By Michael Sebastian

Parker students marched with teachers and DSA members to Markham Elementary School last year to protest the closure of their school. (Photo: Stephanie Hung)

On January 11, Oakland’s educators and the community scored a signal victory in their years-long fight to end the closure and privatization of public schools. Within days of being seated on the school board, two new members endorsed by the Oakland Education Association, Valarie Bachelor and Jennifer Brouhard, joined a 4-3 majority to overturn last year’s school closure plan.

The closures faced mass opposition from parents, teachers and students, prompting protests and packed town halls. More than 2,000 attended last year’s virtual school board meeting on February 9, when the board voted to approve the closures. Public comments were unanimously opposed, arguing that the closures fell disproportionately on low-income, majority-black districts in Oakland, and were not needed in the face of a record budget surplus in California and a district superintendent with a base salary of $294,000. “OUSD has had a pattern of targeting schools with black and brown students populations for closures, effectively balancing the budget on the backs of our most marginalized students,” said Kampala Taiz-Rancifer, an Oakland teacher and OEA vice-president. “It has caused generations of harm.” The vote by the previous school board further eroded trust in a board seen as dominated by charter-school interests, setting the stage for the replacement of several board members in the 2022 elections.

This month’s vote reversing the closure plan saves five elementary schools that were slated to close this year: Brookfield, Carl B. Munck, Grass Valley, Horace Mann, and Korematsu Discovery Academy. In addition, the middle school grades at Hillcrest K8 will be preserved. The vote does not undo last year’s closure of Parker and Community Day elementary, and La Escuelita’s middle school. 

Manufactured Crises Pave the Way for Charters

Despite California’s chronic underfunding of public education, the debt piled onto OUSD when the state put it in receivership in 2003, and chronic deficits since then, the closure of public schools is not the only solution to fiscal woes. The crux of the problem is that the district is spending the money it does have on the wrong things: too many administrators and consultants who are not supporting teachers and students. As Majority observed in 2019, “OUSD spends $30 million more on its central office than other comparable school districts in California. In the 2014-15 school year, if OUSD had reduced its central office spending to the comparison group average, it could have freed up $14 million.”

In fact, closing schools is a false solution. Districts receive per-pupil state funding for the number of students attending, so the more students that the district cedes to private and charter schools, the less money it receives for public schools. By closing public schools, the district only encourages parents to seek alternatives since their child’s own school could be next on the chopping block. Oakland has become a “charter boomtown” according to one KQED report, and in the decade after 2000 the number of charters “more than tripled”. But charters have the option of picking children that do better in school and have less need for support. This leaves public schools in a self-perpetuating cycle, with more high-needs students and fewer resources to support them. Schools then have to cut back on materials and extracurricular activities, which further incentivizes families to leave.

OEA Fights Back

The Oakland Education Association, the union representing Oakland’s public school teachers, made its opposition to school closures a centerpiece of its seven-day strike in 2019. “For decades a grassroots movement in Oakland has fought against the forces of privatization for equity, local control, and well resourced neighborhood public schools,” said OEA president Keith Brown. “The power of this collective effort grew when community and labor joined OEA in our 2019 strike.” 

Brown noted that the strike “brought many improvements for students and re-energized our fight for education justice in Oakland.”  Among those improvements was a brief moratorium on school closures and charter school expansion, and a contract provision that required the district to give OEA and the community a year’s advance notice of its plans to shutter more schools to allow for full community engagement before a decision is made.

Last February, when the district violated that provision, the struggle continued to grow. Teachers and the community organized a week of action against school closures in February, including a mass rally and march, as two teachers at Westlake middle school held a hunger strike. 

These actions culminated in a one-day unfair labor practice strike on April 29 by OEA teachers protesting the district’s breach of the notice provision in their contract. 

Then, as Election Day approached, the California Department of Justice opened up a probe into Oakland’s school closures for potential violation of student’s civil rights, driven in part by a complaint filed by OEA. 

Winning Change at the Ballot Box and in the Bargaining Campaign

But the union’s efforts to protect Oakland’s public schools didn’t stop there. After a disappointing meeting in June in which the school board failed to reverse its decision, organizing efforts shifted to the school board election in November. 

OEA endorsed three candidates, Jennifer Brouhard, Valarie Bachelor, and Pecolia Manigo, who ran on a platform that included reversing the closures. Brouhard and Bachelor won their elections, shifting the balance of power on the board and culminating in this month’s 4-3 vote to reverse the closures. At the emergency board meeting, Bachelor called on “every single board member sitting here today to approve this resolution to make sure that we stop the harm that we’ve already caused our families and make sure that we support these school sites moving forward.” She noted that, “as a Parker Elementary School community member, I saw the devastating impact of the school closures on our community and I don’t want that to happen across the city, especially in East Oakland.”

OEA president Brown credits the reversal of the school-closure decision to “the people power of Oakland,” and he sees the fight of students, families, workers and community for “for equity, local control, and increased resources prioritizing students and families” continuing to grow. “The fight continues this spring as Oakland educators organize to win a contract that addresses the crisis in educator salaries and supports schools that are safe, stable, and racially just.”

As it begins bargaining over a new contract, OEA has put forward a “Common Good” proposal to diversify the curriculum, address racial disparities, and protect our public schools from closure. This plan calls for reinvestment in the Community School model, which has been shown to be a successful alternative to school closures, and received over $4 billion in new state funding over the past two years. The OEA bargaining proposal also outlines a set of guidelines to reallocate resources, consult with the community, and do a thorough analysis before any school closure takes place. Charter schools that do not meet AB1505 regulations would also be returned to OUSD. 

“This victory has been a long journey!,” reflected OEA second vice president Taiz-Rancifer. “Today we need to remember there is not one sole hero in this story. We need to acknowledge all the work done by so many advocates, organizers, parents, educators, and students who have put their hearts on the line and helped us get to this point. Today, we must remember harm caused to many families, school staff, and educators that have been affected by closures. Now and in the future we must stay vigilant because this is a victory in a larger fight against privatization in Oakland.”

Michael Sebastian is a member of the steering committee of East Bay DSA.

Member Bruce Nissen details his thoughts on what hurdles must be overcome to build broad support for socialism.

Polls show that socialism has a more positive image in the U.S. today than it did in the second half of the 20th Century. Nevertheless, support is still at only thirty six percent (36%) and sixty percent (60%) view socialism negatively according to a 2022 Pew Research Poll. Capitalism is much more popular, with fifty seven percent (57%) favorable and thirty nine percent (39%) unfavorable.

There are major differences among distinctive groups within these overall figures. Democrats and Independents are more likely to be favorable toward socialism while Republicans are extremely unlikely to have this view. Even more extreme differences are evident by age: young people under 30 are much more likely to be favorable to socialism than are those older than 30.

Considering that socialism has always been either somewhat marginal or extremely marginal in American life throughout history, these figures are fairly encouraging. Nevertheless, if we are to make socialism a major force in American politics and ultimately a governing power, we have a long way to go in convincing people that our favored economic and political system will improve their lives overall.

The DSA needs to increase in size tenfold and the larger socialist current in the country also needs to expand greatly. What are the roadblocks to this happening? There are many, and I cannot hope to address them all here. But I do want to look at one that has led me to conclude that we should always (1) describe ourselves as “democratic socialists,” not merely socsialists; (2) clearly distinguish a socialist economy from a completely centrally planned “command” economy; and (3) avoid public displays of Soviet-era symbols and language from the so-called “Communist” countries such as the Soviet Union and China. I arrived at these conclusions due to a couple of recent conversations.

I was discussing with an acquaintance the sorry state of housing in St. Petersburg. We were commenting on how unbelievable it was that people were being forced to live in their cars in the richest country in the world. I made the comment, “That’s capitalism.” He immediately came back with, “No, it’s greed.” I said, “Same thing. Capitalism is a system built around greed.” Then he said that the people leading socialist governments seemed just as greedy as those leading capitalist ones. It became apparent that his picture of socialism meant a country led by an authoritarian leader or party that hoarded all the power and much of the wealth in that country through their control of the government. While he was not wedded to capitalism and saw it as flawed, he viewed the historical alternative as no better and probably less free.

A second instance: I was talking with a man who was helping me install a new ceiling in the back room of my house. He was originally from Cuba; his father was Russian and his mother was Cuban. He was married to a woman from Colombia. I was asking him about Cuba and Colombia, two countries he had lived in before coming to the U.S. It quickly became apparent that his political attitudes were anti-leftist; he weas lamenting that a leftist candidate had just won the election for president of Colombia.

He noted that this candidate had previously been the leader of a guerilla war against a previous Colombian government and stated that every time guerillas took power in a country the government became authoritarian, you were no longer allowed access to a free press, viewpoints opposing government policy were repressed, etc. He pointed to Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela as examples. We had a longer conversation, but I was completely unable to dislodge the connection that he made between “socialist” and “authoritarian and unfree.”

In some ways, this pairing is understandable for the older generation because the primary experiences they have had with self-described socialist societies were with the Communist countries (Soviet Union, Eastern European satellites of the Soviet Union, China, Cuba, etc.) I think it is difficult to underestimate the damage that was done to the cause of socialism by the failed one-party authoritarian experiments that were known as the Communist world. (Of course, there are some positive features of these countries such as universal literacy and education and usually widely available healthcare, but they are universally unfree societies that lose disproportionate percentages of their population if emigration is allowed — frequently it is not.)

Most modern societies have a mix of socialist and capitalist features although the capitalist ones tend to be more fundamental and prominent. It helps to think of countries as more socialistic or more capitalistic since pure forms of either socialism or capitalism are basically non-existent (although some of the most unequal societies with minimal social welfare features come perilously close to pure capitalism). If we look at the spectrum from most socialistic to most capitalistic, which countries in the world are closest to straight out socialism?

If we’re talking about democratic socialism, the Nordic countries (Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland) come closest. They combine a large social welfare sector with a strong safety net, relatively low levels of inequality, a massive union movement incorporating a strong majority of the workforce, strongly democratic governments, and a fluctuating but comparatively large public sector. (Wikipedia states that approximately 30% of the workforce in Nordic countries work in the public sector.) In the recent past these countries have generally retrogressed toward capitalism (Norway is an exception: its public sector wealth exceeds the private sector), but the difference from more capitalistic societies is still stark. These countries are not fully socialist, of course. But they are the most socialistic in the world. The consequences are stark: they consistently rank among the happiest countries in the world on the happiness index and they are among the healthiest and most equal in the world.

All of this may be so commonly understood that it hardly needs to be said. Yet, I think there are a couple of lessons for us in DSA from the account given above. First, we would be wise to always describe ourselves as democratic socialists. The simple word “socialist” has been sullied to such a degree that the modifier is necessary if we are to be clear about our politics.

Second, members of the DSA would be wise to separate the notions of socialism from a completely centrally planned “command” economy. Attempts at such an economy have universally been authoritarian failures and we need to be exploring other ways to gain democratic control over the economy and to combat vast inequalities of wealth. I think some version of market socialism where the workers own and control the means of production but utilize market mechanisms to coordinate the economy and respond to consumer demand is the best approach, but that is the subject for another essay.

Third, we should always be vigilantly paying attention to our public image. That doesn’t mean we hide any of our substantive political positions, but it does mean avoiding public displays of Soviet-era symbols of so-called “Communist” countries and/or statements of approval for these governments or their leaders. (I understand that some DSA members may adore these leaders or governments, but they are a distinct minority and do not in any way represent the general consensus of the organization.)

Some years ago, I remember participating in a Tampa Bay DSA chapter march for May Day where some of the marchers held hammer and sickle signs. The march stopped at one point and an American flag was burned. I thought that was counterproductive and contrary to the general thrust of DSA politics at the time, and I still do. The DSA is not an authoritarian communist organization, and it makes no sense to try to coopt Communist symbols or methodologies for an organization attempting to build a democratic socialist society. Why adopt the symbols of such a failed and unpopular movement when we have our own much more popular vision to put out to the public?

Since this entire article has been directed against the hard left-authoritarian fringe of our socialist movement, I should make it clear that I equally oppose attempts on the other side of our movement to dissolve DSA’s distinctive politics into a mushy liberalism indistinguishable from the predominant thinking of the Democratic Party. Unlike liberals, democratic socialists see the structural causes of inequality, racism, sexism, homo- and trans-phobia, etc. baked into a capitalist economy. Divisions within the ranks of working people are critical to the survival of capitalism. But that too is the subject of another piece. The main point here is this: let’s avoid alienating the bulk of the American people by displaying false images of ourselves as upholders of undemocratic ideas and regimes.

The Atlanta Democratic Socialists of America condemns the murder of an Atlanta Forest Defender by the Georgia State Troopers. This killing is the latest act of state violence taken against the Forest Defenders, and the local authorities aim to misrepresent it as an act of self-defense to absolve themselves of responsibility. Over several months, the police have escalated their attack on Forest Defenders using violent tactics, in an attempt to suppress public opinion and organized political dissent to building a costly, corporate-funded cop training facility. Wednesday morning’s raid represents a clear escalation by law enforcement who orchestrated a violent eviction of protestors from public land. Atlanta DSA maintains our full support for the democratic rights of all people to peacefully protest this development and defend Atlanta’s public forests from destruction. As socialists, we should always condemn attempts by police and the far-right to mischaracterize Left-wing activists as “outside agitators” or “domestic terrorists.”

Atlanta has the highest income inequality in America, yet all the corporate Democratic and Republican officials have to offer is environmental destruction and more state violence. Cop City is both an ecological and racial justice issue, with both Atlanta Mayor Andre Dickens and Georgia Governor Brian Kemp calling for the destruction of much of Atlanta’s South River Forest as well as the expansion of the carceral system through a $90 million dollar cop facility. We stand firmly with the working-class communities who overwhelmingly oppose the destruction of public forests, and who squarely reject the construction of an 85 acre police base in their backyards. We call on Atlanta Mayor Andre Dickens and the Atlanta City Council to shut down construction and cancel the city’s plans for a new cop academy. We reiterate calls for an independent investigation of this recent murder by police, which should be shielded from the corrupt political agenda of local officials and the Atlanta Police Foundation.

As socialists committed to environmental justice and the abolition of the carceral state, we ask our comrades and the community to donate to the Atlanta Solidarity Fund to provide bail support to protestors arrested in Atlanta. You can follow and find more ways to support the movement at defendtheatlforest.org and @defendtheATLforest.

Statement co-written by Atlanta DSA and the National DSA Abolition Working Group

Workers at America’s only major unionized publishing house, HarperCollins, went on strike in early November of last year after their contract expired in April. As their strike approaches day 50 with little response from management, workers are standing strong on the picket line and fighting for higher wages, real racial equity on the job, and a union security agreement or “agency shop”. Tonight, we hear from bargaining committee member Carly Katz on how workers are standing up to a company owned by right-wing media conglomerate NewsCorp and how their union is sustaining the longest strike in their shop’s history.

In other New York labor news, Senate Judiciary Committee hearings started Wednesday January 18 for Governor Hochul’s nominee for the next chief judge of the state’s top court. In the weeks since Hochul announced her nomination of Hector LaSalle to the Court of Appeals, labor unions have joined with the abortion rights movement, socialists in office, and Senate progressives to oppose a judge with an alarming record on labor and abortion rights. Last week, TWU International president John Samuelsen broke with NY Labor and refused to denounce LaSalle. We’ll hear from transit worker John Ferretti on why he won’t be following his union leadership and what the LaSalle story can tell us about the power of organized labor in our city.

Find ways to support and follow HarperCollins Union here: https://linktr.ee/hcpunion

“No Justice, No Peace”: Kamala Harris visits Ann Arbor, Highlighting Hypocrisy in Federal Climate Agenda

By Juan Gonzalez Valdivieso

Vice President Kamala Harris visited Rackham Auditorium at the University of Michigan Thursday afternoon for a conversation on “the Administration’s commitment to tackle our climate crisis”. This was the message conveyed to the several hundred event invitees across the university via individual email correspondence just a few days prior. Interestingly, communication regarding her arrival as well as event specifics remained largely ambiguous during the hours leading up to her visit. The exact time and location of the event were not confirmed until the day before nor did local news outlets and media providers make the public privy to the day’s happenings.

Despite this strange and oddly convenient bout of secrecy, coverage of the event following its conclusion was unabashedly celebratory, veering away from direct praise only to discuss adjacent news such as the COVID diagnosis of university president Santa Ono. The Michigan Daily focused heavily on hopeful messaging, noting references to on-campus sustainability, automotive industry innovation, and intersectionality made by the event’s speaker panel. MLive described a relationship of reverence and appreciation between Ann Arbor and Harris’ message, claiming that the city “embraced…Harris’ call for urgent climate action”.

However, these interpretations refused to acknowledge a fundamental quality of Harris’ visit: hypocrisy. The US government cannot engage in genuine and good-faith conversations on climate until it actively grapples with its oppressive and genocidal relationship to Israel, a contradiction best highlighted by the protest held just outside of Rackham Auditorium that same afternoon.

Following the news of Harris’ visit to campus, Students Allied for Freedom and Equality (SAFE) got to work, strategically organizing a demonstration that would speak to the blatant hypocrisies of a government taking part in climate talks while simultaneously funding and supporting an apartheid regime that habitually commits acts of environmental devastation. SAFE is a student organization for Palestinian solidarity that serves as the Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) chapter at the university. The organization represents a diverse range of perspectives united in the collective struggle towards Palestinian liberation. As such, the presence of a political figure as important and consequential as Harris provided low hanging fruit to a group actively seeking forms of effective communication and protest. After all, Israel’s exploits are reprehensible both socio-politically and environmentally.

In 2022, Israel committed a host of war crimes including dropping bombs on Palestinian apartment buildings, invading Palestinian neighborhoods, preventing paramedics from accessing in-need Palestinians, and attacking individuals at Palestinian funerals. It was also the deadliest year for West Bank Palestinians in almost 20 years. Even in the first two weeks of 2023, the atrocities abounded. During the year’s first three days, three Palestinians were killed — including 2 children. Israel’s new extremist government also acted on its explicitly Zionist declarations by bombing the homes of two murdered Palestinians, destroying multiple homes as well as a water tank in Masafer Yatta, and breaking into Al Aqsa Mosque, a sacred Muslim holy site. Moreover, a formal ban of the Palestinian flag in public spaces has now become an official part of Israeli policy.

Environmentally, the same pattern of genocidal violence and ruthless destruction rings true. Israel not only has one of the biggest per capita ecological and carbon footprints in the word — top 10% and 20% respectively — but it routinely engages in massive tree uprooting and harmful pesticide use. It also regularly pollutes Palestinian resources, targets Palestinian farmland, and denies Palestinians access to renewable energy. While doing so, it perpetuates an environmentalist image that claims to espouse “green” ideals. In reality, this “greenwashing” is simply a calculated attempt to cover up acts of criminal war, environmental degradation, and apartheid.

The chants and speeches featured in the SAFE protest spoke to these brutal realities with coherence and poignancy. Cries for “Intifada revolution”, the smashing of “the settler Zionist state”, and the abolition of administrative “greenwashing” could be heard among dozens of waving Palestinian flags and exclamatory posters. University Junior and SAFE Education Director Noor Sami powerfully condemned the 3.8 billion dollars invested into Israel’s military defense budget by the US, claiming that the “Biden-Harris Administration, much like its predecessors…is 100% complacent in the attempted erasure of the Palestinian people from their homeland.” University Sophomore and SAFE Activism Chair Joseph Fisher movingly emphasized the catastrophic proportions of Israel’s environmental policy, describing how the Zionist entity “water[s] their invasive species with Palestinian blood and completely obliterate[s] the dead sea.” He would later go on to denounce the harmful dumping of waste and destruction of freshwater reserves in Israeli settlements.

Above all, though, SAFE’s protest made one thing crystal clear to Harris, the university, Ann Arbor, and everyone and everything in between: so long as Israeli apartheid continues, so long as genocidal brutality persists, and so long as Palestine remains unfree, no substantive conversations about climate — or any other issue for that matter — can take place. Even more pressingly, there will continue to be unrest, grievance, and demonstration that demands unconditional liberation and freedom as well as a permanent maintenance of justice for Palestinian generations to come.

“No Justice, No Peace”: Kamala Harris visits Ann Arbor, Highlighting Hypocrisy in Federal Climate… was originally published in The Michigan Specter on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

The new year brings new opportunities for workers to build power across the South. In Georgia specifically, one such significant opportunity lies in fighting for collective bargaining rights for public sector workers throughout the state. But what exactly does that mean and why is it so important?

Before we dive into that, we must first answer the question of what constitutes public sector work in Georgia. Public sector jobs are tax-payer-funded and service-driven. The most common examples are public school teachers and staff, firefighters, and healthcare workers, but public sector work is also in child care, social services, transportation, public utilities, sanitation, parks and recreation, environmental protection, libraries, museums, historical sites, and much more. Looking at that list, it’s clear that public sector work plays a crucial role in making local communities function and thrive, and it’s imperative that we empower these workers to have a democratic say in how their own workplaces operate. 

Collective bargaining allows workers to negotiate their wages, hours, health benefits, and other workplace conditions. In other words, collective bargaining gives workers a seat at the table, so of course, it is vital to our goal as Socialists to win power back to working people. However, in Georgia, public sector workers are banned from bargaining a contract. Most private-sector worker unionization in the United States is overseen by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRB), but the legal scope of collective bargaining for state and local public sector workers falls to states and local authorities. Our state does permit public sector workers to form and join unions, but Georgia law prohibits those unions from bargaining on behalf of their members. That means that the state has total control over these workers’ wages, health benefits, retirement funding, sick leave, and workplace health and safety. 

Additionally, Georgia is a right-to-work state, which means workers cannot be required to join or pay union dues if their workplace is unionized. Without collective bargaining rights, unions have less power and therefore there is less of an incentive for workers to join, which only further diminishes unions’ potential reach and strength. That’s part of the reason why Georgia has the ninth-lowest percentage of unionized workers in the country, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. As Atlanta Civic Center recently put it, “About one in 10 U.S. workers is in a union. In Georgia, the rate is less than one in 20.”

To fully legalize collective bargaining rights in Georgia, we need pro-labor state legislators to introduce and pass a bill that repeals and amends the sections of Georgia law denying public sector workers collective bargaining powers, like HB 1576 which was introduced last year but not passed. Even better would be a bill granting public sector workers the right to strike. Right now, under Georgia law, public employees cannot promote, encourage, or participate in any strike and will in fact be terminated if they do. But the right to strike is hugely important because as workers, our power comes from our labor. Therefore, withholding that labor is one of our strongest and most effective methods of control over our employment conditions.

While all workers deserve a seat at the table, Georgia’s 680,000 public service workers have significant need for the power that would come with collective bargaining rights and the right to strike. The public sector in particular is largely made up of workers from historically marginalized and disadvantaged populations. According to a Georgia State University report, women have consistently made up a larger percentage of Georgia’s state and local government employees over the last four decades, and there are more women working in the public sector in Georgia than in the private sector. Recent data from Morehouse College shows that more than 6 out of ten public sector employees in Georgia are women. Black workers are also more likely to be employed in the public sector both in our state and across the U.S. As the Economic Policy Institute reports, “Public-sector jobs are rungs to the middle class for Black workers, who often face labor market discrimination, especially in the private sector where employers may be less likely to follow standardized hiring and promotion practices.”

Many public sector workers around the country are also underpaid. Nationally, 32.7% of state and local government employees are paid less than $20 an hour and 15.6% of the sector is paid less than $15 an hour, according to the Economic Policy Institute. In Georgia, that share is higher. Over 20% of Georgia’s state and local government employees make less than $15 an hour. The right to collective bargaining is a recourse for change in this area and many others. 

Collective bargaining provides an important fair wage premium for public sector workers. It ensures they earn as much as 20 percentage points higher than public workers in states where public collective bargaining is banned, per the Morehouse College report. And research published in the American Journal of Public Health has shown that workers represented by a collective bargaining agreement have higher living standards, and the benefits that workers reap from collective bargaining rights have been shown to spill over into their communities, improving public health and boosting civic engagement. For public sector work, which is based entirely in serving the public, those community benefits that come with collective bargaining rights are even more directly seen and widely felt. For example, One example of this is that higher wages for teachers can mean better school staffing, smaller classrooms, and thus better education for students. Similarly, better paid health care workers means quicker and improved care for patients and healthier communities. , which is, of course,  In summary, Georgians have a lot to gain from standing with workers fighting for workplace democracy and in turn stronger public services for all! s a whole better for the community as a whole. All Georgians have a lot to gain from passing public sector collective bargaining in our state.

Currently, 26 states across the country allow public sector collective bargaining, and we can play a role in getting Georgia to join them. In the coming weeks, Atlanta DSA will be working closely with the United Campus Workers (UCW) of Georgia to push Georgia State House members to sign onto a bill to legalize public sector bargaining rights during 2023’s fast-approaching legislative session, and we need your help! 

Sign our petition in support of public sector bargaining and the right to strike for public sector employees, and reach out to your State Representatives to let them know this is an urgent issue! Sign up to join phone banking, text banking, and outreach events to promote awareness throughout our community and build support for the issue. Be sure to also share the petition with friends and family members, especially if they happen to be public sector workers. Finally, if you are a public sector worker, reach out to Atlanta DSA about organizing your workplace or getting involved with a union. 

Note: Since the publishing of this article, SB 166 has officially been introduced to the Georgia State Senate! Write you legislators here and ask them to sponsor the bill.

The post Georgia’s Public Sector Workers Need Bargaining Rights Now appeared first on Red Clay Comrade.

The first thing I want to say about our December 10 defense of the Fall River Pride Committee’s drag story time is that we succeeded.

I wanted to start out that way because between all the various mediocre news stories and online commentaries, you might not realize it. But we succeeded. When neo-Nazi group NSC tried to rush the door, it was our team of volunteers from an ad hoc coalition of local organizations including Boston DSA, that kept them out. We, the team that I coordinated, did keep them out, and we were able to keep attendees safe. And through friendliness and creativity – singing, bells, colorful masks – our volunteers at the side door were able to provide an atmosphere of fun and normalcy for the children as they entered the event, even with NSC outside the front door and Proud Boys across the street. Volunteers were able to escort families to their cars as they left. We did all this not by being some kind of elite strike force, but by showing up, working together well, using our varied skills (tactical situational awareness, first aid, cheery child-friendly charisma, and more), and by keeping our cool.

Don’t get me wrong. It wasn’t a pleasant experience for me, and I suspect there are other people on the team who feel similarly. It’s frightening to be rushed by neo-Nazis who have a lot more muscle mass than you and who outnumber you (because they arrived quite early, only some of our team was there at the time of the rush). I was hit multiple times in the solar plexus, slammed against the doors. I would rather not have been injured, and would rather none of my comrades had been injured either. I heard a whole lot of slurs that morning. I’ve been frustrated at attempts to credit the police for keeping people safe when the cops were not present during the rush on the doors, and who later claimed to not be able to tell the difference between us, in our varied clothing, and neo-Nazis in group merch and quasi-uniform dress). But none of that changes the first sentence in this essay. We succeeded in defending drag story time.

This Saturday, January 14, is the next drag story time in Fall River, and this time it will be a little different – with a community support rally outside to provide fun and safety for all, to celebrate queerness and perseverance and courage. If it isn’t obvious, I’m writing this not simply to share my own experiences or perspective, but to encourage you to attend in support.

I have never been, to use a good friend’s phrase, a “woofing tough.” I have disabilities that impact my ability to build strength or coordinate my own movements. I have chronic pain issues. I avoid militant rhetoric and aesthetic in this kind of work because I don’t believe in raising stakes for nothing, and I don’t believe in making implied promises that I can’t back up. Every time fascists yell in my general direction about how they’d win in a fight, I shrug internally, because I’ve never thought otherwise. And yet over the last few years I’ve worked more action frontlines than I care to recall. A lot of people have been beside me on those lines who didn’t think of themselves before as the kind of people who could do this work. No matter how much groups like NSC want it to be so, we antifascists aren’t their mirror image and we don’t operate on the same terms with only the politics changed. If I have stood for anything in my time organizing against the far right, it is that this work does not belong only to the strong and the powerful.

Why am I telling you all this? Because I want good people to participate in supporting our communities and opposing the intimidation and the organizing of the far right. I don’t want people to think they can’t or shouldn’t do it, or that their contributions aren’t real, because in some way they aren’t the “right” type of person.

So come one, come all, to Fall River this Saturday – whether you’re an old hand or this would be your first action, whether you’re a ninja or regularly trip over your own feet. Dress for the weather (wearing comfortable shoes, wearing hats and masks, minimizing the amount of cotton against your body). Keep your cool, act collectively, and follow the lead of organizers (because this all has a goal and it’s not individualized catharsis). Be aware of what’s happening around you, make sure you have safe ways to enter and exit, and enjoy the performances! Numbers will make us all safer, make it more possible for people who are afraid or uncomfortable or unsure to participate. The numbers we turn out could mean the difference in whether a family feels safe enough to attend the drag story time.

Together we can preserve this queer space, and send a much-needed message to any queer kids (or adults) who may be watching: tomorrow need not be as bleak as neo-Nazis and bro-fascists want them to believe.

New York State Assembly Members and Senators headed back to Albany last week for the start of the 2023 legislative session. We caught up with Queens Assembly Member and socialist Zohran Mamdani the night before the session began to learn how he’s feeling about this year's prospects to pass legislation that will help the working class and the addition of two new socialist legislators. We also talked to him about why his office joined as an intervening party to stop Con Edison from raising gas and electric bills and his platform of legislation to fix the MTA. We’re also joined live tonight by Lizzy Oh and Brandon West to talk about one of New York City DSA’s priority campaigns this year - taxing the rich.  

To submit a public comment against ConEd's proposed rate hike visit: bit.ly/NoConEdRateHike

For more information on the Fix the MTA platform, visit: www.fixthemta.org

For more information on the Tax the Rich campaign, visit: www.taxtherichny.com

By Jamie Partridge, secretary PDX DSA Labor

For years now, the Portland DSA Labor group has sponsored Socialist Job Fairs, about every six months. Up to fifty socialists, half DSA members and half we are just meeting for the first time, show up to connect with about fifteen workplace organizers, looking for the right job. A job organizing with other socialists: to form a union or energize an existing union.

We manage to place about ten participants each time. At organized companies like UPS, Hyatt Hotel, City of Portland, Maletus Beverage, US Postal Service, Burgerville. etc. At unionizing companies like Starbucks and Amazon. And of those ten, some don’t stick around.

Now we are launching a Socialist Workers Support Group, to provide regular mentoring, group support and workplace organizer training and political education about socialists in unions.

In previous eras socialists were often respected workplace leaders. These radicals helped organize workers into a collective force that went beyond workplace fights and into the political arena. That is much less common today. The left often finds itself on the outside looking in when workplace struggle erupts. Socialists are more likely to be organizing strike support than leading strikes.

This divide has weakened both workers’ movements and the left. The socialist movement is stronger when tied to workers’ movements, and vice versa. Rebuilding the link between them is key to revitalizing both, and to keeping our movement grounded in the reality of workers’ lives.

Socialists should root themselves in the labor union movement. Not as supporters from afar or paid staff, but as rank-and-file workers. Not as saviors with all the answers, but as organizers for what Marx called the “self-emancipation of the working class.”

Consider the advantages of a union job that matches your talents, and of choosing one together with fellow DSAers. The pay is decent, and the work itself may be fulfilling, too. All our political work isn’t shunted off to nights and weekends; you can be talking with your co-workers every day. There’s no mismatch between your political life and what you do to keep body and soul together.

Find us at https://tinyurl.com/pdxdsalabor