by Serge S

(Note: This is a corrected version of a previous post.)

Cleveland joined several communities nationwide who are changing their stance on Flock surveillance technology. 

During the Cleveland City Council Public Safety Committee’s June 17 meeting, members voted 3 to 1 against renewing their Flock “Safety” surveillance contract which expires on June 29. 

Voting against were Stephanie Howse-Jones, Niki Hudson, and Kevin Conwell, leaving Committee Chair Mike Polensek as the sole member to vote for the agreement. 

According to News 5 Cleveland, council members, police administrators, Public Safety Director Wayne Drummond, fifteen community members and more than two dozen people from Flock No were involved in the discussion, which lasted nearly two hours. 

Flock cameras were first installed in Cleveland during the summer of 2023 and have spread to nearby communities including Euclid, Richmond Heights, Willoughby Hills. 

The $250,000 contract would have extended the system for another year. 

The fight isn’t over. Although the safety committee declined to renew the contract this time, another council committee may take up the legislation, although no date has been set. 

Flock isn’t the only surveillance system in Cleveland. The city also operates 3,400 video surveillance cameras, most of which have AI tracking capabilities. 

This isn’t the first time that Mayor Justin Bibb’s administration has tried to sneak funding for surveillance technology through backroom channels. In the past he has bypassed the Safety Committee by extending contracts through the city’s Board of Control which effectively sidesteps council’s ability to review, approve, or deny them. 

In one such instance Bibb extended the city’s $850,000 contract with SoundThinking, the vendor of their gunshot-detection technology ShotSpotter in April of 2026. 

Several organizations have risen in response to Flock and other tracking systems which have flooded Cleveland in recent years as city’s including Dayton have cancelled or declined to renew contracts with Flock. 

One of them, “Flock No CLE” formed last year when the city tried to push an emergency proposal to expand Flock systems and replace their ShotSpotter system in 2025. The legislation would have authorized a $2 million three-year contract with Flock’s version of the “shot spotting” technology by using microphones in their already existing automated license plate readers, according to Signal Cleveland. 

According to Axios Cleveland the Cleveland Clergy Coalition spoke in favor of the contract on safety grounds while police argued the technology improves response times and claimed that there has been no misuse of data by Cleveland officers – although there is no way to verify these claims as officers can use a login system that does not always have two-factor authentication – meaning that logins could be shared to avoid tracking. 

Sources in order of use:

https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/cleveland-metro/cleveland-flock-license-plate-reader-contract-expiring-end-of-the-month

https://www.axios.com/local/cleveland/2026/06/18/cleveland-council-flock-contract-renewal-vote

https://www.axios.com/local/cleveland/2026/05/19/flock-cleveland-bibb-council

The post Cleveland Safety Committee Denies Renewal of Flock “Safety” Contract appeared first on Democratic Socialists of America.

The intellectual landscape of our era is defined by a fascinating paradox. On one hand, society remains deeply committed to a scientific, materialist critique of the world, yet on the other, it seems to many observers that we are witnessing a profound return of the religious. At the heart of this possible modern cultural shift lies a renewed dialogue between three historic figures whose legacies were once thought to be mutually exclusive: Jesus Christ, Karl Marx, and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel.

By weaving together Hegel’s logic, Marx’s economic theories, and the concept of kenosis—the self-emptying of the divine—that has developed in many Christian traditions, some modern thinkers are discovering a shared consistency that addresses the deep identity crises of twenty-first-century life and the global pressures of capitalism. This evolving perspective provides one possible framework for a secular faith, with the person and teachings of Jesus the Christ offering an ethical foundation upon which the grand political projects of Hegel and Marx can be built.

To understand how the modern intersection of Christ and Marx works, one must first look through the lens of Hegel’s philosophy of religion, particularly as rather creatively reinterpreted by the contemporary philosopher Slavoj Žižek. On this reading of Hegel, the arrival of the man who would become the Christ represents a profound cosmic moment where the divine spirit steps out of the abstract clouds and enters into the messy, limited reality of human existence. Žižek takes this a step further by arguing that the “Death of God” on the cross is not simply the disappearance of the divine, but the precise moment God experiences what it feels like to be an atheist. When Jesus cries out in agony asking why he has been forsaken, the divine experiences the radical, terrifying gap of its own non-existence. This painful transition shifts spiritual authority away from a distant ruler in the sky and births the immanent Holy Spirit, which these philosophers redefine as the active community of believers working together.

At this point, Žižek is free-styling: the cry of dereliction (only in Mark) is never attributed to God, and only in the late twentieth century do theologians start to make that rather remarkable connection. “God experiences what it feels like to be an atheist” is provocative, which is how we know we’re reading Žižek.

In this framework, Christ represents the ultimate alienation of God into humanity. By dying on the cross, the distant master vanishes, leaving behind human collective agency to shape history. Many point out that Marx’s later critique of religion was actually a radical expansion of this Hegelian logic. Where Hegel believed humanity would find its ultimate peace and reconciliation within the structure of the political state, Marx looked closely at the world and saw ongoing economic alienation.

This relationship is often oversimplified by reducing  Marx’s legacy to his famous catchphrase that religion is the “opium of the people.” In truth, his work was a deep critique of the material world rather than a simple attack on faith. For Marx, the inverted, fantasy world of religious mythology was a mirror image of the inverted reality of capitalism, where dead labor—which we call capital, machinery, and corporate wealth—rules over living, breathing workers. These dynamics form what Žižek calls the “theology of the commodity,” a phenomenon where inanimate objects seem to possess magical social powers while the real humans who made them are ignored.

Consider how this plays out on a regular basis when a consumer buys a brand-new smartphone. People will camp outside stores overnight, treating a sleek piece of glass and metal like a sacred relic capable of bringing them status and joy. Meanwhile, the actual human beings extracting raw materials or working grueling hours in overseas factories remain invisible to the consumer. The object is given an almost divine personality, while the living worker is reduced to an invisible cog in a machine.

In our current era, this tension has fueled a massive revival of Hegelian Marxism, led by scholars like Nathan Brown, who seek to reunite Marx’s economic sharpness with Hegel’s focus on personal and social freedom. This aligns naturally with Liberation Theologians, such as José Porfirio Miranda , who have long argued that the biblical concept of a “preferential option for the poor” is the spiritual equivalent of Marx identifying the working class as the driver of human liberation. Within this synthesis, the radical teachings of Jesus regarding the poor are not treated as polite suggestions for occasional charity but are recognized as the primary engine for historical transformation.

The conceptual bridge linking these three pillars is kenosis, the voluntary self-emptying of power. In Hegel’s philosophy, God empties Godself of heavenly authority to share in human suffering. As Žižek emphasizes, this self-emptying represents the true birth of democracy, forcing the realization that no external superhero is coming to save us, thereby redistributing responsibility to the community.. The Holy Spirit becomes the emotional and social bond of a revolutionary group that steps up after the master is gone.  Marx localizes this self-emptying in the working class—the people who, by owning nothing under the law, end up representing the universal interests of humanity.

Thinkers such as Enrique Dussel  argue that modern global capitalism operates like a religion of death, requiring constant human sacrifice in the form of extreme overwork and poverty just to keep corporate markets satisfied. When these ideas intersect, the results are revolutionary: Jesus provides the deep ethical mandate of self-sacrifice, Marx delivers the structural blueprint of systemic greed, and Hegel offers the logical framework to push through the negative struggles of history.

In our current digital landscape, this philosophical struggle has moved directly onto our screens. Every time a user scrolls through a social media feed, highly advanced algorithms exploit dopamine triggers to maximize corporate ad revenue. The user is no longer just a consumer; their behavior, time, and attention are mined like raw coal. Yet this digital self-emptying also contains the seeds of its own subversion.

This resistance forms what Martin Hägglund calls a secular faith. Because our time on this earth is strictly finite, reclaiming our hours from the digital grind becomes a sacred act of liberation. True freedom in this universe is not the shallow ability to choose between brands, but a deep break from treating ourselves like products to be bought and sold.

Thinkers like Alain Badiou look to the Apostle Paul as the ultimate prototype of this revolutionary attitude, defined by total loyalty to a radical break from the status quo. Freedom is transformed from simple consumer choice into a shared human capacity to physically reshape the material world, echoing the early Christian church’s view (such as the principle of omnia sunt communia, that all goods are to be held in common, as presented in Acts chapters 2 and 4) that the free development of each person is the absolute condition for the free development of all. (Paul may or may not have followed through on his vision, but his rhetoric of equality is significant.)

While Hegel provides the grand logic and Marx provides the mechanical critique of social institutions, it is the figure of Jesus, in my opinion, who injects the vital pulse and the ultimate purpose into this modern synthesis. Without this element, Hegel’s philosophy risks treating human beings as abstract chess pieces in history, and Marx’s theories can devolve into a cold, utilitarian machine of state power. It is only through the explicit focus on the infinite value of the individual—the theological defense of the least of these—that the struggle remains human and redemptive.

The teachings of Jesus thus can be seen as serving as a direct corrective to the potential extremes of both idealistic philosophy and raw economic materialism. Where a philosopher might justify the suffering of entire generations for the abstract progress of a nation, Christ demands immediate compassion for the individual sufferer and offers radical love as the cure. Where a political theorist might reduce a human being to an economic production unit, Christ asserts an inherent dignity that transcends a person’s utility to a market.

In our contemporary world, this intellectual intersection is a practical call to imitate that radical empathy. The most inspiring element of the Marxist dream—the desire for a world free from exploitation—is, at its core, a secular adaptation of the Kingdom of God. The conclusion of this great historical struggle is not found in the growth of the state or the expansion of the market, but in a community defined by agape, or self-giving love.

Works Consulted

Badiou, A. (2003). Saint Paul: The Foundation of Universalism. Stanford University Press.

Brown, Nathan. (2019). The Revival of Hegelian Marxism. Radical Philosophy.

Dussel, E. (2003). Beyond Philosophy: Ethics, History, Marxism, and Liberation Theology. Rowman & Littlefield.

Hägglund, M. (2019). This Life: Secular Faith and Spiritual Freedom. Pantheon.

Haidt, J. (2024). The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood Is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness. Penguin Press.

Hegel, G. W. F. (1977). Phenomenology of Spirit (A. V. Miller, Trans.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1807).

Marx, K. (1970). Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right (J. O’Malley, Ed. & Trans.). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1844).

Miranda, J. P. (1980). Marx and the Bible: A Critique of the Philosophy of Oppression. Orbis Books.

Žižek, S. (2000). The Fragile Absolute: Or, Why Is the Christian Legacy Worth Fighting For? Verso.

Žižek, S. (2003). The Puppet and the Dwarf: The Perverse Core of Christianity. MIT Press.

Žižek, S. (2009). The Monstrosity of Christ: Paradox or Dialectic? MIT Press.

The post Why Jesus, Marx, and Hegel Matter in the Digital Age appeared first on DSA Religious Socialism.

A specter is haunting our world– the specter of capitalist distraction. 

The old forces of capital and the new giants of tech have entered into an alliance set upon squandering human experience in a manner and a scale unfamiliar to history. So far, they’re winning.

Not content with merely the dictatorial control of our working lives and the controlling of our behavior via incentives, they now endeavor to subordinate our every thought to their whims and our very understanding of the world to processes they control. They seek to be the facilitators of all discussion, the arbiters of all ideas, the sole authority in the shaping of the mind.

Comrades, the fight against the forces is nothing less than an existential struggle for the preconditions of our organizing.

Our most immediate task is instilling the working class with an awareness of the forces shaping their material conditions and how workers relate to each other and the capitalist class. This class consciousness must be followed with diligent study of the theoretical foundations of socialism on a mass scale, with the training of huge swaths of our fellow workers in an entirely new way of viewing and understanding the world.

Democratic socialism unavoidably requires an informed, passionate, and intellectual society. Without it, our movement will necessarily veer into authoritarianism. We must build this society brick by brick creating the seeds of a counter-hegemonic bloc in our party and building it out through education and alliances with other organizations. We confront this task in an environment in which vast rivers of capital are flowing in the opposite direction, sweeping the public away from the left’s platform and towards ignorance and isolation. 

We are swimming upstream, and nowhere is this more acutely felt than in our relationships to algorithmic media: platforms in which content is delivered not by user curation but instead by fiendishly effective automated models. The modern incarnations of these  platforms arose from traditional social media and have been supercharged by the introduction of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms. 

While inscrutable and complex, these models are shaped by material forces and optimized for the interests of the platform owners, formed by directives to increase engagement time and engagement intensity. Bluntly, the ruling class has devised an evolving machine with which it can squander human life and control the human experience. As this machine perfects itself, it squeezes away more and more of our lives. Over the last two decades it has utterly consumed us.

Our lived experience is zero-sum. Every moment spent on these platforms is a moment not spent with family, creating art, or improving oneself. When there is a ubiquitous source of instant, endless dopamine, the opportunity cost of doing literally anything else becomes higher. This includes organizing for a socialist future.

Political education is work, both in presenting the information and in absorbing it. That task becomes much harder when participants’ brains are being trained every day to expect only the shortest, easiest-to-digest content it is possible to produce. We each have a duty to enthusiastically learn, understand, and advance the theoretical cause of socialism. This is essentially impossible without the ability to read and digest the foundational texts of our movement.

Today, every page of theory we read must compete directly for time and attention with precisely targeted rage-bait, brain rot, bad faith content, and advertising, a deluge of maximally stimulating information that our brains are wholly unequipped to handle. Being constantly buffeted by such content has a strange dual effect familiar to all of us, a sort of pacified rage, a despair without definite cause or real depth, the result of being thrown back and forth between the extremes of emotion every few seconds.

It is certainly possible to channel the discontent this creates, dulled as it is, and use it to our benefit. Indeed, algorithmic media can be an engine of radicalization. But this requires the careful strategy of a communications team. As rank-and-file members, efforts to agitate on social media are worse than useless. They prove exhausting and divisive, wasting organizer capacity and burning members out of the movement entirely.

Even if we attempt to engage in good-faith discussion, these efforts are shown to the two groups most likely to respond strongly: those who already agree with us and those who will be enraged by us. That is, online agitation is shown to the groups of people we least want to reach!

It is tempting then, to believe that algorithmic media can be useful in our bubble, among comrades. This conclusion underestimates the distortions inherent to the medium. As a rule, curation algorithms punish heavily any content that causes the user to leave the app. Longer posts do this. The pause necessary to engage gives the brain a chance to return to reality and opt out of further scrolling. Posts that link outside of the app, whether sending users to a call to action, an event signup, or simply a  source of considered, long-form information (as is necessary in informed debate) are suppressed most of all.

The force of the algorithm thus pushes essays towards paragraphs, paragraphs towards blurbs, and blurbs to mere slogans. These slogans in some respects reflect correct ideas, but are only understood as such by those familiar with the underlying reasoning, the forces at play, and the conditions in which the idea is formed. Outside of this context, these slogans readily strawman themselves and can be wielded as a cudgel by the right to alienate potential progressive and liberal allies. At worst, these slogans take on a life of their own, leading astray party decision-making, undermining tactical flexibility, and eroding all nuance. Instead of making our ideas accessible to the masses, we risk debasing our ideas to vagaries.

All this is to say nothing of the inherent flaws of a written medium– lack of conversational context and body language clues, alienation from the other participants, and the difficulty of conveying ideas in text in the first place. The discourse on algorithmic media platforms necessarily devolves into people parroting slogans that are understood by neither the author or the reader, the most shrill and irritating examples being lifted up and circulated while any conversation of value is suppressed. This is not a failure of our ideas or our movement. It is not a reflection of who we are, or even who our ideological opponents are. It is a circus in which we are all both the clowns and the audience.

Of course, infighting and fragmentation happen on these platforms; they are literally designed to divide and enrage! They draw us into endless, pointless sideshows. They exhaust our spirit and attack our unity. They undermine our solidarity and convince us of lies. They deprive us of the most essential element of organizing, human to human connection, where the fire of socialism can be felt and the ideas which constitute it can be discussed without interference.

So what can we do about this? Set screen time limits and have a friend or partner set the unlock code. You can gradually reduce the time or go cold turkey. Try getting in the habit of turning your phone completely off and setting it physically away from you. Remember that short-form video is the most powerful stimulant and the hardest to kick. For the genuinely social uses of platforms like Instagram (posts about upcoming events, keeping tabs on distant friends, etc.), restrict your use to a laptop or desktop computer. You do not need it accessible on your phone at all times.

If nothing else, stop arguing online. You are wasting your capacity and your energy, allowing the framing of debate to be undermined in ways that lead to incorrect conclusions. Take those discussions to your branch meetings, to social events, to essays in Midwest Socialist. The issues of our day are too important to be confined to a screen and too complex to fit in a character limit.

Once you wean yourself off the digital ketamine of algorithmic media, tasks that once sounded impossible will become invigorating. Every part of your life can be richer, your brain quieter, your focus deeper, your time spent on the pursuits that matter to you. Today can be the day you take the first step towards that goal.

So, comrades, let us throw off the yoke of so-called “social media” and burn it in the fires of intellectualism and solidarity! Do not let yourself be controlled by our enemies, do not undermine our movement by subordinating yourself to the tools of the billionaire class! A better world lies ahead, let us forge the path together.

The post To Build Socialism, Reject Algorithmic Media appeared first on Midwest Socialist.

The post Socialism Wins In DC appeared first on Metro DC Democratic Socialists of America.

Events & Actions

Tuesday June 16 (6:30 PM – 7:30 PM) Ecosocialist Bi-Weekly Meeting (zoom and in person at 1916 McAllister)

Wednesday June 17 (5:30 PM – 7:30 PM) Affordable Housing Guarantee Act Phone Banking (in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Thursday June 18 (6:00 PM – 7:00 PM)  Education Board Open Meeting  (zoom)

Thursday June 18 (7:00 PM – 8:00 PM) Immigrant Justice regular meeting (zoom and in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Friday June 19 (9:30 AM – 10:30 AM)  District 1 Coffee with Comrades (in person at 2 Clement St)

Friday June 19 (4:00 PM – 6:00 PM) Guarantee Act Petition Dropoff/Pickup (in person at 3368 19th St)

Saturday June 20 (12:00 PM – 5:00 PM) 2026 Chapter Convention (Day 1) (Hybrid) (zoom and in person at Kelly Cullen Community, 220 Golden Gate Ave)

Sunday June 21 (11:00 AM – 1:00 PM) Guarantee Act Mobilization at Clement (in person at 152 Clement St)

Sunday June 21 (12:00 PM – 5:00 PM) 2026 Chapter Convention (Day 2) (Hybrid) (zoom and in person at Kelly Cullen Community, 220 Golden Gate Ave)

Sunday June 21 (5:00 PM – 6:00 PM)  Tenderloin Healing Circle Working Group (zoom)

Monday June 22 (6:00 PM – 8:00 PM)  Tenderloin Healing Circle (in person at Kelly Cullen Community, 220 Golden Gate Ave)

Monday June 22 (7:00 PM – 8:00 PM) Labor Board – Flex Meeting (zoom)

Monday June 22 (6:00 PM – 8:00 PM)  Tenderloin Healing Circle (in person at 220 Golden Gate Ave)

Monday June 22 (7:00 PM – 8:00 PM) Labor Board – Flex Meeting (zoom)

Tuesday June 23 (5:30 PM – 7:00 PM) Social Housing Working Group (in person at 1916 McAllister St )

Tuesday June 23 (6:00 PM – 7:30 PM)  What Is DSA? (in person at 451 Jersey St)

Tuesday June 23 (7:00 PM – 8:00 PM)  Public Transit Meeting (zoom and in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Wednesday June 24 (6:45 PM – 8:30 PM) Tenant Organizing Working Group Meeting (zoom and in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Thursday June 25 (6:30 PM – 7:30 PM) Public Bank Project Meeting (zoom)

Friday June 26 (7:00 PM – 9:00 PM) Maker Friday (in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Saturday June 27 (2:00 PM – 4:00 PM) Socialist Shop Talk (in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Sunday June 28 (1:00 PM – 2:30 PM)  What Is DSA? (in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Monday June 29 (7:00 PM – 8:00 PM) Labor Board – New Union Organizing (zoom and in person at 1916 McAllister St)

Check out https://dsasf.org/events for more events and updates.

Ways to Support Affordable Housing Guarantee Act

The Affordable Housing Guarantee Act is officially accepting contributions! This is a grassroots, community-led campaign, and we need whatever you’re able spare to help us protect our affordable housing funds and tax the rich! Head to fairhousingsf.com/donate to donate!

If you’re not in a position to donate at the moment, we can still use your help gathering signatures. Head to fairhousingsf.com/events to find a volunteer event near you!

Socialist Shop Talk

Come chat with comrades about socialism through the lens of current events! In this new series, we will read a short text together, then discuss and analyze it from a socialist point of view.

This is a low-key environment where comrades can develop their skills of applying socialist analysis to current events, while having an outlet to discuss and process everything that’s happening in the world together. This event is open to all, whether you’re socialism-curious, new to DSA, or a longtime member.

In this post-primary election session, we’ll discuss an article written by a DSA SF comrade discussing the role of electoral politics in progressing toward and winning socialism.

When: Saturday, June 27th, 2-4PM

Where: 1916 McAllister St

RSVP here

EWOC Fundamentals of Workplace Organizing Course

Sign up here!

EWOC holds a regular training course to help you build your union from the ground up alongside workers in your industry. It doesn’t require an organizing background to understand the material, which covers topics including mapping and charting, building an organizing committee, uniting over common concerns, and how to take action. If you’re interested in becoming any level of organizer for EWOC, this course is mandatory.

This course will in person at the DSA office (1916 McAllister). We’ll watch the EWOC lecture together and then go through the discussion activities. If you can’t make all of the sessions, reach out to Caitlin Stanton (SF EWOC local lead coordinator) for accommodations.

SCHEDULE:
Week 1: Developing Leadership
Tuesday, July 14 (7-8:30PM)

Week 2: The Organizing Conversation
Tuesday, July 21 (7-8:30PM)

Week 3: The Arc of the Campaign
Tuesday, July 28 (7-8:30PM)

Week 4: Inoculation and the Boss Campaign
Tuesday, August 4 (7-8:30PM)

Author’s note: This paper, which was presented in April at Historical Materialism Istanbul 2026 at Bilgi University, was written in the context of both a series of seminars on liberatory psychoanalysis and ongoing study with the TDSA Trans Rights & Bodily Autonomy (TRBA) reading group. I am deeply grateful for the dedicated participation of the members of this reading group, and look forward to what our study continues to yield. 

In what ways are war and resistance, revolution even, gendered and raced? What work does an economy of war require of the bodies and psyches of those subject to it? (How) can logics of domination be interrupted via the labor of (transing) gender, or the lens of blackness? That is to say, how do we critically engage race with gender against logics of marginalization? How do we approach race and gender as axes and sites of hegemonic ideological production — as well as the sites for the possible liberation from supremacist hegemony? 

Paul Preciado, writing in his epilogue to Guy Hocquenghem’s Homosexual Desire, and assessing the conditions of feminist and gender-revolutionary movements in the prior half century in Europe, highlights a warning in Hocquenghem’s text — “Hocquenghem alerts us,” he writes, that “’it is possible that revolutionary politics are in themselves repressive processes.’” The “provisional lesson” that Preciado derives from this is that revolutions may not be just what they seem, raising the possibility that “causes capable of becoming logics of power are not really the most revolutionary ones” and that “revolutions also construct their own margins” (AT 130-131). 

For Preciado, the “micropolitics of fags, dykes, queens, and trans people [travesti] are opposed to the traditional model of politics as war… and [these micropolitics] propose a new model of politics as relation, fiesta, communication, self-experimentation, and pleasure” (138). The re-publication of the text of the epilogue as a zine (Anal Terror) by the baedan journal of queer time travel includes an introduction by the baedan collective wondering if Preciado’s portrayal is an overly rosy one. They write that “there is a remarkable elision of violence, perhaps even of force, in Preciado’s text” representing “a kind of historical positivism or optimism that we are not inclined to share” (AT 120-121). This is the tension within which we are reading and working today — just as, for the baedan collective, it is important to “see what in [Preciado’s text] responds still too much to the production and reproduction into which every citizen-subject in a society like ours is interminably seduced and coerced” (AT 121), so too are we investigating the flows, seductions, coercions, into the production and reproduction of hegemonic normativity — even in what are cast and understood as revolutionary or liberatory struggles. 

The thesis here, and what is under investigation, is that there are ideological currents which are manifested and projected on, in, and through the body — its ornamentation, its movement, its sound, its relations… and that the apprehension of the functioning of these ideological currents — their utterly real effects on our lives, relations, deaths— is possible through the terms and sites of race and gender. Judith Butler, in a lecture at the University of Cambridge, enumerates that gender has as its topics life and the body, and thus implicates broad “zones of passion and fear, of hunger and illness, vulnerability, penetrability, relationality, sexuality, and violence” as well as “distinct or differentiated modalities of embodiment [including] modes of porosity and closure, dependency, relationality, relations to food, protections from unwanted intrusion, from assault, from exposure to the elements, hunger.” [30:00, LGBTQCam] 

Thus treatments of gender and of race illustrate and implicate in a material way treatments and interpretations of other social, political, and economic phenomena, and provide a quotidian lens and context for liberatory political projects— which we delineate here as commitments to life, care, autonomy, and their conditions. 

One of the tasks of the hegemon, as the baedan collective’s comment alerts us to, is the production of subjectivities that are conducive to its particular ideological reproduction and expansion. The means by which hegemonic normativity accomplishes this vary — from discipline to propaganda to coercion to medicalization to segregation to force to colonization of the very modes of being, relation, and language that we exhibit to one another. In W.E.B. Du Bois’s Black Reconstruction, he details the confluence of conditions during the American Civil War that resulted in the extension of the legal classification of citizenship to the formerly enslaved black population. He writes: 

“It had been a commonplace thing in the North to declare that Negroes would not fight. Even the black man’s friends were skeptical about the possibility of using him as a soldier, and far from its being to the credit of black men, or any men, that they did not want to kill, the ability and willingness to take human life has always been, even in the minds of liberal men, a proof of manhood” (BR 129). This “proof of manhood required of the [black man]” was, in Du Bois’s words, “to seize a bayonet and rush mad with fury or inflamed with drink, and plunge it into the bowels of a stranger” (BR 129). Let us pause on this constellation: the challenge of manhood, as a conditional status to be proved; this proof taking the form of seizure, rush, inebriation, inflammation, plunging, and lack of other relation; the directionality of proof, to white men, already citizens (made such through genocide), who doubt and other the black subject, and thoroughly devalue his labor, autonomy, speech, and care. Du Bois makes clear that it was only through this proof that the black man in Civil War-era United States was able to accede to citizenship — ‘citizenship’ then, too, is manifestly constituted by this gendered and raced constellation. 

Du Bois notes that the black man “might plead his case with the tongue of Frederick Douglass” yet “the nation listened almost unmoved” (BR 129). Speech, Du Bois observes, resulted in (almost) no motion; it was madness, fury, the ability and willingness to take human life that had a legal effect. This is another relevant question to our inquiry into the conditions and traits valorized in revolutionary life. What are the conditions required for motion, or a change of motion? What do we do if e.g. speech yields (almost) no motion? What labors in this (almost),

prohibiting motion, or concealing micromotions? Du Bois shows us that the American nation, the status of citizenship, and the gender category ‘man’ are directly related to the failure of Reconstruction via the devaluation of care, the denigration of black life, and the hostility of privileged subjects toward groups which ‘threaten’ to dislodge the superiority and supremacy around which their subjectivity is organized. 

Let us turn to the text of Frantz Fanon’s under consideration, from the chapter on “Colonial Wars and Mental Disorders” in Wretched of the Earth. While Fanon lucidly formulates that “imperialism… sows seeds of decay here and there that must be mercilessly rooted out from our land and from our minds” (WoE 181), we also see in the text the difficulty of this task, for these ‘seeds of decay’ labor to invisibilize themselves, to contour the ‘normal’ – and recruit the body and the mind toward their propagation. One of the case studies Fanon writes about concerns a 26 year old Algerian man working with the FLN (Front de Liberation Nationale). When a raid goes wrong, the patient goes “underground… without ever going home” (WoE 186). It takes several months for any news to arrive of the patient’s wife and toddler daughter. After the patient goes underground, French soldiers go to his residence and kidnap his wife for interrogation. She is beaten for days, and then raped, both alone and in front of other soldiers. In the case study Fanon reports, second-, third-, fourth-hand that the colonial soldiers tell her “If you ever see that bastard your husband again, don’t you forget to tell him what we did to you” (WoE 186). Despite the violence to which the patient’s wife is subjected, in this case study, Fanon is concerned with the patient’s “dignity as an injured husband” (WoE 187), and with his inability to have sexual intercourse (it is not detailed with whom, but we infer that it is not the patient’s wife). 

How is the act of rape — the epitome of gendered violence— figured here? It is an attack on the husband, who is ‘injured’; it is a medium of communication between the colonial soldiers and the resistance fighter— tell him what we did to you. This attack, then, takes place via the body of the wife as property of or as extension of the husband. Notably, the wife is not considered or referred to as a militant (as the husband is) and her work is excluded from the content of the liberation struggle. Yet the text makes clear that she is a significant material support to this struggle, cooking the meals to which he sits down every night in silence, raising a child, protecting her husband. Indeed, she displays a great commitment to the relations she is imbricated in, refusing to inform on her husband or other FLN associations; which is punished directly with rape. Her body, her marriage, her quotidian routines— as well as those of her young daughter— are the very field of war, and this fact is summarily repressed. The husband, who is legible as a member of the resistance, is protected underground; the wife, who is not legible as such for the extremely obvious reason of her gender, gets tortured. What margins appear here? Who is acceptable collateral damage in the contention of power? Fanon’s case study here illustrates precisely the seeds of decay he muses on earlier — the importation of hegemonic gendered violence into the schema and behaviors of the anti-colonial revolutionaries. 

The task before us, to follow another decolonial psychoanalytic theorist, Ignacio Martín-Baró, is one of de-ideologization; of the rigorous rooting out of ideologies that keep us located in the motion of colonial, imperial, supremacist logics of domination. These examples have shown us

how the site of the body is colonized, and violence doled out on the basis of a strict supremacist ordering of race and gender relations. I will now bring in the work of Marquis Bey, and their essay in their book Cistem Failure to look at the work of blackness and transness as radical invention — against the politics of war, which are the politics of gendered and racialized violence, the politics and logics of supremacy and extermination. Projects of liberation worthy of the name cannot include or utilize sexual violence, cannot utilize exclusion or extermination of the ‘other’, we opine. 

In their essay “Heart of Cisness”, Marquis Bey interrogates the qualities and behaviors of a cisgender system of bodily regulation, including the co-constitutive racialization of the gender ‘cistem’, and theorizes blackness and transness as “assert[ing] radical invention” (CF, 26). Blackness, for Bey, is “the written name given to an open ‘imagining of things’ that converges astoundingly with the abolitionist imaginatory jailbreak that must include all vectors of violence” (CF 28). Bey goes beyond the epidermalization that constitutes so much discussion of race, and the gender policing that appears even in discussions of transness. Bey synthesizes “whiteness as necessarily subtendant of cisgender” and asserts that “blackness as a critique of [cisgender] [questions] the very notion of cisgender itself” (CF 25). Reflecting on their experience in the American high school football locker room, and the exhortations of their coach toward masculinity as toughness, ability to withstand and dole out abuse, Bey distills that it was “conquest, via violent means, [that] was how we got our currency” as boys-becoming-men. What an echo of Du Bois, writing of events now 175 years past, where conquest and violence was also what made manhood possible and legible, and what permitted subjects to accede to the violent category of citizen (even as the fruits of this category continued to be systematically denied on the basis of race, via the dismantling of Reconstruction through new legal mechanisms)! 

Responding to this status, Bey conceptualizes “black and trans, then, as radically non-exclusionary” (CF 26), and invites non-racist, non-cisssexist reconceptualizations of blackness and transness. This “invitational pull of a capacious, ‘inexclusive’ blackness” represents for Bey “an expansion, not a dilution, of its radical abolition of the violent tethers of this world” (CF 27). I follow Bey here in insisting on a “hell-bent liberatory refusal of the violences that have been inscribed into us and that we’ve been told we must perpetuate” (CF 40). 

In contrast to what white supremacist organizations of power demand, we do not have to endorse or utilize schemas of domination and supremacy in our struggle toward liberation — in fact, liberation as such depends precisely on being able to interrupt these schemas and on discovering, rediscovering, inventing, reinventing modes of relation that radically include the ‘other’ and refuse power whose engine is marginalization. 

By Caitlin Murphy 

Works Cited: 

• baedan collective & Paul Preciado. Anal Terror: Notes on the First Days of the Sexual Revolution [zine]. Seattle, 2015.
• Bey, Marquis. Cistem Failure: Essays on Blackness and Cisgender. Duke University Press, 2022. 
• Du Bois, W. E. B. Black reconstruction in America: An essay toward a history of the part which black folk played in the attempt to reconstruct democracy in America, 1860-1880. Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1935. 
• Fanon, Frantz. The Wretched of the Earth. Translated by Richard Philcox, Grove Press, 2004. 
• LGBTQ Cam (University of Cambridge). Who’s Afraid of Gender? | Judith Butler’s public lecture at University of Cambridge 2023 [Video]. YouTube. June 2, 2023. 

This July is the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence and its proclamation that all men are created equal; that they have unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; and that they have the right to establish governments to secure these rights.

These ideals of universal and equal rights — since broadened beyond white property-owning men — have never been fully realized. As Martin Luther King Jr. observed, the United States is the greatest purveyor of violence in the world. At home, it has overseen the enslavement and mass incarceration of Black people, the extermination and dispossession of Indigenous communities, and violent attacks on the poor and working class. Abroad, it has suppressed movements for national self-determination, invaded sovereign countries, overthrown democratically elected leaders, bombed civilians, and supported genocides.

Today, Trump and the Republicans are wrapping themselves in the flag and claiming they are upholding the Declaration’s principles. The Democrats are also wrapping themselves in the flag and claiming only they can defend us against Trump and restore the rights we have lost.

We will not let the bourgeoisie control the narrative. We will struggle against ongoing oppression and tyranny. To this end, Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) has proudly endorsed the Spirit of Mandela coalition’s National Mobilization Against Genocide, a day-long convergence in Atlanta to celebrate our victories, understand our defeats, and strategize for change. More information about the Spirit of Mandela coalition and the event is available here.

• When: July 4, all day.
• When: West End Park, Atlanta, 111 Oak St. SW. 

DSA members interested in attending the event in person can fill out this form.

The post Democratic Socialists of America Endorses Spirit of Mandela’s National Mobilization Against Genocide appeared first on Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).

Expression of Disapproval – Burbank City Council Budget Flock Inclusion

On June 2nd, after receiving a multitude of constituent comments objecting to the renewal of the City of Burbank’s $250,000 contract with Flock Safety, the Burbank City Council voted unanimously to pass the city budget unamended, resulting in the renewal of the contract with Flock. This included DSA endorsed Socialist in Office Burbank City Council Member Konstantine Anthony.

DSA-LA and many other chapters of DSA have opposed Flock contracts in our cities, and the DSA-LA Immigration Justice Committee currently has an ongoing campaign to end Flock contracts in Los Angeles. Flock routinely shares data with DHS and ICE, breaking sanctuary ordinances and California State Law in the process, and has a proven track history of extreme data vulnerabilities and violations of their own privacy policies. Flock cameras have been used to track immigrants, women seeking abortions, and even in one instance to access cameras in a children’s gymnastics room. The bottom line: “Flock Safety” is not safe.

DSA Los Angeles strongly disagrees with the council member’s vote. As an avowed socialist, Council Member Anthony should have cast a vote of principled opposition to the use of public funds to surveil working class residents. At the same meeting, the council member was targeted for censure for organizing opposition to a Moms of Liberty, a hate group’s, anti-trans event in Burbank. We understand that this motion put him in a difficult position to take a position of courage – however, the expectation of our SiOs is to take positions of conviction, especially when the community demands it.

The struggle for socialism, multiracial democracy, and immigration justice continues. We are in communication with Council Member Anthony about actions to make amends going forward, and will work with him in the future to build a Burbank for all.

The post Metro DC DSA Statement on Trump’s Threats to Revoke DC Home Rule appeared first on Metro DC Democratic Socialists of America.

The following article represents the opinion of the author and does not necessarily represent the views of The Detroit Socialist or Metro Detroit DSA as a whole.

Billionaire donors, votes for corporate handouts, lack of socialist ID, and last-minute effort make a Donavan McKinney endorsement the wrong move

By Anthony D.

Metro Detroit DSA members will be asked at the June 13 General Meeting to vote on the endorsement of current State Representative Donavan McKinney’s campaign for U.S. Congress, just two weeks before absentee ballots go out for the August 4 primary. McKinney has had no significant prior relationship with the chapter. His track record as a State Representative includes voting for billions of dollars in corporate handouts and accepting campaign donations from billionaires and corporate PACs.

McKinney is not running as a democratic socialist and a DSA endorsement this close to Election Day would be a significant backslide into the pre-Bernie era of our organization, when our chapter routinely endorsed progressive Democrats whose campaigns we played no major part in building.

What Are We Building?

As DSA evaluates candidates for endorsement, we should consider how they fit into our broader electoral project and its goals. While consensus is rare in DSA, the various political tendencies within it seem to agree that we want DSA to act like a party. We want DSA’s infrastructure and identity to be clearly independent from the Democratic Party. We believe this is necessary to distance ourselves from politicians who would argue that capitalism is not the problem. We want DSA to be a vehicle towards the transformation of society in which the working class has full democratic control of our government, economy, and workplaces.

The type of party and its character remain up for debate, but DSA members expect the candidates that we run will differentiate themselves from Democrats by being clear that our goal is to win socialism. To that end, the 2025 and 2026 election cycles have seen an unprecedented number of DSA-endorsed candidates around the country running for office and publicly identifying as democratic socialists in their campaigns, after having spent many years organizing inside DSA.

DSA endorsements are unlike those given out by individual politicians or nonprofit organizations that simply act as a rubber stamp of approval based on personal relationships or the policies the candidates are running on. Instead, DSA endorsements are material commitments to run members of our party for office. Rather than relying on progressive candidates to come to us with campaigns that are already fully formed as we did during DSA’s pre-Bernie era, the best DSA candidates’ campaigns are conceived of within DSA and engage members to run them themselves. These campaigns are driven by DSA members who fundraise, write the platform, determine the messaging, run the canvasses, build a social media presence, phonebank, knock doors, and design the flyers we hand out. Through this process, the candidates we run remain rooted in DSA and act as an extension of the movement.

Unfortunately, McKinney and his campaign are none of these things. He has no experience organizing in or with DSA. His campaign did not grow out of the chapter and is not being run by DSA members. His social media and campaign literature include no mention of being a democratic socialist and his website was updated sometime since May 31 to add it.

Track Record

McKinney has served as a State Representative since 2023, so it’s useful to review his past campaign donations and how he’s voted while in office. During his 2022 and 2024 campaigns, he accepted donations from various billionaires, corporations, and corporate PACs including:

• $1,000 in 2022 and $500 in 2023 from billionaire Matthew Moroun, a prolific Republican Party and Trump campaign donor as well as the owner of the Ambassador Bridge who allegedly conspired with the Trump administration to attempt to block the rival Gordie Howe International Bridge from opening
• $1,250 from Ida Byrd-Hill, CEO of Automation Workz, whose company created SenseiiWyze, “an AI-powered behavioral intelligence platform that predicts warfighter and front-liner technology readiness under pressure”, according to her LinkedIn page
• $500 from JC Huizenga, who created National Heritage Academies, a for-profit company that runs 103 charter schools in nine states
• $1,000 from Jim George, whose development company was awarded a $5 million grant in the state budget for a housing project without any competitive bidding
• $2,000 from Realtors PAC of Michigan, whose top contributor is Morgan Stanley
• $1,750 from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan
• $1,050 from billionaires Tom and Theresa Preston-Werner. Tom Preston-Werner, the founder of GitHub, was forced to resign in 2014 over allegations of harassment by a former employee.
• $500 from Detroit Regional Chamber PAC, who shaped polls to promote former Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan for Governor, then endorsed him. The Detroit Regional Chamber recently joined a coalition to promote data centers.

In the state legislature, McKinney has voted for billions of dollars in corporate handouts. This included a vote to send $1.4 billion into the Strategic Outreach and Attraction Reserve (SOAR) Fund, a corporate slush fund administered by a public-private partnership agency that requires lawmakers to sign non-disclosure agreements and has produced only 1,846 jobs as of October 2025. A separate vote sent $630 million to the site of Ford’s battery plant in Marshall and another $170 million into the SOAR fund. Ford’s battery plant has created just 100 jobs thus far and the SOAR fund has been killed entirely. McKinney has voted with Helena Scott, opponent of DSA-endorsed candidate Chris Gilmer-Hill, 99% of the time. He has not endorsed Chris Gilmer-Hill despite their overlapping districts.

McKinney, to his credit, said all the right things during his interview with the Electoral Committee to try to move us to action on his behalf. During the Q&A, he committed to coordinating on votes with Rashida Tlaib, if elected, and to identifying as a democratic socialist on his campaign literature, website, and social media.

However, McKinney launched his campaign in April 2025, making it more than a year old, and there has been nothing stopping him from identifying as a democratic socialist before now, without our endorsement. It seems unlikely that just a few weeks before absentee ballots go out, he would revamp his campaign, literature, and website, with very little time to reach voters with brand-new messaging. If he’s had a sudden change of heart, that’s admirable, and would be indicative of DSA’s progress. But his track record in Lansing should concern us about whether or not he’s ready to meaningfully change course on his politics. His actions weigh stronger than his last-minute words.

It’s Too Late

With more time, these shortcomings could be overcome by developing a relationship with McKinney and moving him closer to our politics. But Metro Detroit DSA has never endorsed a candidate this close to Election Day in its post-Bernie era. Absentee ballots will arrive to voters just two weeks after our June General Meeting. With two-thirds of voters voting by absentee in Michigan, there’s no opportunity to do anything other than knock doors for an already set-in-stone campaign, with its literature already printed and ads bought. At best, a few thousand doors knocked may translate to a few hundred votes in a primary election that saw 81,125 votes in 2024, which would equate to less than 0.25% of the total votes cast. DSA’s endorsement will be essentially irrelevant to the outcome. Endorsing now and claiming a DSA victory if McKinney wins would be lying to ourselves and to our base.

Table 1 below shows how the timing of our potential endorsement would compare to that of our past endorsements dating back to 2020. McKinney would be the latest we have ever endorsed a candidate, just seven days before absentee ballots are mailed out and 129 days later than our average endorsement date. Compared to the timing of congressional candidate endorsements by other DSA chapters around the country, McKinney’s endorsement would be 89 days later than the average of the 18 candidates.

Changing our approach to endorse a campaign that is more than a year old would indicate to future candidates that they do not need to get involved in DSA and our organizing work in order to win our endorsement. It limits us in the future to reacting to candidates that come to us with a fully formed campaign — including campaigns that do not share DSA’s politics — rather than bringing the candidates into the organization and developing them into lifelong socialist organizers who we then run for office as an extension of our party. It signals that it is acceptable for DSA-endorsed candidates to act individually, deciding to run for office and building their campaign and its messaging on their own without our organization and its collective process behind them.

Learning From The Past

Admittedly, we would not have endorsed Rashida Tlaib in 2018 according to the criteria that I’m advocating we apply to McKinney in 2026. But DSA has matured, our organizers are far more experienced, and we are eight years removed from the lessons learned in a pre-Bernie era. That era saw our chapter hand out numerous endorsements to various liberal and progressive candidates like Kat Bruner James and Abraham Aiyash that did not pan out.

In 2019, Kat Bruner James, running for Ferndale City Council, said during our endorsement interview process that she would run on a slate with our other two endorsed candidates. She later turned heel and instead ran on an opposing Democratic establishment slate when it opened a better lane to victory. The chapter voted unanimously to pull her endorsement and she was elected ahead of our candidate.

In 2020, Abraham Aiyash, running for State Representative in Hamtramck, said during the endorsement interview process that he “was not going to Lansing to make friends.” In 2022, when Michigan Democrats took full control of the state legislature for the first time since 1984, Aiyash became the Majority House Leader and used the position to pressure other Democrats to vote for billions in corporate handouts.

We’re lucky to have Rashida, but she was a rare exception back then, within a flawed approach to socialist electoral politics in which we took too many unfamiliar candidates at their word.

Looking Forward

When Dylan Wegela ran for State Representative in 2022 and applied for our endorsement, our Electoral Committee voted against moving his endorsement forward because he had no prior relationship with the chapter and was running in a district in which only five DSA members resided. We asked him to prove himself in the state legislature and to keep showing up to DSA events. Immediately after taking office, he was the single hold-out vote (McKinney voted yes) for a tax policy bill that included $1.4 billion in corporate handouts. Dylan publicly held firm against Democratic Party leadership even as they threatened to punish him (by undoing the cancellation of public school debt for one of the cities in his district).

The chapter later endorsed Dylan in part due to this principled stance. He became an active member of the chapter and has been a leader in recruiting and training more socialist organizers in his district, creating a model of what legislators can do when they strongly identify as socialists and see themselves as organizers.

As DSA grows, more candidates and elected officials will want to join our movement. We should welcome them, but endorsing someone with a questionable track record that very few of us have any relationship with is antithetical to our strategy for winning socialism. We should take the same careful approach with McKinney that we did with Dylan, by declining to endorse him and asking that we maintain an organizing relationship. If he wins, we could revisit the endorsement in 2028 when he’s become involved with the chapter and we can meaningfully shape his re-election campaign and the outcome.

Anthony D. has been active in the chapter’s electoral and labor organizing work since 2019 and is a member of the Bread & Roses caucus. He previously served as the chapter’s co-chair during the 2021–2022 term.

He’s currently active in Socialists Organizing Western Wayne (SOWW), a geographic working group that was created to organize locally alongside our Socialists in Office (SIOs) — Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, State Representative Dylan Wegela, and Westland City Council President Mike McDermott — where their districts overlap in Westland, Romulus, Inkster, and Garden City.

This article was written to inform discussion about the endorsement of Donavan McKinney by Metro Detroit DSA. The vote was June 13. The opposing viewpoint can be found here.

Too Little, Too Late: Against a Donavan McKinney Endorsement was originally published in The Detroit Socialist on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.