by Rita Briar i will give you pause, weed-puller wear your gloves if you come at me or you’ll get pain, annoyance, it’s not your day So you wait a day, wait a week slow down just enough and I will bloom

by Oscar Langford This poem appeared in Miner’s Magazine on May 15, 1913. They’ve put an injunction on old Mother Jones The language so stung From the brave woman’s tongue, And her truth-telling words were so noisy in tones They’ve tried the suppression of old Mother Jones The Court has imprisoned old Mother Jones. She […]

[[{“value”:”

A crowd gathers to hear speeches from MNA Nurses at Baystate Franklin hospital. (Working Mass)

By: Mary Ann Sheppard

GREENFIELD – On April 7, unionized nurses at Baystate Franklin Medical Center staged an informational picket to advocate for better wages and staffing. The picket, organized by the Massachusetts Nurses Association (MNA), was attended by nurses, community members, and supporters of the labor movement outside of Franklin County’s only hospital. 

Nurses at Baystate Franklin have been struggling with poor nurse-to-patient ratios, a central complaint which nurses argue stretch workers thin and lead to inadequate treatment. The fight is a familiar one; the union had already won staffing grid protections in 2017 – a contract stipulation that requires the hospital to implement minimum staffing and nurse-to-patient ratios. 

Union nurses consider safe staffing ratios non-negotiable, as they have been proven to save lives. However, hospital management has attempted to undermine these protections in recent negotiations, threatening to staff Baystate Franklin with non-union “float” nurses from other hospitals. In essence, the union is being threatened with scab labor unless they accept staffing levels that nurses say make their patients less safe.

The MNA has filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board  (NLRB), which may take more than a year to adjudicate. In the meantime, the hospital’s contract violation has forced nurses to the bargaining table.

Bargaining committee co-chair Marissa Potter has led advocacy for nurses’ demands to management. In addition to safe staffing ratios, the Potter and the nurses have demanded wage parity with other regional hospitals, which pay their nurses an average of 10% – 25% more. 

Potter spoke to the strength of the union at Baystate Franklin: “We always have been a union facility.” 

The large crowd which gathered in support of the MNA picket attests to deep roots that organized labor has in the community. Union workers came out to support the nurses, bearing signs and shirts with the names of other unions such as Mass. Teachers Association, AFSCME, UNITE HERE, and the Teamsters. Some in the crowd were nurses from other hospitals, or knew medical workers personally. Others were motivated by political principles or a hope for organized labor to bring about better health care. However the message was clear: We have your back.

Speakers from within and outside the union expressed support for the nurses in securing a fair contract. Ethel Everett, the incoming president of the Western Mass Area Labor Federation, spoke in terms of class conflict. “Nurses are the ones who keep us alive,” she said, “This is part of an ongoing war on the working class.” She led the crowd with a call and response chant – “When we fight, we win!”

Greenfield Mayor Ginny Desorgher and Ward 6 Councilor Patricia Williams also attended the picket. Both had ties to the union, Desorgher a former union nurse, and Williams  is a former MNA staff representative. Baystate Franklin hospital is located in Councilor William’s district: “You are my constituents,” she said, announcing her plans to propose a resolution in Greenfield City Council in support of the union. 

MNA nurses were cautiously optimistic about negotiations. As with any strike action, workers would have to forgo wages in order to force the company’s hand. Baystate Franklin’s nurses can only win their contract through solidarity with one another. “We don’t want to strike,” said Marissa Potter. “But if we have to, we will.” 

Mary Ann Sheppard is a member of Worcester DSA and contributing writer to Working Mass.

The post Greenfield Nurses Prepared to Strike At Franklin County’s Only Hospital appeared first on Working Mass.

“}]] 

by Rich H

The City is moving rapidly towards finalizing an economic development deal that raises financial and political warning signs—it potentially gives away millions of our tax dollars to an Abbott and Cruz crony, who is also a major Texas donor to AIPAC and one of the authors of the scurrilous Texas Holocaust, Genocide, and Antisemitism Advisory Commission’s 2024 Study on Antisemitism in Texas, which perpetuates Abbott’s lies about the Anti-Gaza-War protests at UT.

The Deal

The deal (described in Item 6 on the April 23 Council agenda) is with RIDA Development, a Houston-based company that builds resort-style hotels, mainly in Florida. The proposed tourist-oriented project here in Austin is for a mid-sized convention center and hotel adjacent to the COTA facility that will be a “self-contained” “destination hotel and conference resort” (see news stories here and here for more details). The agreement with the City of Austin will rebate millions of dollars in Hotel Occupancy Taxes (HOT) back to RIDA for 30 years, in exchange for certain public benefits, the most significant of which is that the developer claims the project will result in 900 permanent hospitality jobs, at an average annual wage of $61,000. However, details about the specific performance benchmarks RIDA needs to hit to receive the tax rebate are sketchy. 

The deal also includes public parkland, $1.5 million into the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, and a labor peace deal with Unite Here Local 23. The City also touts projected property tax revenue from the project as a benefit.

The deal, which was unanimously advanced by the City Council at its April 23^rd meeting, has been celebrated by several city council members especially because of the labor agreement. This aspect is obviously great for the labor movement, but there are other serious concerns that may outweigh it.

In general, economic development deals do not benefit the public in ways politicians claim; instead, they tend to have negative impacts on local communities, especially for the working class. Research on economic development deals that use tax breaks allegedly to attract businesses and investment to cities has shown two important points: First, in the vast majority of cases, companies make decisions about where to locate operations independently of tax breaks—in other words, these tax breaks are just corporate tribute and make no difference to whether a project happens or not. Second, cities usually do not benefit financially from these kinds of deals—these deals end up costing the public more than they bring in.

An example of this research is the book, Incentives to Pander, co-authored by UT-Austin Government Professor Nathan Jensen, summarized as follows on the publisher’s website (see also this excellent two-minute video summary):

“Politicians … use these policies to claim credit for attracting investment… This book … shows how such pandering appears to be associated with growing economic inequality. As national and subnational governments surrender valuable tax revenue to attract businesses in the vain hope of long-term economic growth, they are left with fiscal shortfalls that have been filled through regressive sales taxes, police fines and penalties, and cuts to public education.”

Beyond these general problems with economic development deals, this particular one is especially suspect because of who the developer is and because of the financial implications of the deal.

Issues with RIDA’s Ira Mitzner

RIDA was founded by David Mitzner, the father of current CEO Ira Mitzner. It is a privately owned and family-run multibillion dollar company based in Houston. Billionaire Ira Mitzner is a big-money donor to Republicans in Texas and Florida, including to DeSantis’ super PAC and to Ted Cruz. He was the chair of the committee that brought the 2024 RNC to Houston, which resulted in Trump’s second term. Mitzner is also an important pro-Zionist voice in Texas, a big donor to AIPAC, and 2019 AIPAC Gala Chair. 

Additionally, he was appointed to the Texas Holocaust, Genocide, and Antisemitism Advisory Commission (THGAAC) by Abbott. The THGAAC’s 2024 Study on Antisemitism in Texas was partly responsible for the atrocious (and likely unconstitutional) slew of bills passed last year by the Texas Legislature that enshrined in Texas law and education code the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism, which equates anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism (see page 9 of the report). (Incidentally, those bills passed with the support of most Democrats in the Legislature, including locals Hinajosa, Talarico, Cole, Flores, and Bucy.) Another recommendation of the THGAAC is an anti-masking law.

The Study on Antisemitism in Texas repeats false claims that the Anti-Gaza-War protests were anti-Semitic, and it justifies the police crackdown on protesters: “Tensions at UT Austin reached a crescendo at anti-Israel protests in April 2024 that required intervention by state troopers and campus police” (page 7, my emphasis). The report also calls out activists who went to city councils to demand a ceasefire resolution, falsely calling them anti-Semitic: “At public hearings in many cities, anti-Israel activists have regularly gone beyond their free speech rights to bully and intimidate elected officials and Jewish community members, using antisemitic language and sometimes being forcibly removed by police” (page 7). Additionally, the report praises Texas’s “lead” on anti-BDS legislation and Abbott’s pro-Israel statements and actions (pages 10-11). Mitzner is, in part, responsible for this report.

Do Austinites want our city to be entering into deals with people like Ira Mitzner, especially given the irregular, fast-track process the Council has used, and the unanswered financial questions about the deal that remain?

Irregular Process & Unanswered Financial Questions 

In addition to the unsavory connections of Mitzner, this development deal also raises serious financial and process questions.

At the April 23^rd meeting, Council passed an ordinance that “waives the staff presentation, public announcement and portal setup, and public hearing requirements” normally required for economic development deals. This prevents public scrutiny of the deal, which is especially problematic because “the structure of the agreement and its long-term cost to the city remain unclear, however, with key financial projections and final terms still under negotiation and not yet publicly released” (see this news article). We do not know what is actually in this deal, yet Council is fast-tracking it. Among the things that we do not know is the projected amount of the tax rebates—we don’t know how much this will cost us.

Typically, convention center and hotel development deals are sold to the public because they have “economic spillovers”: convention-goers typically spend money locally in restaurants and bars, retail stores, other local attractions, etc.—the argument goes—thus, supporting local businesses and jobs¹. Some of that rhetoric is in the staff presentation, but this project is specifically described as a “self-contained” (page 3) “destination hotel and conference resort” (page 2), located far from other local businesses at the COTA facility. This means that attendees of future events at the RIDA development are unlikely to spend much money outside the “resort” itself or in local businesses, severely limiting any “economic spillover.” The City’s claims about the “economic impact” of this project are disingenuous.

The deal does include public parkland, $1.5 million into the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, in addition to the peace agreement with Unite Here. These are all great benefits, but the city cannot tell us at what cost to the public. How much are we spending from HOT funds to get parkland and $1.5 million in the Trust Fund? We are not told.

However, we can make some calculations based on assumptions that we do know: 

• The deal will rebate 8.5% of gross room revenue from the hotel for 30 years. 
• The hotel is planned to have 1,000 rooms. 
• Standard rooms at one of RIDA’s comparable developments, the Omni Orlando Resort, are around $250 per night. 
• The average annual hotel occupancy rate in Austin is somewhere around 65%. 

These are conservative numbers, so we can conservatively approximate the amount of HOT tax to be rebated to RIDA as:

8.5% x 1,000 rooms X 65% occupancy X $250/night X 365 nights X 30 years

=

~$150,000,000

That is $5 million per year for 30 years, with the main public benefit being 900 jobs. That’s about $5,500 of public money per job per year, which means that the public is effectively covering approximately 10% of RIDA’s payroll for 30 years, guaranteeing Ira Mitzner larger profits, subsidized by Austinites. 

This is what economic development looks like in Austin.

The item should be coming back to the council in next few month, so keep your eyes out for it to appear on an upcoming agenda—and be ready to write, call, and testify against this bad deal.

---

¹It’s important to remember that most jobs in hospitality and food service are low-paying jobs. For example, of the job categories that the US Bureau of Labor Statistics uses, in Austin food service pays the lowest, at $31,200 on average, which is under 60% of the median wage for our area. Tourism-related economic activity tends to rely on a low-paid workforce; economic development deals do nothing to improve pay or working conditions in “spillover” jobs, yet those jobs are counted as part of the “public benefits” that we are paying for.

The post Troubling Economic Development Deal in the Works at City Council first appeared on Red Fault.

The post Metro DC DSA Urges DC Council to Put Working People Before Autonomous Vehicle Companies appeared first on Metro DC Democratic Socialists of America.

by Justin W

I Love Boosters is a story about a trio of “boosters,” women who steal from department stores and resell the items to the community, and their fight against a local billionaire. The billionaire’s name is Christie Smith, whom one of them admires so much she has her platitudes memorized, which makes for a complicated relationship that evolves as the movie goes along. The CEO is very clearly a genius, having graduated college at 17 and spent years working in physics departments, but her platitudes still sound just as vapid and amorphous as any other CEO or motivational speaker. During their heists the trio find a Chinese worker who steals the designer wear so quickly they legitimately believes she has a magic bag, and given that this is a Boots Riley film, you believe it too until it’s revealed to be a teleporter. 

The Chinese factory worker, Jianhu, is stealing the clothes as a way to attack Christie Smith for the horrible conditions in the factory she and her family work in. This brings the trio and Jianhu together as they start stealing more from Christie Smith. As they’re in the process of stealing clothes a discovery is made: The teleporter does more than teleport, it deconstructs and accelerates the contradictions as well. It becomes clear this is a machine based on Dialectical Materialism as the machine brings two things together (teleports), it deconstructs (as shown when they deconstruct clothes into their base components AND when they aim it at a person and turn that person into their parents having sex), and it accelerates the contradictions of a given entity (a cop car is turned into a parody of overmilitarization and reconstructs a person from their parents from before). 

This leads to the personal conflicts in the movie and what I believe to be the thesis. We have the main character Corvette and her best friend Sade, one who is trying to overcome the ills brought about by capitalism (Sade) and the other who is so lonely a loneliness demon tries to pick her up on multiple occasions (Corvette). Sade sees MLM marketing as the way through the ills of capitalism and Corvette sees vengeance as her way out of her loneliness. This is resolved when they link their struggle against Christie Smith to the workers both in China who are making the clothes as well as the workers building a union to stand up against the billionaire. The resolution is built through the combining of the efforts of all workers against Christie Smith and the fashion industry, starting in China and the United States but then the rest of the world, and the community organizing that needs to happen to build those strikes and protests. 

We see this through Corvette rejecting the loneliness demon and her confronting the rolling ball of bills, tickets, and failures of Corvette’s past (seen the entire movie following her just out of sight of everyone else), which shrinks once she has a community to help her deal with those problems. The problems are still there, just reduced to a more manageable size. 

Given this is a Boots Riley film, there are some incredible design and artistic choices that combine to create wonderful metaphors. The CEOs office is tilted, showing her skewed view of the world. The loneliness demon who has been around for millenia can only remember two years back when they were lost in a Target, or, one might say, lost in a capitalist hellscape (please listen to the song “Lost in the Supermarket” by The Clash). At one point some characters who have been seen interviewed on TV take off their skins, revealing that they play characters on TV (like workers arguing for less pay and benefits as well as Candace Owens, among others) or lead MLMs to generate in people the need for more brutal cop tactics, anti-worker propaganda, and false solutions (like MLMs) as part of a campaign created by the billionaire to reduce in workers the desire for real solutions like collective action. 

The skin suits also demonstrate how those with anti-worker sentiments but still working class themselves literally sell their identities to be used and interchanged by anyone who needs them for whatever purpose. They give away their ability to identify themselves for the purpose of fulfilling the whims and desires of a billionaire. In true Boots Riley fashion, he tries to make the metaphors as overt as possible, with a little bit of surrealism thrown in the mix. The comedic elements of the movie shine through these metaphors and are so littered throughout I am very surprised the movie isn’t considered a comedy. Boots Riley’s love of storytelling and visual metaphor make him one of my favorite directors and this was terrific and just the right amount of silliness to push through the slightly radical position he’s leading towards through the film.

But this wouldn’t be a Marxist take on a very overtly Marxist movie (the main catalyst for the movie is a Dialectic Materialism machine) without some discussion on the theory presented. The Dialectical Materialism machine is initially seen only as a teleporter, but later in the movie a union organizer explains the full functionality, urging the trio to use it to help them accelerate people into the union they’re building. Initially, the Velvet Gang (the name of the boosters’ group) turns her down in favor of their plan to simply steal from the billionaire thinking that would be enough. As the movie progresses and we reach the climax of the film, the machine is used to link the struggles of the union in the United States to the factory workers in China, creating the solidarity needed to fight against their collective boss. 

Through the explanation of the functions of the machine we get a decent description of dialectical materialism, in a way that is simple enough that we can progress with the movie, while still being faithful to the concept itself. I think Boots’ decision to purposefully inject actual theory into the movie gives a stepping stone for those who like the movie something to grasp onto when deciding to work on their own politics, but does mean the resolution of the movie cannot be as explicit in the direction I think we should go. The CEO is not removed nor a communist revolution waged by the end of this film, instead a worldwide strike against the fashion industry is started, and characters from the movie are seen leading the union in their fight for a better wage, though the main characters are not participants. The most recent film to have such overt Marxist themes, also made by a black director, is Sinners. 

Sinners, for those who haven’t seen it (Why haven’t you? Go watch it!) has a black community fighting against a vampire who uses racism to escape from justice and controls the actions of those whom he has bitten. It is a story about a blood sucking parasite who had oppression forced on him years ago and wants to forcibly create the community he lost due to colonialism and imperialism by stealing the music and soul of a community that hasn’t yet lost themselves to that same oppressive force. The black community fights and kills the vampire, in a bloody struggle that lasts all night, ending with one character killing the racists who came to kill him. In interviews following the release of the film, director Ryan Coogler was asked multiple times about the Marxist implications of the movie and what was being said through the metaphors, every time keeping silent about what he wrote. He could not, at any point, be explicit in the aims and messaging of his movie, lest he lose what position he has to make films like Sinners again. He was able to show the action of the theory, but wasn’t allowed to be explicit in the ideology that created it. 

I see Boots Riley’s choice to name the theory but not show the action as the flip side of the coin. Even on a good day Hollywood would not allow both sides of the coin to be shown on screen at the same time, as Capital knows what it can allow anti-capitalist art to show, as well as what it can’t. Were I Love Boosters to show the fall of capitalism and say the words “Dialectical Materialism,” a producer would have simply shut down the movie and not let it see the light of day. There must be a balance struck between what can be said and what can be shown while still being funded by those who would otherwise be the target of said action or the villain of theory. The theory of the film is presented in a relatively clear way, but the film needed to reel in the actions shown to compensate. When we say “The Revolution will not be televised” this is an example. You can see that revolutions happen or you can hear theory be spoken, but never the twain shall meet, at least not on the big screen. So we need to read between the lines, and see the direction Boots Riley or Ryan Coogler are pointing us in. (On a related note, come join us at Book Club sometime.) 

Overall, this movie is terrific and I recommend everyone go see it. The bright colors, wonderful fashion, comedic style, and the only just so slightly over the top surrealism blend together into a wonderful movie that I would definitely watch again, and recommend others watch too. Combined with the theory hilariously intertwined into the movie, it is one of the best movies I have ever seen and I want to hear your thoughts on it too.

The post I Love “I Love Boosters” appeared first on Democratic Socialists of America.

[Federal] US CONGRESS CA-26: Chris Espinosa

We have been represented by a terrible establishment AIPAC shill for far too long, and we have a candidate who is anti-establishment and not beholden to the donor class.

The Ventura County DSA is proud to endorse Chris Espinosa.

Sources:

• CA DSA
• The Acorn
• ACLU
• CAIR California
• VC Star

[Federal] US CONGRESS CA-24: Helena Pasquarella

Incumbent Salud Carbajal (D) is running for his 6th term. He is an establishment democrat and has a disappointing track record for the working class. He is beholden to the donor class, with campaign contributions from organizations like AIPAC, SpaceX and Raytheon. He also accepted funds from Samuel Bankman-Fried, a cryptocurrency entrepreneur who was sentenced to 25 years in prison for defrauding billions of dollars from thousands of people.

Carbajal continuously supported Israel during the genocide in Gaza, despite multiple town halls where his constituents directly expressed their outrage to him for his inhumane positions and refusal to acknowledge the genocide. His voting record reflects that he supports the following measures:

    – Supplying billions of dollars’ worth of weapons to Israel (HR 2670 in 2023 and HR 6090 in 2024)
    – Opposing the BDS movement (HR 246 in 2019)
    – Codifying the conflation of anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism and criticism of Israel (HR 894 in 2023 and HR 6090 in 2024)
    – Censuring House Representative and DSA member Rashida Tlaib for her support of Palestinian humanity (HR 845 in 2023)

Carbajal has crossed the aisle to vote alongside MAGA republicans on several harmful bills. In 2022, while acknowledging that “a good part of the Republican Party” has transformed into an anti-democratic cult loyal to Trump, he also stated his belief in “collaborating and creating a collaborative environment” with the MAGA republicans. Here are a few examples of measures he supported in his collaboration with MAGA politicians:

    – Enabling Trump to legally receive bribes in the form of cryptocurrency (GENIUS Act in 2025)
    – Legalizing the detention/deportation of immigrants who haven’t committed any crimes (HR 3697 in 2017)
    – Expanding the power of ICE and the DHS to collect American citizens’ personal information under the guise of fighting retail theft (HR 2853, aka CORCA, in May 2026)
    – Denying gender-affirming healthcare to children (National Defense Authorization Act in 2024)
    – Denouncing socialism (House Concurrent Resolution 58 in 2025)

Carbajal has shown time and again that he prioritizes corporate interests and the donor class over the working class, has no regard for the lives of Palestinians, and is willing to help advance Trump’s agenda.

Salud Carbajal’s challenger in the Democratic Party is Sarah Bacon, a former tech executive who is currently the vice president of external affairs for UC Santa Barbara’s Graduate Student Association. This will be her first time running for office. Overall, her platform aligns reasonably well with ours and she seems sincere and competent, but in this race she’s a Democrat running on a reform ticket. We feel the Democratic party needs to be transformed or supplanted, not just reformed.

Our preferred candidate is Helena Pasquarella, a DSA member and the Director at the Department of Peace in Ojai. She previously ran in the primary for CA-24 in 2024 as a Democrat, securing 9.1% of the votes and finishing 3rd. She is the only candidate – other than incumbent -Carbajal who has previously run for office.

Pasquarella is running as a member of the Peace and Freedom Party this election cycle and has been endorsed by the Green Party of Santa Barbara. Her platform includes Medicare for all, cutting funding to Israel, immigration reform, universal rent control, defunding the police, and supporting the Green New Deal. Pasquarella has recognized that Israel is committing a genocoide in Gaza and has pledged to refuse campaign contributions from corporations and their PACs. If elected, she has said she will proudly promote the DSA ideals into her decision making in Congress.

DSA Ventura-County is proud to endorse our fellow DSA member Helena Pasquarella.

Sources:

• Santa Barbara Independent
• Vote View
• The Sacramento Bee
• Federal Office of Public Affairs – Press Release
• Reverse Canary Missions
• Daily KOS
• Brad Lander (X.com)
• ED Hat Santa Barbara

[CA State] Lieutenant Governor: Oliver Ma

(Via CA DSA)

Very much like the governor’s race, the race for lieutenant governor contains a lot of candidates that leave much to be desired. Fiona Ma, California’s State Treasurer, and Josh Fryday, one of Gruesome Gavin’s high-ranking appointees, are the main establishment candidates. Fiona Ma has the bulk of endorsements from the Californian political establishment, with politicians like incumbent Lt. Governor Eleni Kounalakis and the majority of organized labor behind her. Along with Fiona Ma’s uninspiring establishment political line, she has been accused of sexual harassment and racial discrimination by a former staffer.

Occupying the “progressive” lane is the former mayor of Stockton, Michael Tubbs. Since Tubbs’s single term as mayor, where he is most known for his attempts to implement a universal basic income (UBI) program, he has led efforts in the non-profit sphere to combat wealth inequality with his End Poverty in California (EPIC) organization. While Tubbs is certainly running as a progressive and is endorsed by members of the progressive Californian establishment like former Senator Laphonza Butler, Representatives Lateefah Simon and Robert Garcia, and Mayor of Oakland Barabara Lee, his commitment to advancing left politics is not entirely certain.

To start off with, Tubbs endorsed billionaire centrist and former NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg for president in 2020, even while democratic socialist Bernie Sanders’s campaign swept California, receiving almost 36% of the primary vote to Bloomberg’s 12%. Bernie even won Tubbs’s home of San Joaquin county. On the campaign trail, Tubbs has certainly evoked economic populism, but revealed sparingly little policy- especially policy that results in real redistribution and the elevation of workers over owners. He has also been conspicuously silent on the ever-escalating violence, apartheid, and genocide in Palestine.

Luckily, there is another choice: Oliver Ma. Oliver is CA DSA’s first-ever endorsed statewide candidate and is running on an explicitly democratic socialist platform that articulates a vision of a California that works for working people—not oligarchs and billionaires.

Oliver immigrated to California at age seven and has dedicated his career as a lawyer to protecting the rights of tenants, immigrants, and workers. As an immigrant rights attorney with the ACLU, Oliver has been on the front lines of defending Californians against ICE and the federal government’s terror campaign. When elected, he will shut down the for-profit detention centers that have proliferated across our state, ending the profits made from our exploitation.

One of the primary areas of influence of the Lieutenant Governor is over California’s higher education system. Currently, University of California schools alone have over $32 billion invested in assets tied to genocide and apartheid in Palestine. Not only is Oliver the only candidate to describe the atrocities in Gaza as genocide, he is the only candidate who has promised to divest these funds from Israel and ensure that our higher education institutions are not funding atrocities overseas.

Oliver is committed to building something that lasts beyond his campaign and, in this, building DSA statewide. Oliver understands, like all democratic socialists must, that an organized movement of working people is more than one candidate or one campaign. If you are not in DSA yet, join today and get involved with our statewide organization or in your local chapter’s work.

For more information on Oliver Ma, go to: https://oliverma2026.com/ and vote for Oliver Ma before June 2.

Candidate Recommendations

Recommendations are personal statements from members of DSA and are not elected endorsements from the chapter

[State] CA Governor – Ramsey Robinson

By T.

Opportunism and class collaboration have historically not brought about a strong socialist movement, independent organizing has. If the current situation is unique enough that we should diverge from the lessons learned by past socialist projects and change strategy, that argument has not been made. It is not the job of socialists to further empower a billionaire, to funnel people’s support into the bourgeois Democratic party, the ruling class has enough help doing this as it stands. There is a tendency among some to say that if socialists are not winning directly we should strategically align ourselves with the winning side, but in this case the winner is still capitalist exploitation. This is not just our opinion, this is a long standing socialist strategy that has seen great effect in the past.

“Even where there is no prospect of achieving their election the workers must put up their own candidates to preserve their independence, to gauge their own strength and to bring their revolutionary position and party standpoint to public attention. They must not be led astray by the empty phrases of the democrats, who will maintain that the workers’ candidates will split the democratic party and offer the forces of reaction the chance of victory. All such talk means, in the final analysis, that the proletariat is to be swindled. The progress which the proletarian party will make by operating independently in this way is infinitely more important than the disadvantages resulting from the presence of a few reactionaries in the representative body.”
-Karl Marx, 1850

Running as and voting for socialists provides valuable benefits in building visibility for socialist organizations, growing class consciousness, emphasizing organizational independence from bourgeois parties, and measuring support among the population. To frame socialists voting for a socialist candidate who represents their values as simply a “protest vote” while advocating for socialists to vote for a capitalist candidate is belittling and disrespectful to our comrades who dedicated their resources to the socialist campaigns. As Eugene Debs once said, “I would rather vote for something I want and not get it than vote for something I don’t want and get it.” If voting for a socialist, such as Ramsey Robinson of the Peace and Freedom Party, is purely a symbolic protest, then what is it called when a billionaire promises to raise taxes or arrest ICE officers? Less than symbolic, this is an empty promise. Voting socialist is only symbolic support if voting is where your organizing ends.

We understand the disagreement is not over which candidate is preferable in and of themselves, the disagreement is over which campaign is worth supporting in a race. This being said, we must understand that our endeavors do not last for one election cycle, one act of praxis does not exist independently from the others. The question we must ask ourselves is: what course of action will result in a stronger socialist movement? Voting for Steyer to further empower one of the richest, most powerful individuals in our state, or voting for Ramsey Robinson and adding momentum to California’s growing socialist movement? For many of us, the answer is solidly Ramsey Robinson. A better world is possible and that world starts with standing by what we believe in, and standing in solidarity with workers.

Vote socialist! Vote Peace and Freedom in 2026! Vote Ramsey Robinson for governor!

[State] CA Governor – Tom Steyer

By G.

The California Gubernatorial field is huge. And with the open primary system, the two candidates who receive the most votes will advance to the general election, regardless of party affiliation. As it stands, the only non-Republican candidates in position to advance are billionaire Tom Steyer and attorney Xavier Becerra. 

After Eric Slalwell resigned when accusations of sexual misconduct and alleged rape emerged, Xavier Becerra became the preferred candidate of establishment democrats. As Attorney General of California during the first Trump administration, Becerra strongly advocated for lowering the cost of medicines that were developed with taxpayer dollars. But in 2023, as Joe Biden’s Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), he completely reversed his position at the behest of pharmaceutical lobbyists and rejected a petition by prostate cancer patients to lower the cost of the medicine they needed and couldn’t afford. Becerra has refused to recognize that Israel is committing a genocide. As a member of the House of Representatives, Becerra voted to authorize the use of armed forces against Iraq (HJRES 114 in 2002). Under his watch as HHS, 85,000 migrant children went missing. Becerra pushed to move children out of shelters quickly, resulting in the loosening of protections that were in place, including the screening of sponsors. Several of these kids were subjected to child labor in places like slaughterhouses, which resulted in cases of severe injuries and death. Becerra refused to take accountability for his failures. Becerra’s endorsements include Julia Brownley and Salud Carbajal, two Zionist supporting politicians. He has also received the maximum campaign endorsement from Chevron and has doubled down on receiving their support. 

Tom Steyer has a far more progressive platform than Becerra. Despite being a billionaire, he has stated his commitment to be a class traitor and advocate against his financial interests, including supporting the California Billionaire Tax that will be on the ballot. He supports the abolishment of ICE, calling them a violent extremist group. Steyer’s anti-ICE position goes beyond rhetoric. He has a 5-step plan to prosecute ICE agents if elected governor. Steyer supports Medicare for All and has been endorsed by CAIR and the Bernie Sanders organization Our Revolution.

But there are some red flags that immediately stand out. He is a billionaire who made his wealth in horrible ways. He founded an investment firm called Farallon that invested almost $90 million in a private prison company that runs the largest ICE detention centers in California. It is something he has acknowledged and says he regrets. Steyer also used his hedge fund to finance fossil fuel projects. Today he claims to be a climate change activist and has tried to distance himself from Farallon but he never fully cut ties with the firm he founded. Steyer has stopped short of acknowledging that Israel is committing a genocide and has stated that the focus should be on Iran rather than holding Israel accountable for their crimes against humanity. But he has condemned AIPAC, saying there’s no place for dark money in politics.

In an ideal world, socialist Ramsey Robinson would be the leading candidate. But unfortunately, he has no chance of winning. The reality is that the only viable candidates to oppose Steve Hilton, the pro-ICE Republican candidate, are Steyer and Becerra, neither of whom deserve the endorsement of DSA. That being said, I will be voting for Tom Steyer because his platform is far more progressive. He has not been endorsed by oil lobbyists and Zionists like Becerra has. It’s a matter of public record that Becerra has capitulated to the capital class over the working class when given power in government. And while Steyer has many flaws, he has pledged to run on a progressive platform that includes taxing billionaires, abolishing ICE, housing first initiatives, advocating for trans rights, and Medicare for all. It remains to be seen if Tom Steyer will follow through on his commitment to be a class traitor, but his platform is far superior to Becerra’s, and I would much rather Steyer be the candidate to oppose Hilton.

The official publication of NNJ DSA is back with a brand new name. Formerly known as The Red Star Ledger, this quarterly issued magazine features various stories of our chapter. […]

By Liam P-A. On Thursday, March 12, community members sat down on the wet sidewalk in front of Christ Hospital and refused to leave. For three days and two nights […]

Are you interested in becoming the best organizer you can be? Do you want to expand socialism here in Milwaukee, but are unsure of where and how to start? Have you been involved but feel like the project did not go anywhere? If you answered yes to any of these questions, the Milwaukee Socialist Organizer Class is for you! 

This eight week program will focus on holistically teaching you to be an unstoppable organizer who builds socialism, changes hearts and minds, and impacts our city.  You will learn direct action organizing, as defined by Organizing for Social Change: Midwest Academy Manual for Activists, in which we organize actions, campaigns, and tactics to “1) win real, immediate, concrete improvement in people’s lives . . . 2) Give people a sense of their own power . . . 3) Alter the relations of power.” 

Interested individuals will register (Click here, which is due by 11:59 p.m. on Sunday, June 7, 2026), be contacted and begin attending classes.  DSA membership is not required to participate, but is encouraged. 

This education program will be a combination of in-person events with virtual events if necessary. Each unit will be roughly a week, with a week break in the middle of the program. Each unit will consist of classroom-style instruction in the unit topic (no more than 2 hours, which will be in-person on Tuesday nights from 7:00 p.m. until 9:00 p.m.), field work in organizing (which will be at least 3 hours and consist of having conversations, moving people to action, and building infrastructure for a strong socialist movement involving several types of campaigns), and time for personal reflection. Each participant must commit to the entire program and, unless excused, attend every unit instruction, and field work session.  Missing more than three classes and field work sessions may result in removal from the program.  

This is the ninth time this program has been offered, and it is back by popular demand! The three instructors have updated and revised the course to make you even more prepared to lead in socialism.  

Time commitment per week: 

Unit instruction: 2 hours 

Organizing work: 3 hours 

Miscellaneous tasks: 1 hour 

Total time per week: 6 hour

Weekly Schedule 

Class will be conducted on Tuesday evenings from 7:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m. and held for at least the first few weeks in-person at Zao MKE, located at 3219 E Kenwood Blvd, Milwaukee, 53211.  A new location for class may be chosen, but the class will remain in-person.   

Field work will be held at regular intervals over the week, with options to organize at several points during the week: 

(tentative schedule, subject to change . . .) 

Saturdays, 9:00 a.m. until 12:00 p.m.

Sundays 12:00 p.m. until 3:00 p.m. 

Mondays 5:30 until 8:30 p.m. 

Program Timeline: 

Sunday, June 7, 2026 at 11:59 p.m.:

Application deadline – apply here

Tuesday, June 9, 2026:

Start of eight week program ( class held, 7:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.), held at Zao MKE, located at 2319 E Kenwood Blvd, Milwaukee, WI 53211

Tuesday, June 16:

Class will be held from 7:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.

Tuesday, June 23:

Class will be held from 7:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.

Tuesday, June 30:

Class will be held from 7:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.

Tuesday, July 7:

Class will be held from 7:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.

Tuesday, July 14:

Class will be held from 7:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.

Tuesday, July 21: 

Class will be held from 7:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.

Tuesday, July 28: 

Class will be held from 7:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.

Units

Each unit helps to answer the question: what is organizing? 

Welcome: what is organizing?

• Get to know participants and instructor
• Define scope of class and intentions 
• Determine goals and desired outcomes 

Organizing is one-on-one Conversations

• Learn the 7 point organizing conversation 
• Practice the conversation and its elements 

Organizing is building the committee and the campaign 

• The importance (or not) of the committee
• Power Mapping the campaign 
• Strategy Chart 

Organizing is holistic productivity 

• Traction versus distraction 
• Time management and its importance
• The Reverse Calendar 
• Overcoming blocks to action

Organizing is a mindset 

• Acknowledging hurdles and setbacks 
• Failure is a great option
• Develop a practice to keep you going

Organizing is raising money and managing it

• Why money is OK 
• How to bring energy and money to your campaign 
• The basics of campaign budgeting and finance 

Organizing is communications

• What does “messaging” mean? 
• The power of media 
• Writing workshop

Organizing is bringing it all together

• You’ve got momentum – now what? 
• Recap of unit themes

Reviews

Here is what previous students have to say about the Milwaukee Socialist Organizer Class: 

“[Before the class] I had no idea about the actual work of organizing.  Now I feel confident that I would be able to become a leader in a campaign setting . . .” 

“I loved the practical application of socialism . . . [and] I loved the far-reaching application of some of the class content.” 

“This is a great way to move into the world of socialism. . . thank you so much for offering this course” 

“This [class] is a great first step for anyone looking to start organizing . . .” 

“I radically grew in my comfort around being upfront and simply being able to approach a complete stranger with a potentially controversial topic.” 

“New organizers and experienced organizers can benefit from this class.” 

“Generally speaking my confidence level just interacting with people about socialism has gone through the roof.  I have been given a phenomenal overview of how to organize and I feel confident that I can find out what works best for me in the future.”  

“It was great to grow as an organizer within the confines of a welcoming community/instructor.” 

“I feel more confident organizing outside of an electoral context.”  

Meet your instructors: 

Alex Brower

Alex Brower is a labor leader, socialist organizer, and Milwaukee’s 3rd district Alderman as a DSA endorsed elected official, serving on the City of Milwaukee Common Council. Professionally, Alex has been the Executive Director of the Wisconsin Alliance for Retired Americans, which organizes union retirees, in addition to other organizing roles with UFCW, SEIU, WisDems, and Wisconsin Jobs Now. In his organizing work, Alex has saved jobs from privatization, helped workers win a union voice on the job, defeated a temp agency, organized against a proposed iron-ore mine, helped bring comprehensive sex education to Beloit Public Schools, and won workplace healthcare for many uninsured MPS Substitute Teachers. As an MPS substitute teacher and former Milwaukee Rec. Department instructor, Alex brings a host of experience teaching others. Alex has also been a candidate for Milwaukee City Comptroller and School Board, running both times as a socialist. 

Ian Gunther

Ian is a union leader, experienced socialist organizer, and has filled many positions in the movement over the last ten years. After becoming one of the founders of Milwaukee DSA, he started leading canvasses for the early Medicare For All campaign on behalf of the chapter. He was elected to the chapter Executive Committee four times, in positions of Treasurer, At-Large, and Outreach Officer where he helped build up the capacity of the local movement. In August of 2025, Ian had the honor of serving as a DSA National Convention chair, facilitating thirteen-hundred nation-wide delegates through intensive debate over the national strategy of DSA. Ian also co-founded MSOE YDSA before graduating with an Electrical Engineering degree. Ian now works for the City of Milwaukee Water Works, and in his capacity as the Chief Steward of AFSCME Local 47, has led the city union to its first victory in over a decade, acquiring raises above cost of living for all general city employees. Ian is excited to bring his years of experience to mentoring new socialist organizers. 

Andy Barbour

Andy currently serves as a chapter co-chair of Milwaukee DSA. His DSA involvement began  in the spring of 2023 as a regular volunteer for the Power to the People campaign, Milwaukee DSA’s now three-year-old campaign to replace We Energies with a publicly owned utility. After sharpening his organizing skills through regular canvassing and phone banking, he became a leader in the organization and has been closely involved in many DSA campaigns and projects. He’s been a consistent organizing force throughout his entire involvement in DSA. Andy currently also serves as chair of the Power to the People Working Group, though he’s previously held half a dozen other leadership roles in the chapter. Notably, he previously acted as deputy campaign manager of Alex Brower’s successful campaign for Common Council, where he oversaw the entire field operation.

Any questions? 

Contact Alex Brower at milwaukeedsa@gmail.com 

Register now!

Register here, or copy and paste this URL into your web browser: https://forms.gle/hW7VKmonwXJnSzzo9