and training public and free.

Housing For All

Housing is a human right. Build new, publicly-owned social housing, strictly regulate investment properties, establish universal rent control, and guarantee right to counsel for all tenants.

Finish Reconstruction

End the legacies of slavery and colonialism. Reinforce anti-discrimination laws. Honor all treaties and tribal sovereignty. Enact reparations and massively invest in good jobs, quality housing and infrastructure in neglected minority communities.

End Mass Incarceration and Police Immunity

Demilitarize police departments, disempower police unions, and redirect funding to public services as steps towards fully abolishing the police and prison system which protects the rich and jails the poor. Treat drug addiction and mental illness as health issues, not crimes. End qualified immunity and empower civilian oversight bodies with real authority over the police.

Feminism For All

Socialist feminism fights for queer liberation and the freedoms of all working class women. Stop gender violence and end policies that oppress bodily autonomy and intimate life, including patriarchal restrictions on abortion, childbirth and childraising, gender expression and transition, marriage, and divorce. Ban sex discrimination and ensure fair compensation and support for all forms of labor, including care work.

Green New Deal

Workers must lead our democratic transition to a green future. Pass a federal jobs guarantee. Implement massive investment in sustainable, publicly owned energy and transit infrastructure. Phase out the use of fossil fuels. Reclaim and repair our earth's resources for all.

WORKING-CLASS FOREIGN POLICY

End The U.S. War Machine

Defund the Department of War. End all foreign wars and close overseas military bases. Support and fully employ veterans. End immunity for U.S. war criminals and support the International Criminal Court's mandate to prosecute war crimes.

Free Palestine

Recognize the rights of the Palestinian people, including the right of return, the right to resist military occupation, and the right to self determination in a free Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital. End all military and economic aid to Israel. Prosecute U.S. and Israeli leaders responsible for the genocide in Gaza.

End Blockades, Embargoes, and Sanctions

People around the world deserve to live their lives without U.S. interference. End economic warfare against countries whose governments act independently of the United States, such as Cuba, Venezuela, and Iran.

Abolish ICE

End ICE detention and deportations and punish federal agents' brutality. Legalize migration, grant amnesty for all immigrants regardless of status, provide a path to citizenship for all permanent residents, and end visa caps and quotas.

WORKING-CLASS DEMOCRACY

Democracy For All

Extend full voting rights to all permanent U.S. residents and restore the right to vote for incarcerated people and people with criminal convictions. Establish statehood for Washington D.C. and recognize the right to self-determination for all U.S. territories and colonies. Expand and protect voting rights and end voter suppression.

A Real Democracy

For the working class to govern, we need a new political system. End political corruption and legalized bribery: get rid of lobbyists, dark money, and Citizens United, and publicly finance all elections. Abolish the Electoral College. Replace the President and Supreme Court with an executive and judiciary chosen by and subordinate to Congress.

A Democratic Congress

Replace the two-party system with a multi-party democracy. Expand the House of Representatives, implement proportional representation and ranked choice voting in all elections, and abolish the Senate.

Economic Democracy

Establish public ownership of the largest corporations and essential industries to ensure democratic control and accountability to the people. Enact aggressive wealth taxes on the richest individuals and corporations to spend on public goods and infrastructure.

Democracy At Work

Empower workers to come together and fight the boss. Protect, expand, and enforce the rights of all workers to form, join, and strike with their unions, regardless of industry. Support union members who organize reform caucuses, democratize their unions, and take political action."

Workers of the world, unite!

Should DSA support an AOC presidential run? What are the risks and benefits? How do we build and maintain the political independence of the socialist workers movement? Is supporting AOC compatible with building the party?

"Is a DSA-backed AOC presidency in 2029 possible? Noah Emke says yes; it will also be a disaster for a nascent socialist movement unprepared for national power and wedded to a project of managed imperial decline."

"The moment is electrifying; the rebirth of American democratic socialism started in 2016, and now, ten years later, we are seeing it emerge as a serious political force. The number one goal post is in sight: the White House. Full circle from the original Sanders Presidential run, we may be ready for another swing at the big chair in 2028. The only logical conclusion of the strategy currently being pursued is the Presidency, and we are closer to that goal than ever before. Currently, DSA has a single qualified politician with the necessary public profile to take on a Presidential run, and that is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Right now it is only an idea being thrown around, but in the wake of these victories it is clear that if we pool our resources and launch a serious campaign in 2027, we have a decent shot at electing AOC President, thus completely destroying our own movement almost overnight."

"To put it bluntly, a President AOC would enact their policies while wearing our colors, thus neutralizing the threat of a social-democratic challenge. DSA would be de-radicalized as we try to support "our" President even while she severely moderates her position, the masses turning against socialism when the first socialist President sends their retirement to Israel yet again. Our ideas work, neoliberalism doesn't, so why on Earth would we want to take credit for neoliberal policies on a national scale?"

"There are certain issues which the Democratic leadership wants off the table while they are in power, like genocide in Gaza and caged migrants, and she totally complied with that directive during the Biden administration. AOC has never shown herself capable of standing up when under any pressure regarding these all-important issues, making her indistinguishable from the rest of the party at the end of the day."

"The solution is simple: We need to learn to say no. We have no power because we have no boundaries. For a great lesson on the power of boundaries, we should look to the Democratic Party. When DSA took over a state’s Democratic Committee, the newcomers were not allowed to use any of their resources. When Mamdani won the primary, key establishment figures had no qualms about letting Cuomo split the vote. Then, no matter how oppositional a candidate is when they are getting elected, once they are actually in office, the Democratic establishment has power over them. A politician's place in key committees and caucuses, and thus their power, is dependent on their standing within their own party. This is the point of a political party; it is an institution designed to wield power by providing organization, structure, and discipline."

"There is no substitute for the boldest step of all, however, the one we will need to make if we are serious about a Socialist America: reorganization as our own party. Change is coming, and if there is any kind of future for American civilization then the first socialist President has already been born. However, make no mistake, she is not a Democrat."

"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."

"How do we reconcile the forced patriotism of the 250th anniversary with the real facts of our history? This July 4th, American socialists must fight to build a new national narrative that can overturn our country's civil religion."

"The Fourth of July is a whirlpool which pulls all events back to the origin. Every struggle since the Founding to bring us closer to a free society is morphed into a post-facto legitimization of the same constitutional order that produced those problems in the first place. The struggles of indigenous and enslaved people for freedom, and of women for the vote, the fight for equal civil rights through the ‘60s and ‘70s; all are presented to us as distorted reflections of the genius of our Founding slaveowners. The US civil religion imagines an already perfected government, gradually stripped of its more problematic aspects. But slavery and conquest has always been a part of Americanism.

All the facts listed above are known to you. To anyone proximate to activist spaces in the last decade, the knowledge that we are on stolen land, that the wealth of this country was born by oppressive systems designed to divide workers, that we live in a profoundly undemocratic state, are all somewhat common-sense. But without an alternative, without a positive vision for our society, acknowledging these facts comes to nothing. The colossal oppression we witness every day, the millions of corpses we walk upon, becomes a guilt-inspiring thing, not one that leads to action. We know that our society is cruel but we live with it, on a day to day basis. We let that knowledge turn into yet another consumer choice, another way for us to express our identity.

We are more than passive observers. Just as we live in what feels like the conclusion of this moment in American history defined by the collapse of the “Great Lie” of post-racial America, we live in the prelude of another, greater moment; one that is being actively shaped by the choices we make today.

There is another story we can tell of our people; a story of struggle by enslaved people and abolitionists, of liberationists and unionists, of communists and suffragettes. It will only fully cohere itself once we escape the whirlpool of American civil religion and start to understand all of these as part of a single force to transform our undemocratic society; from one rooted in the whims of a handful of slaveowners and merchants to one that will empower every human being that walks on the Earth.

As the Founding Fathers made an intentionally complex, conservative republic to disempower the working class, so will we make a democratic socialist republic which can tear down the edifice of colonialism, slavery, and all other forms of oppression. When we finally transcend the relevance of the Fourth of July, no one will ask why. They will instead ask why Americans accepted our suffering for so long, and so passively."

Communism Lives! The transformation of DSA into a revolutionary workers party continues, which is reflected in the increasing radicalism of DSA's elected representatives, even if they are not, at least openly, communist. Will communists in DSA succeed, or will the reformist tendencies take the lead? Is it time for DSA to turn to more explicit communist politics?

"We Communists, it is said, have returned after a long period of dormancy. Everyone is saying it. Mayor Mamdani is a Communist, the DSA is full of Communists; or, if you ask certain Democrats, Republicans themselves are the real Communists!

Modern politics has become a big trial, and everyone stands accused. The charge is Communism. From his venal pulpit, ‘Truth Social,’ a platform full of lies, even the big orange rapist himself proclaims boldly that "the Communists are finally making their move"—that he's "been waiting and preparing for this moment for a long time."

We Communists are a little confused, President Trump. We have not yet made our move. We were going to, but it seems our 'Democratic Socialist' cousins have jumped the gun a bit, and already earned themselves the allegation. But it is a title they do not deserve!"

"Yet now, with the political 'centre' finally forced to the defensive, defending an indefensible status quo, reiterating again and again the brazen lie that they are ultimately a force for good, these slurs are no longer coming from the right alone. They are coming from the Democratic establishment itself, rearming themselves, in good Clintonite tradition, with a rhetoric of triangulation.

It's no surprise at all to us, then, that the first mainstream report on DAC's assuredly terrible tweets, that good liberal democracy could never support, did not come from the right! The call came from inside the house: CNN! This liberal-leaning media titan, in between its habitual bouts of carrying water for genocidaires, has now turned its guns on even Democrats, as the party cannibalises itself ever further in an attempt to reckon with reaping what it's sown."

"We say that the DSA are not in fact Communists, not because they have taken the wrong direction, but because they have not elaborated their struggle enough. All across the organisation, we see the scars of conservative half-measures, of demands that only go part of the way. But it is their definite opposition to the existing order which is denounced as Communist, and which rapidly wins the hearts of the masses."

"Did Hasan Piker not call for a Dictatorship of the Proletariat, to the applause of the students at Yale? Did Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez not nod along to him when he lamented the collapse of the U.S.S.R.? The language of a Communism now holds credence in the Democratic Socialist movement."

"We are quickly reaching a situation where, if a politician is branded as a Communist, the worker only has to say: “All the better for her.”"

"The spectre of Communism, long thought vanquished, finally returns, and it haunts all the Earth—it is time for the Communists to vanquish it for good, and meet this weak epithet with the strength of its real positions. We tell the bourgeoisie: your moment is over, your chances are spent. We are no longer coming for concessions, but everything you own."

"Quick decision-making is perfectly understandable during civil war conditions. But to create unity, prevent irresponsible splits and to educate the party and the working class, provision must be made for extensive debate. Mike Macnair continues to explore procedural principles"

"The significance of timing is not unique to conditions of revolutionary crisis. On the one hand, if George Galloway had walked out of the Labour Party and called for a new party on the day British troops went into Iraq on March 20 2003, as opposed to hanging on until the Labour Party expelled him on October 23, it is likely that the resulting movement would have been more powerful than Respect (founded January 2004). On the other hand, the role of the SWP in Respect was possible because of its role in Stop the War Coalition. And its role in the StWC was possible because the SWP seized the initiative in creating the coalition in 2001 to campaign against the war on Afghanistan.

This ‘seizing the initiative’ is precisely the problem. In the first place, each grouplet is determined to have the initiative, and hence creates its own front, which it hopes will be the one that ‘takes off’ (as the StWC ‘took off’). Equally, groups walk out if they lose the majority (and thus initiative control) - thus the Socialist Party in England and Wales in the Socialist Alliance in 2001, and thus the SWP in Respect in 2007. Or they create competing initiatives to prevent their rivals’ operations ‘taking off’ (as the three main French far-left groups have done against each other, repeatedly since the 1970s)."

"Hence, in reality, the driver for the endless splittism of the far left: comrades are reluctant to “waste time talking to ourselves” and hence either minorities walk out of organisations in search of fresh fields and pastures new, or majorities invent factitious excuses of one sort or another to drive minorities out."

"Back to Bolshevism and October. Their strategic orientation to political democracy, and the worker-peasant alliance, enabled the Bolsheviks to grow into a large-minority party with a mass-circulation paper in 1912; enabled the Bolsheviks to pursue a policy of patient explanation, with a view to winning the majority during 1917; and enabled them to make the practical alliance with the Left Socialist Revolutionaries that actually took power.

In reality, all this was the inheritance of August Bebel’s and Wilhelm Liebknecht’s strategic conception, which was the foundation of the revolutionary social democracy of pre-1914. And this in turn was the legacy of Marx’s and Engels’ arguments against the Bakuninists, for a workers’ party that attempted, not to lead the strike movement, but to create a political voice for the class in high politics"

Democracy is the foundation of working class rule, both in the working class party and the workers state. Mike Macnair shows the centrality of democracy in the struggle for socialism and a socialist mass party.

"Too many on the left consider lengthy debates, polemics, decision-making votes and minority rights a diversion from the ‘real struggle’. A fundamental error. Mike Macnair begins a series of articles"

"To lay out at the outset what I plan to cover, I begin with arguments for the importance of the issue, and why questions of procedures of decision-making should not be regarded as a diversion from ‘real politics’. For this purpose I will unavoidably repeat both arguments I have made recently (and repeatedly) for the centrality of questions of political democracy, and arguments I made back in 2011 against Trotskyist arguments that these questions are secondary."

"The underlying situation of the left is that we are very radically a minority (as I argued some weeks ago, and as it remains necessary to repeat). Contrary to the Trotskyists, the ‘transitional method’ cannot solve this problem, because it arises not from lack of clarity about how to get to socialism, but from the hostility of the majority of the working class to the ‘socialist’ end-point, towards which ‘transitional method’ points: that is, ‘war communism’ in a single country and the bureaucratic regime."

"It is nonetheless objectively necessary to promote socialism and communism. And it is true, first, that the working class needs socialism in order to defend its elementary interests. Second, the society needs socialism - and this needs to be what Marx called in 1871 “la domination politique du proletariat” - the political dominance of the working class over the other classes, and in particular over management and the state apparatus. And, third, this is only possible with radical democracy."

"Proletarian political rule thus implies everyone gets one vote, one voice, freedom of access to information and communication, and freedom of association. It also requires democratic procedural methods of decision-making: ones that as far as possible return real decision-making to the ranks, so far as they are willing to participate in the process."

"A dramatic resignation letter from one of the PSL's top leaders accuses the organization of secrecy, factionalism, and bureaucratic decay. The controversy has reignited questions about the future of America's socialist micro-parties."

"The letter is long, wide-ranging, and damning. The letter is a confession as much as an indictment. Smolarek states his role as a leader in the PSL included perpetrating, covering up, or merely ignoring abuses. He describes a pseudo-democratic structure whose only purpose is to conceal an unelected Becker family clique capable of overriding every decision made by members. He documents a culture of compulsory applause and outright worship of the leadership. He alleges that bylaw changes for the organization were pushed through in secret because the leadership was afraid to face a vote. He reveals that the party’s core political documents were not the product of the combined knowledge of the organization, as members were led to believe, but were one person’s random thoughts and scribbles. He notes that they are increasingly drafted by A.I. chatbots, which he jokes has actually improved their quality."

"Why was a group of petty tyrants with no interest in organizing the American people granted the standing of a serious tendency on the left? Because the micro-party left that platformed it, recommended it, and treated it as a peer is playing the same game. It recruits from the same few thousand radicals and measures itself, like the PSL, by its reputation on the left rather than its reach among the people. As marginal as the PSL is, among the microparties, respecting the PSL as a leading rival is the only serious position."

"Smolarek has no intention of re-treading the same ground with the same line and re-cannibalizing the same old radical milieu, as Brian Becker and Gloria La Riva did when building PSL

He is calling for a fundamental course correction. He and his supporters recognize that the PSL is a dying effort not merely because of its decrepit leadership but because of its political orientation. Smolarek, however, was himself a chief author of that orientation, which leaves important questions: What will he keep, what will he add, and what will he abandon? To succeed, he and his people will have to do more than discard the WWP/PSL playbook; they will have to build a politics that actually constitutes the masses as a historical agent. What the letter has on offer is a critique of the PSL, but it is not yet that new politics. It is only a re-invocation of the basic Communist ideas that the PSL long ago threw away.

Smolarek and his supporters depart the PSL with substantial political goals and substantial baggage. Whether they will be able to free themselves from this baggage and reorient themselves towards the struggle for communism in America will be answered the only place such questions are: in practice, among the people the PSL had long given up on."

"Against the grain of various sectarian narratives, Albert Gil argues that the Cuban Revolution stands as a bold experiment in socialism with contributions worthy of appreciation for all socialists today."

"The Soviet Union disappeared 35 years ago, Cuba is isolated, and the time when it played such a central role in the imagination of the global left has long passed. The global socialist movement has changed, but has Cuba changed as well?

A useful framework is what Helen Yaffe called the ‘Guevarista pendulum’, which showcases the constant dialectic between the ideal that the Revolution still adheres to (Guevara’s model) and necessity, which might force pragmatic measures in other directions. Yaffe has described a series of swings towards and away Guevara’s ideas between the 1960s and the 21st century.[15] Since Miguel Díaz-Canel became the President of the Republic, one of the most popular mottos of the Revolution has been ‘we are continuity [somos continuidad]’, which one can find everywhere in, for example, Díaz-Canel’s posts on social media. Cuban revolutionaries know that they do not live in the 1960s anymore, but the ideal that they adhere to is still the same one: a Marxism that is radically open and Cubanized, but circumstances have not always allowed it to appear as the Revolution would want to.

And in this case, ‘circumstances’ is a euphemism for the US blockade, which has seen many phases and started in 1960. The US blockade of Cuba is the longest and most comprehensive set of unilateral sanctions imposed on a country in modern history, and, at the time of writing, includes a complete fuel blockade on a nation that is not self-sufficient in terms of energy. The blockade is an insurmountable condition for any attempt at overcoming Cuba’s underdevelopment. Any call for industrialization or further liberalization of the economy faces the barrier of the blockade: where would machinery and raw materials be imported from? Who would trade with Cuba? What about foreign current reserves? These abstract criticisms of the Cuban government fail to acknowledge who has the upper hand in this situation.

Even in these circumstances, the Cuban Revolution has resisted and prioritized its population. The Revolution, just as it did during the deep crisis of the 1990s that ensued the fall of the Socialist Bloc, is spending a vast amount of its budget on financing a minimum of food and basic consumer goods that the population requires through rationing. Despite these harsh conditions, Cuba became the only country in the Global South to create its own COVID-19 vaccine and make it available to its population and to other countries. In times of crisis, such as the “Battle of Ideas”, in which the Revolution tried to find its path after the fall of the Socialist Bloc, or during the drafting of the 2019 Constitution, the Cuban Revolution turned to the Cuban population and launched ambitious processes of grassroots participation. Even with these limitations, the revolutionary project remains flexible and committed to the same values.

The truth is that the future of Cuba is not in the hands of Cubans. The future of Cuba is in the hands of Marco Rubio and the Trump administration, and stating the contrary is either a delusion or anti-Communist bad faith. The imperialistic siege on Cuba is inextricable from other issues that have mobilized the global left around the world, such as the genocide against the Palestinian people. Presenting the Cuban story as a uniquely regional event, which also always carries the caveat of also blaming the policies of the Cuban government, instead of a story of the innumerable attacks of the United States against humanity, stems from a complete misunderstanding of the meaning of the Cuban Revolution, both for Cuban and global history. The fact that the lives of millions of Cubans depend on the end of a US siege is more than enough to declare that the Cuban question is one in which all socialists should have the same position on, but the fertile history of Cuban Marxism and its decades-long heroic struggle against the empire should make all of us side with our Cuban comrades and say with one voice: let Cuba live!"

"Charlie G reports back from the June 12th launch of the Bread & Roses caucus of the NSW Socialists, held at the Red Rattler Theatre in Marrickville, Sydney."

"Bread & Roses, the independent socialist caucus of the NSW Socialists, held a launch party to announce their formation on June 12th. The event was well attended and sported a decent number of talented performances from folk musicians, a jazz band, and a poetry open mic. An excess of around a hundred people turned up to the party, which was no small feat for a socialist event in Sydney. Many sects were present: Communist Unity, the Red Anti-Imperialist Collective (Red Ant), Red Spark, and the Platypus Affiliated Society. Solidarity’s Sydney branch also attended, uncharacteristic for the lesser twin of the dominant Socialist Alternative."

"While the Bread & Roses Caucus, and the Socialist Party for that matter, are still in their infancy, it is clear that these organisations contain the seed of the mass party of the working class, its organ and its champion which the movement so desperately needs. However, it is still to be seen whether this seed will be nurtured into the militant, fighting organisation it has the potential to be, or if it will be uprooted by the forces of opportunism, by the logic of capital, by loyalism to the state form, the forces of reaction, or the political entropy many an electoral formation have fallen to. Bread & Roses has immense potential to play a key role in forging this kind of party in NSW. At risk of sounding like a broken record, doing such is a matter of program. The rest will follow."

"To fight for yourself, to organize with others, first requires the courage to be Out, first requires Pride. This pride month we’re happy to republish comrade Glen H’s Red Pride from Cosmonaut Magazine."

"Despite being overlooked, communists should not ignore the lessons to take from the movie and the queer community at large. First and foremost, the strategic importance of being out. Whether it is a social conservative trying to stuff gays back into the closet and out of public life, whether it is a boss trying to prevent their workers from standing up to them, and whether it is the capitalist state trying to exorcise the spectre of communism, all of these rely first and foremost on one tool. Most people believe that tool is the fear of retaliation. The fear of getting queerbashed, the fear of being fired by their boss, the fear of being red scared. While it is the most attention getting it is not the one that’s used first and used most pervasively. The weapon of first resort in all these cases is shame, the fear of embarrassment. That one's peers will find who they are or what they do to be pathetic, and they will be shunned by the vast majority who are cautious of being associated with them. Social conservatives don’t have to queerbash a queer who stays in the closet of their own volition. Bosses don’t have to fire workers who never even try to stand up for themselves in the first place. Capitalist states don’t have to exorcise a phantom that doesn’t haunt.

The cure for this shame is Pride. If someone acts like they have something to hide from others, people will naturally treat them with suspicion. If someone parades themselves down mainstreet with nothing to hide how can they be accused of hiding anything from anyone. What’s more, those who harbor a secret dissatisfaction with an identity they feel has been forced on them, with working conditions they find intolerable, or a dream that we have at hand the raw materials of a new world, will see this person boldly walking down the middle of mainstreet and decide they can step into the light if it means they won’t be alone in it. It is in this way that queers, and communists, undermine the prevailing system through nothing more than unapologetically being themselves.

This is why every communist ought to be proud to be a communist. Obviously we cannot be out all the time to everyone in every context. Just as outing queers who aren’t ready and willing should be treated as a social crime so too should outing communists. The main point is that every second spent in the dark is a second when someone who was waiting for permission to join something larger than themselves went without that permission. This was in part the value of Bernie Sanders running for president. We do not have Medicare For All and the Supreme Court decision on Citizens United remains in force. But what Bernie Sanders did accomplish was to give the socialist movement the permission to publicly be socialist with no embarrassment of that fact. "

"Though mainstream culture may try to take our accomplishments away, that's all the more reason to fly our flag. In 1984, amidst repression and defeat and plague and death, communists saw an opportunity to unite not just two separate groups but rather two parts of the same larger struggle. That’s worth being proud of."

"Raphael F. Alvarenga contends that Žižek’s post-2015 approach to migration, while retaining the language of radical politics, embraces a managerial logic of border control that blunts the universalist and emancipatory thrust of his earlier theory."

"In responding to critics[6], Žižek writes that capitalism “cannot afford” the same freedoms and rights for all people and must therefore rely on migrant labor while simultaneously restricting migrants’ movement. But this framing subtly naturalizes the border regime as if it were a regrettable necessity of the system rather than one of its active tools.

The issue is not simply that capitalism cannot afford equal rights for everyone, but that it needs the border to produce differential rights, to manufacture a segmented, precarious labor force whose vulnerability can be exploited. Capital does not merely fail to grant rights; it withholds them to depress wages, fracture worker organization, and prevent the solidarities that might challenge its power. Without a rightless stratum of migrant labor, entire sectors of accumulation – from agriculture to logistics to care work – would collapse. This is the political economy post-2015 Žižek never fully engages with, let alone confronts. By speaking of what capitalism “cannot afford,” he recasts a structural strategy of domination as a fiscal limitation rather than a weapon in the class struggle."

"In practice, this means that while we can agree with Žižek that neoliberal multiculturalism is an inadequate response to migration, and that both xenophobic nationalism and naïve liberal humanitarianism should be rejected, we must not let fear of right-wing backlash dictate our strategy. Rather than choosing between social chaos and top-down crisis management, we should embrace bottom-up, democratic, grassroots internationalism in the form of migrant mutual aid networks, urban solidarity initiatives, and cross-border labor struggles."

"Six years after the George Floyd Uprising, Marisa M. surveys political trends around policing on the Left. Both willingness to oppose the political power of the police and a program for Black liberation remain necessary pillars for any socialist electoral project."

"The Left’s failure during the uprising was twofold. Organizationally, we did not build new institutions that could effectively carry the politics of the movement into harsher conditions, and existing organizations like DSA failed to absorb militants activated by street protest. Politically, we were not able to move most participants from a reformist critique of police funding and behavior to a broader political movement against the police state. By the time the leaves turned, the most popular explosion of street militancy in our lifetimes had given way to the dementia of the Biden era."

"In short, for DSA to open the road to socialism, we need to incorporate the demands of Black liberation into our electoral platform. On the municipal level, this means directly challenging Blue Power and working to shrink the authority and power of the police, naming their role as an oppressive, occupying army terrorizing working class neighborhoods. On the federal level, it means fighting for radical democratization and reparations, creating the conditions for a politically powerful, organized Black working class.

The lesson of the George Floyd Uprising is not that street tactics are more significant than political action, or that abolition is not a viable electoral plank. It is that the democratic struggle of the Black working class is the lynchpin to the overthrow of capitalism. Black freedom lights the way to freedom for all of us."