This is an opinion piece written collaboratively by the Immigrant Solidarity Working Group and was not voted on at a general membership meeting. Opinion pieces from sub-bodies do not reflect the opinions of all members and are not chapter approved statements.

It is with no stutter and no hesitation that Salt Lake DSA stands with the 15 defendants facing charges for anti-ICE organizing in Minneapolis. Their stance is part of a proud, long-standing tradition of resistance against law enforcement overreach in this country. Faced with the indiscriminate violence of this winter’s ICE/DHS activity in the Twin Cities, these neighbors banded together in an inspiring and powerful model. After these feral agents murdered two and celebrated their own impunity, the regime attempts to contort law and morality to punish their real enemy: our unwillingness to submit.

There is risk in taking a principled stance. It is in that spirit that we also condemn the charges faced by two former court clerks in Logan that allegedly helped individuals evade ICE agents at the courthouse. When faced with an opportunity to perform the moral, righteous act, these clerks took it—at their own personal risk. They acted against a vindictive and thoughtless regime intent on tearing apart families, and for that we salute them.

It is not enough to point out the blatant hypocrisy of the Trump regime, as it is not only painfully obvious, it is expected and routine. They decry the “weaponization” of the law while also rewarding loyalist felons with pardons. The hypocrisy and double-dealing are markers of a system in a permanent tailspin. Trump and his cronies find themselves in the criminal trough of our economic system, resorting to merely demanding submission and collecting bribes. They are rapidly running out of distractions, and soon, the lid will tighten yet further.

As the administration criminalizes dissent in America, we implore all Utahns: do not consider yourself exempt from this assault on your civil liberties. Stand with us, or stand beside us, but at least stand up and be seen in opposition to this continued erosion of freedoms. In this capitalist system, law is merely a weapon in the hands of the powerful, completely divorced from morality and righteousness. As a weapon of the powerful, once you stand crosswise to their goals, the law will be used to hammer you back into place. It is time for us to seize the hammer.

We know we stand firmly on the right side of history, because between solidarity and hate, we will always choose the former.  In time, we will win; the only question is, for how long will we all need to suffer until we can put an end to this madness? How many of us will be caught up in the gears? When the working class has unified to fight this fight together, we will no longer have to wonder. We will have already won.

The post Solidarity is Not a Crime first appeared on Salt Lake DSA.

Adopted June 15, 2026

Eryka Caldwell, a waitress and event planner in Brooklyn, is the most recent murder in the continuing onslaught against the trans community. Eryka was caring friend and sister who always saw the good in people, and loved “everything sappy & mushy”.

Juniper Blessing, a graduate of the New Mexico School for the Arts in Santa Fe, was murdered the week before Eryka. Juniper was a remarkable person, a gifted vocalist and is described as truly loving weather, intending to study Atmospheric and Climate Science at the University of Washington, along with Music and Philosophy. Videos of Juniper’s remarkable vocal work have been shared widely to honor her.

Their murders are an immense loss for us all.

The murders of Eryka and Juniper are not one-off events. They are sparks from the wildfire of hatred towering over us all. Turning Point USA chose to cancel their event at the University of Washington scheduled to take place just days after Juniper was murdered. This event would feature Chloe Cole, a right-wing detransitioner who actively opposes access to gender-affirming care and whose work has been described as ” [a] political touchstone for conservative groups pushing against transgender rights…”. Events like these serve as a wellspring for hatred and dehumanization, which tour across the country propagating violence.

Rochester is no stranger to this violence: this time last year, we were still reeling from the murder of Sam Nordquist, one more life lost to what seems like an inescapable waterfall of anti-trans hostility. We’re continuing to see rampant violence against trans people across the country, in particular trans people fleeing red states to our cities where they hope to be safe. But it is only by recognizing our collective strength and organizing together that we can keep all of us safe in the face of increasing repression.

“Seattle must serve as a refuge for our trans neighbors who are fleeing regions trying to erase their existence, which is why today’s news is so devastating and horrific,” Seattle Councilmember Alexis Mercedes Rinck said in a statement on the murder of Juniper.

Until this murderous, genocidal intent is swept from our nation, we have a responsibility to organize and overturn the unjust systems that lead to this violence. There still exist threats to trans lives even in Seattle and Rochester which are both considered deep-blue cities. The entirety of New York State passed the Trans Safe Haven Act to protect gender affirming care and to protect trans lives. However, work continues at the federal level to strip away these protections. Work still continues to dehumanize trans lives and eradicate trans existence from our nation and from the world by any means available. That means we must continually work to uphold and protect trans lives, dignity, and freedom in the face of these attacks.

Trans people are simply trying to live their lives, gain acceptance and equal treatment. We must recognize in the trans experience a universal struggle against the patriarchal gender binary, and for human freedom. An attack on one of us is an attack on all of us. No one is free until all of us are free.

ROC DSA is organizing working class people to fight for trans liberation and freedom from capitalism. You can join ROC DSA by signing up at dsausa.us/join. A better world is possible, and together we can build it

The post ROC DSA Statement on the Murders of Eryka Caldwell and Juniper Blessing first appeared on Rochester Red Star.

The River Valley Democratic Socialists of America is opposed to the widely-reported rent control compromise legislation being considered by the Massachusetts legislature. Based on positive polling and the power of the tenants movement, we believe we will win rent control on the ballot in November. The compromise proposed by some rental control advocates would raise […]

by Gregory Lebens-Higgins

The rapid mechanization of the world has inspired a wealth of fiction with the theme of machines acting without human impulse and beyond human intention. These depictions speak to the real fears of workers confronting their displacement by machines in an unfamiliar world. With the advance of computational intelligence, the threat of sentient machines overtaking humanity is a common feature of movies, including The Terminator (1984), The Matrix (1999), I, Robot (2004),and most recently, Good Luck, Have Fun, Don’t Die (2025).

Does this fear have grounding in reality? Will sentient machines reprogram themselves without the knowledge of their human creators, pursuing tasks for their own ends and actively interfering in human affairs? Or perhaps decide to eliminate humans entirely? Maybe we should just start worshipping our future overlords now to avoid later retribution?

Like the AI of fiction, capitalism seems to self-replicate, expanding and recreating itself on a global scale and sucking all exchange into commodification. Capitalists are propelled by competition to reach new markets and cheaper inputs or be put out of business. In those regions not yet infected by capital, the tools of economic and physical violence do the work of displacing people from their land and creating a propertyless laboring class that must depend on the capitalist system to survive, by selling its labor and purchasing necessities from the market. The surplus value of these transactions accumulates to a wealthy ruling class, structuring class relations:

“Accumulation of wealth at one pole is, therefore, at the same time, accumulation of misery, agony of toil, slavery, ignorance, brutality, mental degradation, at the opposite pole.’ And to expect any other division of the products from the capitalistic mode of production is the same as expecting the electrodes of a battery not to decompose acidulated water, not to liberate oxygen at the positive, hydrogen at the negative pole, so long as they are connected with the battery,” comments Engels (quoting Marx).

Competition results in winners and losers. Resources and power are centralized in a shrinking ruling class, while precarity metastasizes among a surplus population. “Capital grows in one place to a huge mass in a single hand, because it has in another place been lost by many,” says Marx. Even before AI, the incentive to reduce costs meant the replacement of workers by machinery.

Unlike AI, it is clear that capitalism does not have a mind of its own. The individual decisions that maintain the system are made by humans. Capitalism is not a natural state of affairs, but an economic system established by businessmen and bankers to perpetuate their social status. Capitalism does not exist for its own ends, but to profit and empower these capitalists.Challenges to the system, whether from labor solidarity or corporate regulation, are fended off by capitalists protecting their class interests.

The threat of AI exists not in its self-replication, but from a ruling class empowered with tools to discipline labor and increase surveillance (alongside its environmental impact). Computer programs, like traditional machines, do not have independent motivation but serve the interests of their creators. It is not robots who desire to dominate humanity, but Silicon Valley CEOs.

These CEOs hype up the potential of AI in order to encourage investment. The myth of a coming “Artificial General Intelligence” acts in service of the latest tech bubble. Sci-fi scenarios of AI overtaking humanity reinforce these expectations. Meanwhile, the shift in focus to the machines themselves, rather than their capitalist creators, shields the relationship from class analysis.

Those involved in the Luddite movement (1811 – 1817) are often thought of as irrational actors fighting against the inevitable turn of history. Their tactic of machine-breaking is depicted as opposition to all technological advancement. In fact, direct action only followed the exhaustion of legal attempts at redress against their displacement by machinery. Their fight was not against machines, but for survival.

Our understanding of society’s relationship with machines necessitates a class analysis. Who does the machine benefit? Is it designed to meet actual human needs, or primarily to extract additional surplus value? How can the working class take ownership of machines to repurpose them toward the elimination of drudgery? The confrontation is not one of humanity vs. machines, but of class struggle.

The post On Self-Replication in AI and Capitalism first appeared on Rochester Red Star.

The Class podcast interviews an organizer on the importance of bringing a political vision to the pushback against AI data centers.

The post Portland DSA Organizes Against Data Centers appeared first on Democratic Left.

Ahead of Tuesday's elections Democratic Left has published interview with ten DSA candidates on the ballot in New York City.

The post Meet NYC DSA’s 2026 Slate appeared first on Democratic Left.

U.S. Rep. Adriano Espaillat has failed his district as his constituents are priced out. His opponent represents a real challenge to the displacement crisis.

The post Darializa Avila Chevalier Represents the Future of her District appeared first on Democratic Left.

The following remarks were delivered by councilmembers Mary Lupien, Stanley Martin, and Chiara “KeeKee” Smith in explanation of their votes against the proposed budget, which dedicates more than 25% ($160 million) to the Rochester Police Department.

Mary Lupien; East District: I view budgets as moral documents. The staff did a great job putting it together, it’s a lot of work. My not supporting the budget has nothing to do with the amount of work that was put in, it’s the policies and decisions that come from the top. This budget does not go fast enough or far enough, and it does not meet the moment. I recognize that we’re facing a difficult fiscal reality, and that resources are limited, and that hard choices had to be made. But if every department is being asked to tighten its belt, to reduce staffing, and do more more with less, why does that expectation seem to apply to everyone but the Rochester Police Department?

Every year the RPD gets their biggest budget ever. Which, to be honest, doesn’t even matter, because every year they overspend their budget, so they really just get unlimited money. We continue to budget for vacant police positions that have gone unfilled for years, even as other departments that provide direct services to residents are forced to make cuts. We know that nearly half [of] the police department is eligible to retire in the next five years. At some point we have to ask whether budgeting for these positions that we cannot fill, is the best use of our limited dollars.

Meanwhile, we continue to underinvest in violence prevention programs, like Advance Peace, that have already demonstrated success. Pathways to Peace, Advance Peace, and our other non-police interventions, in cooperation with the police department, have helped to significantly reduce violence. Yet we still treat these investments as secondary rather than essential.

And we also continue to underinvest in housing during a housing crisis. Every year that we postpone the investments that would help us repair underlying problems, the challenges grow harder to solve and the costs grow higher.

There are many positive elements in this budget, and I appreciate, again, the work that went into it. But I cannot support a budget that continues to prioritize maintaining the status quo, over making the investments necessary to meet the dire challenges in front of us. 

Stanley Martin, At-Large: So, I’d like to start by saying thank you to the administration, Director Warren, all the different departments that work together to put this budget together. And of course, a huge thank you to our staff, James, Jenn, Dacy, Adrien, Clerk Washington, everyone who helped to this work and who continues to take care of this city.

It’s not surprise what my vote will be tonight. It is going to be a no. As many of my colleagues before me have mentioned, I am deeply concerned with the amount of money we spend on policing. This year, we are spending $190 million on policing. That includes pensions, that includes positions that are vacant with no reasonable expectation to ever fill those positions. To me, it’s hard to understand how in one breath we’re saying we have a budget deficit, we’re struggling to make ends meet; and in the next breath we fund police at the highest amount they have ever been in the history of this city.

My no vote is also because I feel that this budget fails to take care of some of the people who keep us safe. We heard a lot of the issues around safety when it comes to security guards need for certain equipment to feel safe. When I walk into this room and I see security guards around, I feel extremely safe. I see how they de-escalate. And I would like for the folks who are on the front lines to be paid equitably in the same way other departments on the front lines are getting paid.

Finally, it is my deepest hope that within my time on this council, I will see a budget that equitably invests in alternative responses, rent supports, supports for people who simply can’t make ends meet because of inflation and all the other issues we’re seeing in this country. My no vote does not critique, again, any of the important work so many folks in this city are doing. But for me, this budget just fails to meet the majority of the needs of our community. 

Chiara “KeeKee” Smith, At-Large: Like my colleagues, I also want to acknowledge all the great work that everyone in this city does every day to make things run smoothly, especially the work that was done around the budget – Again, Jen, James, Dacy, Adrien, Clerk Washington, and the rest of the staff. Thank you guys so much for being available and for answering questions as needed. Budgets are more than numbers; as Mary said, they are moral documents. And they tell a story of what we value as a city. They show our residents who we invest in, what challenges we are willing to confront, and what kind of future we’re working to build. They are records that will tell stories of what we held important.

I have heard a consistent message from residents across our city. People want safe neighborhoods, but they also want stable housing. They want mental health support for those in crisis. They want opportunities for young people. They want clean neighborhoods. They want violence prevented before it starts. They want us to address the conditions that create crisis, not simply react when someone gets hurt.

When I was running for office, people were not asking for larger police budgets. They were asking why families were struggling to keep a roof over their heads. They were asking why young people lacked positive opportunities. They were asking why neighbors facing mental health challenges have nowhere to turn. They were asking why the same communities continue to carry the heaviest burdens of the city’s drug crisis, while being ignored when they asked for help.

I support public safety and I respect those who have chosen a career in law enforcement. But public safety is bigger than policing. Public safety is when a child has a safe place to sleep; when a family can afford to stay housed; when someone in crisis receives care and support. It begins when young people have access to hope. Residents have been clear – they want greater investment in prevention. They want stronger support for programs like violence prevention initiatives such as the PIC program, such as the Action Team, and trusted community organizations already doing the work of healing, the escalating conflict and supporting families before emergencies happen.

I am also concerned that this budget does not provide a clear path forward for Peace Village, or another meaningful alternative for our unhoused neighbors. Our communities are strained. Residents are frustrated. The people living there deserve dignity, and the surrounding neighborhoods deserve solutions.

As elected officials, our responsibility is not simply to fund systems. It is to listen to the people we serve, especially those whose voices are often overlooked. When I look at this budget through that lens, I cannot support it. I’m asking us to have a broader vision of public safety. One that includes housing, mental health prevention, intervention, and community. One that recognizes enforcement alone cannot solve challenges rooted in poverty, trauma, disinvestment, and a lack of opportunity. I respect those who may vote differently, and I remain committed to working with my colleagues to move Rochester forward. But my first obligation is to the residents who have trusted me with this role, and those whose needs are the greatest. For this reason I will be voting no on this budget. 

* * *

The DSA difference means prioritizing people’s needs over the maintenance of class order and pursuit of profit. Investments in affordable housing, accessible food, and adequate mental health resources are investments in public safety. A better world is possible.

Make a difference with DSA. Join today: dsausa.us/join

The post Why Did Democratic Socialists Vote ‘No’ On Rochester’s Budget? first appeared on Rochester Red Star.

by Rich J.

In a small municipal park at the corner of South and Alexander, there is a statue of city namesake Nathaniel Rochester. The space itself is more of a neighborhood garden, a place where residents hang out, and the bronze statue of Nathaniel Rochester hangs out with you. He is seated, though his legs are a little too long for his body, resting on his cane, and smiling as if at a private joke. It’s a bronze you could imagine sidling up next to and listening to amusing stories of early, rapidly-growing Rochesterville. 

The built environment is our daily background. Our public spaces are places we pass through or hang out in, not regard with deep contemplation. But that very passivity is what makes public symbols so potent. They provide unassuming legitimation for the official history of a place and its extant structures of authority. Nowhere in Nathaniel Square Park will you find mention that Nathaniel Rochester built his town on land recently conquered from the Seneca, or that he did so with the coerced labor of slaves he brought here from Maryland. 

In the port city of Trieste, Italy, in 2019, citizens unveiled their own bronze statue depiction of a thoughtful-looking man. Gabriele D’Annunzio was a modernist poet, still highly regarded in Italian literary circles, and the statue captures that facet of the man. It shows him cross-legged, deeply concentrating on reading an open book, while leaning on a pile of still more books. It is exactly the kind of commemoration one would expect to see of a respected author. 

For the citizens of Rijeka, Croatia, however, Gabriele D’Annunzio’s legacy is not that of a renowned author. It’s that of a fascist occupier. Or, more accurately, if the citizens of Rijeka remember his name at all, they associate him with a fascist occupation. In the opening scenes of Croatian filmmaker Igor Bezinović’s Fiume o Morte!, which screened at the Little Theater earlier this year, he interviews passersby, and most people on the street don’t recognize the name Gabriele D’Annunzio. Determined to reframe the memory of D’Annunzio, Bezinovic sets out to humorously film a historical recreation of the man and his occupation.

In 1919, D’Annunzio led a few hundred demobilized Italian soldiers in a takeover of the disputed former Habsburg city then known as Fiume. Allied negotiators at Versailles had promised the port to the new Yugoslav state, to the chagrin of the city’s powerful Italian minority. The city’s Italians cheered D’Annunzio’s coup and celebrated him as a man of action who would force the Italian government to take on its nationalist responsibility to annex Fiume. For D’Annunzio and the coterie of young adventurers who gathered around him, however, Fiume was to be the revolutionary center of a utopian society of work and art and generative violence.

D’Annunzio was in the orbit of Italy’s fascist movement and, through his Fiume adventure, framed much of fascism’s aesthetics. Photographers thoroughly documented his 15-month occupation, and the imagery they produced was largely of shirtless young men posing heroically and brandishing weapons. This bravado performance of masculinity was an explicit critique of bourgeois liberalism, which they saw as effete and degenerate. Only strong men, willing to use force, could regenerate the insipid culture of the bourgeoisie.

The images of D’Annunzio and his followers are easy to mock. Bezinovic cheekily restages their historical photographs as filmed tableaux with amateur local actors. He casts a series of men to portray D’Annunzio himself mock-heroically in his uniform, giving speeches, throwing orgies, and working on his poetic constitution. The director’s only criteria for casting his seven D’Annunzios is that they be bald and middle-aged.  The effect is to enunciate the buffoonish character of the whole cocaine-fueled occupation. D’Annunzio’s self-conceived heroism dissolves into the ordinary, the boring, the common.

And here the subversive memory-making at the heart of Fiume o Morte succeeds in its goal. The fascists who followed D’Annunzio imagined themselves as supermen bending the world to their will. A few shells from an Italian battleship ended their whole Fiume adventure. Its participants went on to another project to bend the world to their will. A couple of meathooks in a town square ended their Italian fascist project. But, given the continued popularity of D’Annunzio, whose palace is a well-attended tourist attraction in Italy, it is evident that the fascists refuse to remember their failures. In Fiume o Morte!, with its unapologetic lowbrow approach, making art with and by normal Croatian people, Bezinovic makes an antifascist movie about fascist failure. D’Annunzio would have hated it. 

The post Fiume o Morte: Anti-Fascist Memory Making first appeared on Rochester Red Star.

Foreign atrocities and domestic repression share a common racist logic. Movements that recognize the connection may be best positioned to resist both.

The post Trump’s Wars, Foreign and Domestic, Extend a Long Imperial History appeared first on Democratic Left.