The Nevada landscape is not the same as the federal landscape. In Congress, we know that power players like Big Pharma and AIPAC run the show. Here in Nevada, it’s the Chambers of Commerce, the Nevada Realtors, the Retail Association of Nevada, mining companies, and big casinos. Labor unions get a slice of the pie, like prevailing wages for new construction and raises for public workers, thanks to their generous donations, with most progressive bills existing due to union backing.

During this legislative session, these power players have run the show. In a published statement, Sandra Jarauigui stated that her bill was watered down by Nevada Realtors, who then decided not to back it anyways. This bill, AB280, would limit rent increases for senior citizens to 10% (now 5%) for one year before sunsetting in 2026. That’s right, a one year long rent stabilization bill, that would allow landlords to immediately raise it to any number they want again when it expires in December 2026. This would conveniently be months before the end of the next legislative session and leave them without protection for over six months, even in the event that a second bill is passed.

Retail Association of Nevada, or RAN, has been loudly opposed to Attorney General Aaron Ford’s anti-price gouging bill, even publishing a condemnation of the bill in their monthly newsletter. They lobbied against it, pushing legislators to vote down the bill. Unfortunately for RAN, if you want legislators to take a politically ugly position such as this one, you’re going to have to pay them the big bucks. Only 3 Democrats voted against the bill: Duy Nguyen, Venise Karris, and Joe Dalia. All 3 of them received the maximum donation of $10,000 from the Retail Association of Nevada. They were the only Democrats to do so.

The bills are then written, sponsored, and presented by corporate lobbyists. AB523 is a bill written and presented by Uber lobbyists. Several articles refer to this bill as a “settlement” or a “compromise”, we prefer the term “quid pro quo”. Uber launched a nationwide campaign to lower their insurance liability in 2023, as a response to a litany of lawsuits regarding sexual assault, injury, and wage theft. Uber decided to go to war with a key pillar of the Nevada political class: legal services professionals.  Uber presented this bill as a ceasefire. You allow us to carry lower insurance limits, shield us from all liability prosecution, and define drivers as “independent contractors” in law, and we will stop running ads against your friends in the law firms. Howard Watts allowed Uber lobbyists to fast track the bill through the Growth and Infrastructure Committee. It was introduced, heard, and passed in 24 hours. It then passed the floor unanimously. Not a single state lawmaker opposed the bill.

Next up is AJR8, what some are referring to as a desperate offering to Elon Musk. Sponsored by Assembly Democrat and Corporate Darling Joe Dalia, the bill is heavily supported by the Retail Association of Nevada. A reasonable person can assume that the world’s richest oligarch Elon Musk might have something to gain from the bill, due to his continued reliance on Nevada public dollars for his operations. Musk has also been railing against the existing business court in Delaware, because the court increasingly has ruled against corrupt CEOs and Trump-connected henchmen. Musk expressed his desire to establish a business court in Nevada on X.  AJR8 passed the house with 40 votes, with only Assembly Democrats Erica Roth and Selena La Rue Hatch in opposition.

Then there’s SB371, presented by Resorts Association lobbyists on behalf of strip casinos. This bill would increase the penalties for trespassers on the Las Vegas strip. While that might sound reasonable to some, these “trespassers” are mostly homeless people moving from their way down the strip to access the tunnels (a local residence for the unhoused). This bill seeks to “deter” people who have no other choice, by locking them away for three years. Most notably, the bill is sponsored by Nevada Senate Democrat Fabian Doñate and Senate Republican John Steinbeck. Doñate represents one of the poorest districts in Las Vegas, and has seemingly sold out his own constituents. Doñate received the maximum contribution from MGM Resorts in his last election, as well as more than $5,000 in donations from various casino properties. SB371 passed the senate with no opposition.

Lastly, the disappearance of BDR 10-513, rent stabilization. The bill was viciously opposed by the entire corporate coalition, most strongly by Nevada Realtors. The bill was one of only a few bills to not be introduced at all in the session.

In all, the legislative session has been dominated by corporate lobbyists. While their presence is overwhelming — there are 900+ lobbyists in a building with 60 legislators — Nevada state lawmakers have given up on the pretense that working Nevadans have the same influence as their corporate campaign donors. There are no backroom deals between legislators and corporate lobbyists in Nevada, the lobbyists are standing in the middle of the room and loudly declaring “I wrote this bill.”

Neither party stands up against corporate interests. Whether it’s giving away federal lands, lowering insurance rates for Uber, arresting the homeless, or pouring public money into state funded billionaire slush funds, the CEO always comes first in Nevada. Las Vegas DSA wants to see a legislature dominated by worker power, and we will keep fighting until we’ve defeated the corporate giants.

If you want to stay up to date on what bills are making their way through the legislative session and who is supporting them, check out our bill tracker:

…by a reading group member

From November 2024 to March 2025, Madison Area DSA embarked on an ambitious political education project. A reading group formed to tackle Paul Reitter’s 2024 translation of Capital. The challenges of this book were clear and immense from the beginning. Marx’s words measure to a total of 710 pages with over 100 more pages of introductions and endnotes. It tackles a vast array of topics starting with a theoretical analysis of value, a mathematical assessment of the working day, and a historic review of the working class’s conditions across Great Britain. To call this work a magnum opus feels like an understatement. 

How did MADSA respond to the challenge? There are different measures of success that should be considered. Over a dozen members signed up in December to attend the weekly meetings. Attendance dwindled rapidly to a core four members who finished the text earlier this year. We held a majority of meetings in-person at the Social Justice Center, though occasionally some were converted to Zoom due to scheduling conflicts. By the end, a transition from Thursday nights to Saturday mornings was made to facilitate reading group members taking on other active organizing projects on weekday nights. 

The drop in attendance was likely multifactorial. For some members, the scheduled in-person weeknight meetings were inaccessible. For others, missed meetings due to other end-of-year holiday obligations made it difficult to catch up. Because each chapter of Capital references previously introduced concepts, falling behind often meant being left behind. In response, reading group members employed a combination of audiobooks, physical books, and digital ebooks to read the material. This allowed time-strapped members to maximize opportunities to read between sessions. Basically, whenever I had free time this winter, I needed to crack open Capital to stay ahead. 

Sessions originally consisted of facilitated meetings with a self-nominated leader agreeing to summarize key concepts and key vocabulary each week. The decline in membership led to a decline in formal structure. At the conclusion, the four remaining members brought an equal share of questions and key passages to the table for others to review and discuss. This second model reduced scheduling anxiety and remained effective because as members grew to understand and build off of each other’s strengths. In general, a key source of success was having a member already familiar with the text, this member provided valuable context at the beginning of each session and prepared us with signposts to pay attention to when we read the into the next section.

In summary, I believe MADSA should form a Capital reading group every two years to maintain institutional knowledge of the key socialist theories among chapter members. Future reading groups will benefit most from regularly scheduled meetings that do not interfere with the end-of-year holidays. They should also seek to have members who are already familiar with the text to help draw attention to key ideas for new readers. It is worth considering the use of supplemental material, such as David Harvey’s chapter by chapter lecture series, which could reduce entry barriers or help members stay up to date despite occasionally missing a section. However, I believe there is significant benefit to engaging in the written metaphors and analogies Marx uses to explain his concepts. Members relying only on summarized material will miss the humor and jokes very much needed in the socialist vernacular to call out the contradictory monstrosity of capitalism. 

The question of in-person versus video meetings remains up in the air. I invite current MADSA attendees of Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism reading group to contribute a follow-up report to Red Madison to help direct the chapter’s burgeoning political education committee on the best practices for maximizing access to important member education. 

Finally, what other key theory should enter the MADSA reading group roster? In addition to reading European socialists like Marx and Lenin, MADSA should make dedicated space for non-European theory exploring the mechanisms of capitalist oppression. Given we organize within occupied Ho-Chunk land in the shadow of a massive land grant university, members would benefit from critical theories of settler colonialism. Reading groups for Fayez Sayegh’s 1965 thesis, Zionist Colonialism in Palestine and La Paperson’s A Third University is Possible represent exciting ways to build the membership’s capacity for material analysis and historical critique.

By Matt Triaszin

The first months of the second Trump administration have been a serious surprise for the global left. It now seems that the American imperial system is deliberately shooting itself in the foot simply to spite its primary international interlocutors. On a local level, Rochester DSA and its allies are on the offensive, eyeing not only a majority on the City Council but the Mayorship as well. This, albeit local, prospect of victory is not to be taken lightly or as an unbridled good. What it means to win on a municipal level for Socialists is well understood historically and current conditions provide several outcomes for electoral victory in Rochester.

This article attempts to elucidate the “concerns of optimism.” That is, rather than attempting to posit a purely optimistic outcome from the next year of ROC DSA’s operations, I will attempt to assume positive outcomes in our electoral program and then warn against the view that these electoral victories are in and of themselves complete victories. As such, this article is a warning against lack of planning, fatalistic optimism and the assumption that local progressive governance is in and of itself the victory of socialist governance. As such, I will not be discussing the very real possibilities of failure at the beginning of our local electoral campaign. We must remain steadfast against fatalistic optimism and also against the demobilizing effects that such fatalism entails and can be found in history when socialists assume a position of inevitability of their victory or even of victory being complete at the moment of the counting of votes. 

1. Victory on City Council

Amongst comrades, this appears to be the most optimistic hope, remaining an oppositionary, but popular force without wide scale compromise or putting us into statewide and national battles where prospects are significantly worse. I will make this point however: While being a disciplined oppositionary force is needed in the current moment, increasingly erratic decisions from the forces of the Slaver Constitution means that a lack of even municipal aggression on our part could mean that our position is weakened in the long term. We must present a true alternative to the current political landscape, including short term gains for the people of Rochester and its surrounding areas. We cannot back ourselves into the corner of being pure sewer socialists. Not using our powers for the meeting of basic needs will likely mean someone else will. All local programs, however, must be part of a wider, national strategy which places our victory in context and gives us direction. 

2. Total Local Electoral Victory

The next alternative is victory in not only city council races, but in our mayoral hopes as well. While this seems like an unequivocal good, it must come with caution. We have experiences from Socialist or Socialist aligned mayors in Buffalo and likewise the history of the American Socialist movement as a whole. We will immediately be in conflict with the government of New York State, the Federal government and even local agencies, particularly the police. Most importantly on the latter, we will also be at their head. This is a borderline insurmountable contradiction, a position similar to “Abolitionist Slavers.” As such, we in the cadre of ROC DSA must be prepared in a variety of ways. One person does not have the answers here, but as a collective body, we must be ready for a likely result: the failure of our electoral wins to materialize into something greater than electoral wins. Importantly, failure cannot turn into a demobilizing phenomenon, especially after organizing strongly for what seemed like victory. On day one, as a minimum we need to be prepared to explain why certain laws, measures etc. did not succeed. We must set up analyses beforehand, before finding ourselves doing a post-mortem.

3. “Red Rochester”

There is a tightrope to walk for a true local victory however, one which requires careful preparation and an invigorated cadre. This victory results in Rochester being a bastion of the Socialist movement in the United States, a City on the Hill spreading the good news against the tides of reaction and bigotry. Even attaining the “status” of stable Socialist rule in Rochester, in its current miniscule and off chance is not enough. The conception of “Socialism in One Country” failed and so did the bastion of Socialist culture of Red Vienna. In the event of such success, we must be a shining example of victory and not the victory itself, a vanguard showing a possible path forward for our comrades not only in the United States, but areas throughout the world facing similar challenges and conditions. Even the greatest of successes require us to learn from history and our comrades from around the world. We stand on the shoulders of giants and avoiding the pitfalls of the past must be a constant thought in our minds. 

4. The Reality of Local Socialist Governance Historically

I have made several mentions of historical outcomes, none of which were successful in the long term. It is lofty to compare our fledgling movement to the success of the SozialDemokratische Arbeiterpartei Österreich as a mass organization. The SDAP was a party which in 1927 succeeded at taking 42% of the vote in a national election, alongside total dominance of the country’s capital city. Not only did the party succeed in official elections, but they maintained a social and economic plurality over the Austrian Republic’s cultural institutions, trade unions and maintained an armed force, the Republikanischer Schutzbund (Republican Protection League) which at its peak outnumbered the armed forces of the Austrian Republic. The SDAP operated under the assumption that the Republic of Austria was a “neutral plain” which positioned the bourgeois parties and the proletariat into a state of political rather than open warfare. 

The Austrian state however, was not this neutral site of combat between evenly positioned titans of mass politics. It was a repressive apparatus which situated the proletarian parties (though primarily only the SDAP) as a plurality against bourgeois and allied interests (namely peasants and the petit bourgeois). The SDAP, by positioning itself as the defender of the Republic, found itself constantly ceding ground to forces uninterested in democratic principles. Likewise, the national government was hostile to the project of Red Vienna, meaning that the Socialist project was hamstrung not only by right wing terror campaigns and increasing police repression, but by a financial war which the SDAP parliamentary plurality could not fight through legalistic means. 

The lesson to be learned for ROCDSA is that we: (1) Cannot treat any level of the American state as “ours” and (2) Cannot go into the next period of our activity with the simple plan of passing local laws as if they are value neutral propositions. All of history disagrees. We must be ready to be a vocal opposition even if we are locally in power and prepared for showdowns we cannot win. Being able to articulate that the American state is hostile to not only our intentions, but to the interests of the working class in an effective manner is of the utmost importance. We cannot become impotent by virtue of dissolving ourselves into either a “progressive coalition” which is ultimately hostile to socialist politics, or dissolving ourselves into economistic reformism. Our victory (in the local sense) must be understood as a demand for expanding democracy and the beginning of a larger battle for it. A local victory which does not demand a new state of affairs is a temporary one at best and victory without being prepared for losses, tactical retreats and setbacks is one which assumes that we are only moving by the laws of history. A fatalistic, even suicidal strategy which would bury us before we are born.

These are mostly optimistic possibilities, even slim ones, but ones that we can win. We must, however, never for even a second forget that one battle does not win the war and the war to remake society in a democratic, humane, socialist form will be a long one. One which requires us to understand that the decisions we make have consequences that require introspection, thought and the activity of all of us in these processes.

Solidarity Forever,
Matt Triaszin

The post On the Prospect of Victory first appeared on Rochester Red Star.

This May Day, we gather in a moment of rising pressure. The bosses exploit us, the politicians sell us out, and the system demands our silence. In a city and country where labor action is far too rare and organizing faces constant resistance, it can be easy to feel isolated. May Day reminds us that we are not alone. We stand in a global tradition of struggle and solidarity, one that has always grown strongest in the face of repression. Rooted in the demand for basic rights – from the eight-hour workday to healthcare and housing for all – May Day is our yearly call to keep fighting back.

This tradition belongs to us all – workers, tenants, students, and everyone struggling for a better future. Across the country, workers are reclaiming their power, forming unions, making their voices heard, and building something better. We can and must embody that spirit here in Madison. As capitalism decays our world around us and threats to our lives and livelihoods escalate, our task is clear: build working-class power and wrench back our wealth from the bosses and billionaires.

Let this May Day be a reminder: the future is not yet written. We create it. With courage, with care, and with each other, we organize – not just for survival, but for dignity, for justice, and for the world we know is possible. Change doesn’t happen overnight, but it starts when ordinary people come together. Whether it’s supporting the next generation as they walk out of school, preparing for a 2028 general strike, or spending a spring day talking socialism with comrades in the park, every step forward counts.

Below are a few ways to get involved this May Day and beyond to help build our power – no experience required. All you need is the belief in a better future and a willingness to stand in solidarity against the ruling class. Let us plant the seeds for a stronger movement, together.

• Thu. May 1, 9am – East + West High School Walkout
• Thu. May 1, 7-8:30pm – May Day Mass Meeting & Panel Discussion: The Road to a General Strike
• Fri. May 2, 3pm (or Thu. May 1, 9:30am in MKE) – A Day Without Immigrants & Workers Rally
• Sat. May 3, 10am-1pm – Family Friendly Spring Park Social
• Sat. May 3, 2-3:30pm – New Member Orientation
• Sat. May 10, 6pm – Hands Off Medicaid! Town Hall

Monthly Newsletter of the Rochester Chapter of Democratic Socialists of America

Welcome to the first anniversary issue of Rochester Red Star! For one year, Red Star has provided monthly coverage of ROC DSA activities, advertised upcoming chapter events, and published insightful articles that explore capitalism’s multifaceted attack on the world and our vision for a better future.

The post Rochester Red Star | May 2025 | (Issue 13) first appeared on Rochester Red Star.

Metro Justice Releases Representative and Candidate Report Cards on Proposal to Replace RG&E with Public Utility, Calls out RG&E closed door meeting including Electeds and Business Reps on May 1 

ROCHESTER, NY – Metro Justice and members of the Rochester for Energy Democracy (RED) Campaign released the results of a candidate and representative survey Wednesday at 5:30pm at City Hall on the City Leading a study on replacing RG&E with a public utility. The group also called out a closed-door meeting on May 1 where RG&E is inviting business representatives from the Chamber of Commerce and all area political representatives, raising concerns that RG&E is trying to stop a study, as they did at the County in April 2024. 

“While City Council has made a positive first step, what we need most is the courage and political leadership it takes to make a transformative change – not just to make a political talking point,” said Clayton Lyons, RED committee member. “Many leaders in our community support a public utility study, which makes it all the more surprising that the core of our elected officials in power – Mayor Evans, Council President Melendez, Mitch Gruber, Bridget Monroe Michael Patterson, and Lashay Harris –  have declined to commit to commissioning a public utility feasibility study at the City level. Meanwhile, the “progressive block” of City Council – Lupien, Martin, Smith, and Lightfoot, along with all challengers in the primary except Luis Aponte and Shashi Sinha, responded “yes” to all questions.”  

“We’re in an RG&E Crisis – Last year, RG&E shut off power to over 13,000 local homes and businesses, and Rochester’s energy burden is third highest in the country. Rochester City Council voted in both 2023 and 2024 to reserve $500K for a public utility feasibility study. Yet they have failed to take the next step, commissioning a study. Why are a majority of City Reps using inaction at the County as an excuse for the City not to lead?” expressed Christina Christman, President, Federation of Social Workers.

A coalition of community, labor, faith and anti-poverty leaders is calling on City Council and the Mayor to allocate funds already reserved by City Council to commission a Phase 1 feasibility study to replace RG&E with a public utility. The Metro Justice survey focused on which representatives will commit to act at the City level, which will not, and who won’t answer the community’s questions. 

“We’d like to work in partnership with City Council on a feasibility study, but we also need to see action. The foreign corporation that owns RG&E is draining our community of resources while leaving us out in the cold. It’s time our local elected officials take the initiative and study a public alternative. Economical utilities help to enable a community to transition from a nightmare to a beloved community, and as Drum Majors for Justice, the United Christian Leadership Ministry is in pursuit of the beloved community,” said Bishop Dr. Dwight Fowler, President of United Christian Leadership Ministry.  

“While I have suffered all my life under the pressure of RG&E, their impact on my credit, and making me choose between Christmas for my kids and avoiding a shutoff, I also just got a mistake shutoff notice last month. Why have we not gained clear answers about holding RG&E accountable?” added Ruth Reeves, impacted community member. 

 “Ratepayers already pay for all of RG&E’s operating costs, plus now $122 million on top of that in profit. Recently, they’ve also gotten millions in taxpayer money – corporate welfare – on top of that, just to do their jobs, and they try to sell that as benefiting our community. When RG&E has a private meeting with all our electeds plus those business representatives responsible for funneling taxpayer money to corporations, we must ask – whose needs are centered in our community?” asked Lisle Coleman, community member affected by RG&E. 

“Rochester has suffered RG&E’s overbilling, shutoffs, and profiteering for too long. We need our leaders to explore an alternative that has worked for many other communities,” said Dr. Michi Wenderlich, Metro Justice Campaign and Policy Coordinator. “Recent feasibility studies in San Diego, Decorah, Pueblo, Long Island, and Winter Park all found that public utilities would result in significant cost savings from the beginning, even after factoring in the cost of purchasing the grid through our rates over 30 years. The City must lead if the County will not.”

BACKGROUND: 

In place of the coalition’s previous call, which was a fully comprehensive feasibility and implementation study, a Phase 1 study that examines the possibility of a public utility at both the City and County levels could be done by the City alone, with the $500,000 funds they’ve already reserved for this purpose. A Phase 1 Feasibility study that covers the City and the County would not be significantly more expensive than a study that looks at the City alone, but would give the City all the options moving forward.

Metro Justice’s survey asked current candidates for public office to say if they have general support for a public utility feasibility study, if they support City Council commissioning a Phase 1 study of their own, and if they support a strong process and oversight for the study, including Metro Justice’s draft and timeline for an RFP, including an advisory council. Representatives and Candidates who are in support of City Council commissioning a feasibility study that covers the City and County and that utilizes Metro Justice’s proposed RFP process received A grades; those who would not commit or did not answer received Failing grades. One respondent committed to action at the City level but did not commit to process questions of community oversight and received a passing grade. Candidates could answer yes, no, or no answer/not committed, and those who did not respond to the survey were given no answer/not committed. A full chart outlining answers and grades can be found here.  

The RED Campaign has advocated for replacing RG&E with a publicly-owned utility since 2022. Rochester City Council voted in both 2023 and 2024 to reserve $500K for a public utility feasibility study. Yet they have failed to take the next step and commission a study.

In the context of opposition from County Executive Adam Bello, the County voted down funding for a public utility study in April 2024, when 2 Democrats (Yudelson and Maffucci) sided with the Republican caucus to block it. Bob Duffy, the President & CEO of the Greater Rochester Chamber of Commerce, is paid over $240,000 a year to sit on RG&E’s parent company (Avangrid)’s board. The son of area Congressperson Joe Morelle is the Senior Vice President of the lobbying firm that lobbies for Avangrid. RG&E was bought out by Avangrid in 2008, which is owned by Iberdrola, the 2nd largest utility company in the world.  

The Candidate + Representative Questionnaire is being released by Metro Justice, which is a member-led organization committed to social and economic justice in the Rochester area. Since 2022, the Rochester for Energy Democracy (RED) Campaign of Metro Justice has been calling on local elected officials to commission an independent study to determine the feasibility of replacing RG&E with a publicly-owned utility in Rochester and Monroe County. Bonds for a new utility would be issued by the newly created utility as low-interest revenue bonds, not as general municipal bonds directly by the City (or County). 

The coalition calling for action by the City independent of the County includes Metro Justice, UAW 1097, 1199 SEIU, Federation of Social Workers, Spiritus Christi, RUNAP, Climate Solutions Accelerator, United Christian Leadership Ministry, RocACTS, Episcopal Diocese of Rochester, City-Wide Tenant Union, First Unitarian Church, Connected Communities, Rochester Contemporary Art Center, Generational Engagement Matters, Third Act Rochester, Poor People’s Campaign – Rochester Chapter, Rochester Democratic Socialists of America (ROCDSA), Grants Pass Resistance, Rochester Committee to End Apartheid, Jewish Voice for Peace Rochester, Rochester Mutual Aid Network, Peacework CSA, Mary Magdalene Church, Parkside Neighborhood Association (Irondequoit), and several local businesses including Kris B. Kimmel Construction Drafting, inc. and Sakjak Enterprises, Inc. The RED Coalition additionally includes Workers United Rochester Regional Joint Board, First Universalist Church, Greece Baptist Sustainability Team, Rochester Rotary NW and SW Chapters, Rochester Black Nurses Association, Rochester Refugee Resettlement Services, City Roots Community Land Trust, VOCAL NY, National Lawyers Guild – Rochester NY Chapter, Southeast Area Coalition, Color Brighton Green, Color Pittsford Green, Color Irondequoit Green, Color Henrietta Green, Being Black in the Burbs, Sunrise Rochester, Irondequoit Neighborhood Roundtable, North of East Main Neighbors United (NEMNU), Energy Democracy Alliance, Run On Climate, Clean Air Coalition, Mad Hatter & Roc Cinema.  

The post Press Release: Candidate Report Cards first appeared on Rochester Red Star.

By Travis Wayne

Cambridge, MA – On April 24, 2025, the MIT Coalition for Palestine and BDS Boston held a press conference outside campaign target  MIT Museum announcing that the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) had sent a formal letter cutting its ties with the Israeli weapons manufacturer Elbit Systems. 

The Industrial Liaison Program at MIT (MIT-ILP) is a program designed to facilitate the relations between MIT campus communities and large corporations with US$500 million or more. That includes strategic recruitment of students into businesses that hold these lucrative ILP contracts with the Institute, one of which was Elbit Systems. 

The termination of Elbit Systems’ contract with MIT is the second victory for what the movement began calling the “People’s Arms Embargo” in late November 2024. Earlier that year, Elbit Systems terminated its Central Square office location a year early after waves of disruptions led by BDS Boston. A coalition of Palestine organizations launched the People’s Arms Embargo with a direct action at Travis Air Force Base in California after the federal government failed to end weapons shipments after a year of continued genocide in Palestine: “if the U.S. government won’t stop shipping arms to Israel, then we will establish a People’s Arms Embargo to stop it ourselves.”

The organizers and press were not alone on April 24. The Cambridge Police Department had assigned an entire squad of ten visible security guards to barricade the press conference. Two organized counterprotesters also showed up, unfurled a Zionist flag, and proceeded to bellow slogans to disrupt the press conference. One filmed while another screamed to drown out the speaker. Three security guards stood between counterprotesters and a Palestine organizer when they began heatedly exchanging words.

One representative from BDS Boston echoed the same words the organization released after the successful removal of Elbit Systems from Central Square: “We have collective power and we will use it.”

The Palestine Youth Movement was also invited to deliver a statement:

This is the moment. This is the moment where people of conscience must take matters into our own hands… this is our community’s time to escalate against this merchant of death and all war profiteers.

The movement coalition also identified a new target: Maersk. The US$55 million shipping company, located in the strategic logistics industry, has been identified as a targeted by Palestine organizers worldwide. In Tangier, Morocco, 1500 dockworkers and supporters at the Maersk-owned APM Terminals 2 organized to refuse to accept a Maersk shipment of US fighter jet parts to Israel – entering a showdown with management. PYM’s Mask Off Maersk campaign posted that Maersk added dockworkers in Morocco to special lists as a repressive response to their organizing on the same day that BDS Boston announced its own Maersk campaign. 

“This is only the beginning,” said one MIT Coalition for Palestine member. 

Travis Wayne is the deputy managing editor of Working Mass and the co-chair of the Somerville branch of Boston DSA.

By Colleen L

In the heart of North Carolina, a storm is brewing once again. Senate Bill 516 (S.B. 516), misleadingly titled the "Women's Safety and Protection Act," threatens to unravel the fabric of inclusivity and respect that binds our communities together. The bill is not just a step backward, it's a direct assault on the dignity and rights of transgender individuals, and it places everyone, regardless of whether or not someone is transgender, at greater risk.​

But the danger doesn’t stop at restroom doors. S.B. 516 is part of a broader political strategy rooted in upholding systems of patriarchy, white supremacy, and capitalism. These types of laws seek to control bodies, especially the bodies of those who resist gender norms, who are people of color (POC), queer, disabled, working-class, and/or poor. By weaponizing fear and moral panic, these bills distract from the real crises facing our communities: lack of access to housing, healthcare, education, and living wages. In doing so, they divide the working class and shift blame away from the systems that actually endanger us.

When the government polices gender, it enforces rigid roles that serve the interests of power, not the safety of people. S.B. 516 does not protect women or children. It reinforces a violent, narrow view of who is “acceptable,” while putting trans people, non-binary people, and even cisgender people at risk of surveillance, harassment, and violence. This bill isn't about safety, it's about control.

What is S.B. 516?

Senate Bill 516 (S.B. 516), also known as the “Women’s Safety and Protection Act,” is a proposed North Carolina law that would force people to use bathrooms and changing facilities in public buildings based on their sex assigned at birth, not their gender identity. The bill would also prevent transgender people from updating the gender marker on their birth certificates or driver’s licenses, legally erasing recognition of trans and non-binary individuals. S.B. 516 does not increase public safety. Instead, it puts transgender people, non-binary people, and even cisgender women and men at greater risk of harassment, violence, and discrimination in public spaces.

A Violation of Privacy and Safety

Studies have shown that transgender individuals face alarmingly high rates of harassment in public restrooms. According to GLSEN, over 75% of transgender students feel unsafe at school due to their gender identity, and restrictive bathroom policies exacerbate this vulnerability.​

Moreover, these policies don't just harm transgender individuals. They hurt all of us.

S.B. 516 is written as though gender is binary and everyone fits neatly into one of two categories. But we know that’s simply not reality. Countless people, non-binary, gender nonconforming, and intersex, exist outside that rigid framework. This bill erases their identities and their humanity by forcing them to choose between unsafe or inappropriate public spaces. 

Harmful policies like S.B. 516 create an environment where anyone who doesn't conform to traditional gender norms, whether it be appearance or mannerism, can be subjected to scrutiny and discrimination. This includes cisgender women who are perceived as masculine, who could also be challenged or harassed when simply trying to use the restroom.​ Cisgender men aren’t safe either. Fathers helping their daughters in public restrooms or caregivers assisting elderly family members may find themselves accused of suspicious behavior.

Consider the case of domestic violence shelters. Transgender women, who are already at a heightened risk of intimate partner violence, could be denied access to these critical resources under S.B. 516. This exclusion not only leaves transgender women without support but also undermines the very purpose of these shelters: to provide safety and refuge to those in need.​

S.B. 516 doesn’t create safety, it invites profiling. And worse, it encourages everyday people to act as enforcers of state control. Much like abortion bans, ICE raids, or anti-trans legislation across the country, this bill relies on surveillance and snitch culture, where suspicion alone becomes justification for confrontation. It deputizes citizens to police each other’s bodies, turning public spaces into battlegrounds of judgment and fear. 

The GOP knows these laws are both harmful and unpopular. But rather than govern democratically, they push these policies through by stoking fear, bypassing public consensus, and using political power to force their agenda, regardless of the lives at risk.

This bill, created under the guise of “protection,” doesn’t protect anyone. It targets the most vulnerable among us, and it empowers the public to do the state’s work.

We’ve Seen This Before: HB2

We don't have to look far back to see the repercussions of such discriminatory legislation. In 2016, North Carolina passed House Bill 2 (HB2), which mandated individuals to use restrooms corresponding to the sex on their birth certificates. The backlash was swift and severe. Major corporations halted investments, leading to significant economic losses. The NBA relocated its All-Star Game, and numerous entertainers canceled performances. The Associated Press estimated that HB2 would cost the state over $3.76 billion in lost business over a dozen years.​

The public outcry and economic impact were so profound that the legislature eventually repealed HB2. Yet, here we are again, with S.B. 516 threatening to repeat history.​

Infringement on Fundamental Rights

Beyond the tangible harms, S.B. 516 strikes at the very core of individual freedoms. Denying transgender individuals access to facilities that align with their gender identity is a blatant violation of their rights. It's not about safety; it's about codifying discrimination. The American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina has aptly described S.B. 516 as a bill that "erodes fundamental rights and dignity by enforcing rigid definitions of sex and gender in state law."​

But this bill is about more than restrooms. It is part of a larger strategy to maintain systems of control. Policies like S.B. 516 reinforce patriarchy by policing gender roles, white supremacy by disproportionately harming POC trans people, and uphold capitalism by criminalizing the poor while denying them access to safe public space. These systems rely on strict hierarchies of power and punishing those who refuse to conform.

In the face of this institutional violence, LGBTQ+ communities have built alternative systems of care. Many rely on mutual aid networks to meet their most basic needs: hormone therapy kits, gender-affirming clothing swaps, safe housing resources, and fundraising support for legal, medical, or survival costs. These acts of collective care are not charity. They are acts of survival.

S.B. 516 seeks to sever these networks by increasing stigma, limiting access to public life, and pushing people into deeper precarity. It targets the very communities that have always had to build their own safety. When the state abandons these communities, or actively legislates them out of existence, the communities are the ones who respond. Mutual aid is a reminder that real safety doesn’t come from the state. It comes from each other. And that is exactly what this bill is trying to dismantle.

The Urgent Need for Compassion and Understanding

To those who support this bill under the guise of protecting women, consider the real-world implications. Policies like S.B. 516 don't make spaces safer; they make them more hostile and divisive. True safety comes from fostering environments of understanding, respect, and inclusivity.​

Taking Action: Preventing the Passage of S.B. 516

There are so many ways to show up in this fight, and not all of them require being physically present at a protest. Activism is strongest when everyone participates in the ways they’re able.

1. Show up for trans and non-binary people: That means listening, believing, and advocating alongside them.
   
   

2. Contact your legislators: Contact your state senators and representatives. Express your opposition to S.B. 516 and explain how it harms the community. Personal stories and well-reasoned arguments can be particularly impactful.​
   Find your NC legislators here: https://www.ncleg.gov/FindYourLegislators
   
   

3. Support local organizations doing the work: In addition to national advocacy groups, grassroots organizations here in North Carolina are building power for reproductive justice, LGBTQIA+ rights, and working-class liberation, such as:

The NC Triangle Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) – Socialist Feminist Working Group

The Socialist Feminist (“SocFem”) Working Group of the NC Triangle DSA envisions a world rooted in reproductive justice, bodily autonomy, and dignity for all people, values that stand in direct opposition to S.B. 516.

Their work connects the fight for trans rights and reproductive freedom with broader struggles for labor rights, housing justice, and free, accessible healthcare. They organize for systemic change, not just defensive actions.

Their past efforts include:

• Rallies in response to the overturn of Roe v. Wade

• Picketing anti-abortion “crisis pregnancy centers”

• Teach-ins on abortion care and bodily autonomy for trans people

• Active participation in the chapter’s Priority Campaign for Trans Rights and Bodily Autonomy, which challenges the state government through civil non-compliance and organizing.

To learn more or get involved:
Website: https://triangledsa.org/working-groups/socialist-feminist-working-group/
Instagram: @triangledsa

Other organizations include: ACLU of NC, Equality NC, and the Campaign for Southern Equality (and more!)

1. Attend protests and community events: Show public solidarity. Visibility matters. If you can’t attend physically, raise awareness digitally.
   
   

2. Educate others: Use your voice on social media and in your local communities. Help people understand that this isn’t about safety. It’s about control and discrimination.
   
   

3. Vote: Remember this moment during election season. Support candidates who champion inclusivity and oppose discriminatory legislation.​
   
   

Let's not be a state that legalizes discrimination. North Carolina can champion the rights and dignity of all its residents. S.B. 516 is not the path forward. It's a regression that North Carolinians cannot afford morally, socially, or economically.​

It's time to stand together, to uplift every member of our community, and to ensure that our laws reflect the values of equality and respect. Reject S.B. 516. Embrace compassion. Champion justice.

By Nathan K & Dan C

In the wake of October 7th, another round of Israel’s genocidal actions towards the Palestinians in Gaza has begun, pushing Zionism and antisemitism to the top of American public consciousness. While Israel has been engaged in brutal repression towards the Palestinians for decades, what has made this moment so different from previous ones has been the sharp outcry against Israel’s actions from a wide swath of western capitalist society. In an effort to suppress these newly dissenting voices, Zionist affiliated organizations have turned to a tried-and-true method in their playbook: conflating anti-zionism with antisemitism. Criticism and even awareness of Israel’s actions are positioned as antisemitic smears by the left, juxtaposed against a rational and palatable “Liberal Zionism”. The waters are only muddied further with the arrival of far-right groups inadvertently bolstering this effort, attempting to hijack the narrative to insert actual anti-semitic rhetoric into criticism of the Israeli state.

So what is antisemitism, why and how is it being conflated with Zionism, and how do we push back against the narrative of “Liberal Zionism”?

Antisemitism is rooted historically in Europe’s conversion to Christianity, though there were certainly discriminatory actions levelled at Jews in the classical era, such as expulsions and slavery in the wake of conquest or revolt, the prejudices we are familiar with grew out of the perception that Jews were “killers of christ”. Restrictions on where Jews could live, bans from certain occupations, and everyday racism were all part of a systematic campaign of persecution with the goal of forcing conversion. These pressures led Jews to practice in secret, flee their homes, or take up socially inferior jobs such as moneylending, peddling wares, or tax/rent collecting. The latter resulted in representations of Jews as “greedy” or untrustworthy and made them scapegoats in times of crisis, despite Jews in these professions working on behalf of Christians who could not practice usury.

Starting in the Enlightenment, race as a “science” gained popularity as attempts to retroactively justify the religiously motivated prejudices of the past. The rising nationalist movements of the day viewed Jewish identity as inherently oppositional to national identity and Jews as conspirators against national rejuvenation. To fight their oppression, Jews in turn began flocking to revolutionary movements, leading to further tension. Jewish and gentile intellectuals alike debated whether Jews could assimilate or would always face discrimination. In the pro-assimilation camp, various movements to secularize Jews and fight for their rights within society were founded. Among Jews from the anti-assimilationist camp, a new political ideology emerged: Zionism.

Political Zionism began with Theodore Herzl and his manifesto Der Judenstaat written in 1896, though its existence as an aspirational religious goal predates that. Unlike assimilationists, Zionists did not necessarily reject scientific racism and accepted the formulation that Jews were a distinct and separate race from their European counterparts, requiring a homeland of their own. The British Empire saw Zionism as an opportunity to expand influence in the Middle East and offered patronage through the The Balfour Declaration, and Zionists in turn encouraged activity in Mandatory Palestine due to its religious and historical significance in Judaism.

Following the Holocaust and the death of six million Jews, assimilationist positions seemed absurd. How could Jews possibly turn around and attempt reintegration in a society that had just planned their mass extermination? The Zionist position seemed like the obvious way forward: to settle in a new land, far from Europe,and  establish a Jewish nation-state with complete political control. The words never again etched their way into Zionist lexicon as their strongest argument. This is the common refrain of the Liberal Zionist, that the Holocaust uniquely proves the necessity of a Jewish Nation-State — that it is a given fact that without a Jewish Nation, a genocide will occur again.

According to this mindset, the "excesses” of the Israeli state boil down to bad policy or bad actors. Following this line of thought, Liberal Zionists, argue that the right politicians or the right policy can create a Zionism that is palatable and free of such “excesses”. The problem is this outlook refuses to see the settler-colonialism at the heart of the Israeli project, which will cause those “excesses” to occur again and again. Benjamin Netanyahu’s Nationalist Likud Party, the ones currently conducting the campaign of slaughter in Gaza, wasn’t always the ruling party of Israel; the first governing coalition was composed of Liberal and Labor zionists. That didn’t stop Jewish settlers and soldiers who had just fled persecution and suffering turn around and inflict that same violence against the Palestinians. As negotiations broke down into war in 1948, the Israeli paramilitaries that would eventually become the core of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) engaged in a campaign of ethnic cleansing known as the Nakba. Over 750,000 Palestinians were expelled from the land they called home, 16,000 Palestinains were killed,and land and property were expropriated by the nascent Israeli state.

No matter how much liberal or socialist window dressing takes place, Zionism is an ideology of settler-colonialism, and nothing can change that. Its rallying cry, “A land without a people for a people without a land” erases the personhood of Palestinians, leading to its atrocities being buried or ignored. Zionists believe, implicitly or otherwise, they are on a “civilizing mission” for the Levant. When media outlets and politicians push rhetoric like “Israel is the only stable democracy in the Middle East,” the implication is clear: Israel is a western democracy, it has European founders, it is stable like us.

That also doesn’t change the fact that many Jews support Israel out of fear of antisemitism, with a true conviction that Israel serves as a bulwark against it. Zionism itself proudly claims this to be true, but history paints a different picture. Israel, through its material actions, has no issues with antisemitism aimed at the Diaspora. It materially supports evangelical “Christian Zionists” who support the Israeli State out of perceived fulfillment of biblical prophecy, a prophecy that ends in genocide: with all Jews either dying in the apocalypse or converting to Christianity. Christian Zionism and American backing leads to widespread acceptance of Israel on the ideological Right, even among groups who perpetrate antisemitism against Jews in their home countries. That’s how a party like the AfD in Germany can advocate for tearing down Holocaust Memorials and laws outlawing Kosher slaughter but be a vocal proponent for Israel in the German legislature.

Israel does nothing to protect those who are victimized by these groups and their supporters. There is no material support, and no amount of “soft power” actually helps the people trying to live their day-to-day lives. At most, Israel’s claim of being a shield against antisemitism amounts to cynical invocations of the Holocaust to justify its own existence through methods like the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, which notably includes:

“Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.”

These alliances between Zionists and antisemites are a feature, not a bug. Theodore Herzl once noted in his diary that “The antisemites will become our most dependable friends, the antisemitic countries our allies.” This remains the strategy of Israel to this day, and why not? It’s of material interest to the Israeli project. Antisemitism against the Jewish diaspora means more Jews emigrating to become Israeli citizens. There is still the implicit understanding of Herzl’s internalized antisemitism in policy: that the “weak” diaspora must be transformed into a “proper” Zionist nation. This is to say nothing of the destruction of traditional Jewish culture within Israel, the eradication of local practices in the name of stamping out the “ghetto culture” of the diaspora (Ashkenazim, Sephardim, etc) for the homogenized monolith of the Hebrew-speaking Israeli.

This brings us back to the question of antisemitism. Is anti-Zionism antisemitism, like so many politicians would have us believe? No. Just from the Nakba alone, there are clear political reasons to oppose the Zionist project that have nothing to do with the hatred of Jews. Definitions like the one used by the IHRA obscure this, framing the discussion of Israel around Jewish self-determination as opposed to the suffering and dispossession of the Palestinians.

That doesn’t mean critiques of Israel can’t still cross the line into antisemitism, such as when those critiques cross the line into targeting Jews who have no connection to the Israeli state. Other offensive tropes include invoking claims of sinister conspiracies headed by the Rothschilds or George Soros,  implicating Jewish individuals and institutions as part of some secret cabal for Israeli power, and implying a dual loyalty across an entire people. Baseless accusations like these are just the old tropes of antisemitism given a new coat of paint for the world Jews find themselves living in today.

DSA is against all imperialist and colonial ideologies, including Zionism and anti-Muslim racism. We reaffirm that anti-Zionism is not antisemitism! We stand with the oppressed peoples of Palestine and work with them in solidarity and support through actions like our No Appetite for Apartheid campaign and by working on the ground with Palestinian organizations. We do this while fighting antisemitism in our communities at the same time. Freedom for the Palestinian People and safety for the Jewish diaspora are not in any way mutually exclusive. Recent events have made people more conscious of this, but it is only through action and education that we can make sure it is a reality.