Member Bruce Nissen shares his thoughts about a past political movement

In conversations with my younger comrades in the Pinellas DSA, I have been astonished to discover that virtually none of them has any idea of who the Yippies were in the 1960s — 1980s period. As one who came to political maturity in the ’60s (I was twenty years old in 1968), I was powerfully influenced by them at the time. They were a significant force in bringing together the emerging “hippie” or youth culture and political radicalism at the time. They were in the news fairly frequently, I just assumed that they would remain in the public consciousness up to the present day. How wrong I am!

I still think that the Yippie! phenomenon is worth remembering and examining, so that’s why I am writing this. Let’s start with a little bit of background. The 1960s was a decade of increasingly obvious disaffection from society by the younger generation. The 1950s had produced the beatniks but they were a very small sideshow to the decade of conformity in most things. By the 1960s some of the most obvious failings of the United States became so prominent that they could not help but stimulate a negative visceral reaction from a growing segment of young people. The two most prominent failings were the racist repression of African-Americans, prompting a civil rights movement that was viciously repressed on national TV news each evening, and an imperial war in Vietnam that resulted in a draft to send young American men off to fight a war that made little sense to many of them.

The numerically larger reaction was cultural. Young people began experimenting with mind-altering drugs (especially marijuana but also less frequently more potent drugs such as LSD and mescaline). Some young men grew their hair longer; puritanical attitudes toward sex were under attack. Peace and love and freedom to “do your own thing” became keywords of the growing cohort of those who became known as hippies.

A second reaction was political. The anti-war movement against the Vietnam War grew throughout the final third of the decade and into the 1970s. The civil rights movement morphed into a Black Power movement and a women’s movement seeking gender and sexual equality grew by leaps and bounds. Liberation movements from underdeveloped countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America spurred solidarity movements in the U.S. as well as Latino freedom struggles among Chicanos and Hispanic (primarily Puerto Rican) populations. Militant reform movements in a previously self-satisfied labor movement challenged the power of employers and their often-compliant union leadership.

These two reactions were not necessarily connected with each other. Despite a common vaguely defined opponent — the “system” — there could be enormous differences in both cultural styles and political analyses among these emerging forms of resistance. I distinctly remember in 1967 running into young Marxist revolutionaries who urged me and other radicals to cut our hair, eschew dope, look as straight as possible, get a job in a factory, and integrate into a working class that was perceived as being hostile to the new youth culture. I was lectured that only in this way could I contribute to a transformation of U.S. society. I rejected this invitation to mimic the very attitudes and lifestyle that I was rebelling against.

A big portion of the emerging hippie culture remained apolitical in any conventional sense of the word “politics.” They rejected the striving competitiveness of mainstream culture and attempted to live a quieter life less centered on conspicuous consumption, but did not necessarily engage in political activism or advocacy. But many of us attracted to the hippie culture also were politically estranged because of the war and other reasons, so we felt a compulsion to also rebel through political activity.

Enter the Yippies. As a named phenomenon the Yippies originated in 1967 from a meeting of a small group of leftist veterans of previous demonstrations and movements. The most prominent figures to emerge as Yippie leaders were Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin. (More on them later in this article.) The name was of course a take-off on the word “hippie” and was intended to indicate joy in living, antics and pranks, and a nullification of the “death culture” that the originators saw as pervasive in America. To make it look more official for mainstream media, they invented a (non-existent) “party” — the Youth International Party (YIP).

The Yippies (and YIP) had no formal membership; one could simply declare oneself a member. The goal was not to establish anything with a formal structure; instead it was to utilize the media to spread among America’s youth countercultural and anti-capitalist messages through the use of flamboyant spectacles and symbols. Some prominent Yippies took outrageous names as part of the theater: Wavy Gravy was a prominent Yippie who became fairly well known for his role at the historic Woodstock Festival in 1968. Here is Wavy at later point in his life:

Others took names like Joannee Freedom or Daisy Deadhead. Some semi-famous people like radical singer-songwriter Phil Ochs, radical lawyer William Kunstler, Tuli Kupferberg and Ed Sanders of the rock group The Fugs, and others were self-declared Yippies.

But probably the most prominent Yippie was Abbie Hoffman, a brilliant media performer who constantly ended up in the news because of his latest outrage against conservative mainstream sensibilities. For all his clowning, Abbie was a serious revolutionary who had a thought-out rationale for his theatrical antics. He had come to believe that people were not moved to radicalism by rational discourse and logic. Instead, they viscerally responded to events and images that shaped their cultural viewpoint through which they interpreted the world. Thus, the way to reach them was to engage in pubic theater that forced them to reevaluate.

Here are a few images of Abbie:

Jerry Rubin was almost equally prominent in the Yippie mythology, but he was not as deep of a thinker as Abbie. Books he authored were fairly shallow, and he didn’t exhibit the same degree of purposive refection on his own actions as did Abbie. In the end he would sell out his ideals and become a Wall Street trader and businessman who Wikipedia claims became a multi-millionaire. But in his earlier incarntaion he did have something of a flair for theatrical messages. Here are a couple of images of Rubin in his revolutionary days:

Abbie and Jerry and fellow Yippies engaged in numerous public guerilla theater events. Among them:

· In the 1967 March on the Pentagon, Yippies induced some in the crowd to surround the Pentagon, handed out witch’s hats and colorful outfits and levitation sticks and held a ceremonial “levitation” of the Pentagon building to drive out the evil of militarism and war. Soldiers guarding the Pentagon held rifles out in the direction of the protesters; a picture of a girl inserting a flower into the barrel of one soldier’s gun went around the world in news media.

· Abbie Hoffman in late 1967 snuck a crew of protesters into the Wall Street Exchange building. When up on the visitor’s balcony over the Exchange floor, they rushed to the rail and threw hundreds of dollar bills down on the trading floor. Trading was stopped for a few minutes; some stockbrokers scrambled to retrieve the bills as chaos ensued. Abbie and crew managed to escape outside where he related the story to reporters who had been tipped off in advance. Then he publicly burned a $5 bill to complete the guerrilla action. Again, publicity streaked around the country.

· In March 1968 the Yippies called for a “Yip-In” at New York City’s Grand Central Station. I happened to be in New York for a spring break from college in Iowa, and my then-girlfriend and I attended. Well over one thousand people showed up. Balloons, music, and a festive atmosphere was everywhere. Then a couple of intrepid youths climbed up on the famous Grand Central clock and removed the hands. (Later Yippie publicity claimed the purpose was to free the masses from the tyranny of the clock and a forced workweek.) At that point the police went crazy and rioted. They waded into the crowd, swinging batons and cracking heads. We were trapped inside the building and could not escape except by running down the stairs into the subway system. As we were running down the stairs, a policeman pursued us and others who were likewise escaping. I still vividly remember an older gentleman who looked very straight and who most likely was not part of the demonstration but simply a commuter. He ran down the stairs with us, but he was slower. The policeman smashed him across the head with such a loud crack that I can still hear the pop. The man reeled and fell heavily to the ground, bleeding profusely. We couldn’t even get him help for some time, as we were trapped inside by a police line. Things like that radicalize you very, very quickly.

· The biggest stage for Yippie! theatrics was the Democratic Convention in Chicago in August 1968. The Vietnam War was heating up; Democratic President Lyndon Johnson was retiring in disgrace; the Democratic Party was planning to nominate VP Hubert Humphrey, a strong war supporter, for president; and Chicago Democratic Mayor Richard Daley had instructed the Chicago police to “shoot to kill” anyone disturbing the peace. Mainstream anti-war movement organizations had called for a massive march during the convention and the city had refused to grant a permit. Hundreds of thousands had been expected for the march, but widespread publicity of Mayor Daley’s threats intimidated most who had planned to come. In the end only about 10,000 showed up. The Yippies had planned a massive Festival of Life with live rock bands and theatrical happenings; again, permits were denied. All the big nationally known bands pulled out in face of the threats; only the MC5, a radical Detroit-basaed band ended up playing. Phil Ochs also performed. The MC5 concert was cut short when the cops attacked the crowd. The Yippies brought in a pig named Pigasus to coronate as President of the U.S. Abbie was arrested and the pig was confiscated by the police. The whole convention was a mess that culminated with a Police Riot outside the hotel where Humphrey was being selected. The TV media brought all of this to the nation on a nightly basis.

· Following the Democratic Convention police riot, the U.S brought felony conspiracy charges against eight organizers who had planned the demonstrations. Most were anti-war political organizers who looked like normal Americans, but Abbie and Jerry were also part of the Chicago 8 (later the Chicago 7 when Black Panther Boby Seale’s case was severed from that of the rest). Abbie and Jerry showed up at the trial adorned in judge’s robes, repeatedly taunted the judge, and were charged withi contempt of court countless times. Because the name of the judge (a real fool who made a joke of himself by his behavior) was Julius Hoffman, Abbie made a legal effort to change his first name to Fuck so he could answer as Fuck Hoffman every morning in court. (For some reason, his application was turned down.)

· When Abbie and Jerry were pulled in front of the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), Abbie came wearing an American flag shirt; he was promptly arrested as he stated, “I regret that I have but one shirt to give for my country.” Jerry, who was wearing a Viet Cong flag shirt, shouted that the cops were Communists for not arresting him also.

· Yippie chapters across the country engaged in similar public theatrical events. In 1969 they stormed and briefly seized the Justice Department building in D.C. during an anti-war demonstration. In 1970 Yippies raided Disneyland and occupied Tom Sawyer’s island; riot police shut down the theme park and arrested dozens of occupiers.

These theatrical radical events fascinated me as a young college student. For about two and a half years from mid-1967 until 1970 I considered myself a Yippie and attempted to emulate their work on my campus. I joined a guerrilla theater group that disrupted officious campus events, participated in the coronation of a male homecoming queen at a homecoming football game, played a minor (and shamefully cowardly) role in a nude-in against Playboy magazine’s spokesman speaking on campus, ran a giant be-in festival of life on campus, hosted various “Digger dinners” with free communal meals outdoors, set up a Free Store in an unoccupied alcove of my college dorm, and more.

The college student government appreciated many of these antics, and they were happy to sponsor a visit to campus by a leading Yippie. We tried to get Abbie Hoffman, but could not find an easy way to reach him. We did contact Jerry Rubin, and he came and spoke to fairly large crowd on campus. I arranged a Yip-in welcome where we inundated the crowd with balloons thrown down from a balcony we occupied. I still have a photo of Jerry and me during his visit in 1969:

We interviewed Rubin for our college underground newspaper, and I quickly saw that he was not a particularly deep thinker — I remember thinking that I had thought through a number of these questions more thoroughly than he had. He was warm and friendly and fun to be with, but here was not a leader to work out a strategic direction for the future of our movement. He had nothing to say when I attempted to converse with him about the role and function of the Yippie myth, something I had discovered through reading writings by Abbie.

Still, I thought the Yippies were pretty cool for a couple of years. But subsequent events caused me to lose my fervent admiration and to move to other elements of the movement. First, it became apparent that the Yippies were not anchored in anything that had staying power, such as the labor movement. When youth culture faded so did the Yippies.

Second, it became apparent that behind the flashy exterior many of the Yippie “leaders” were lesser idols than they appeared. All idols have feet of clay, and my infatuation with Abbie Hoffman cooled considerably as later episodes showed him to be a very flawed human being. When I finally got a chance to meet him, at a fizzled demonstration at Tompkins Square Park in the East Village in New York City, he was acting paranoid. I asked him if he was Abbie Hoffman (because I wasn’t sure) and he immediately said, “Yeah! Want to drop some acid?” I replied no and retreated in confusion. Upon later reflection I realized that he suspected I was a “narc” (narcotics agent) trying to get him arrested and he knew that narcs are not allowed to consume illegal drugs when they pursue drug dealers and users. He certainly didn’t appear as brilliant in person as he did through his media antics; in fact, he appeared to be an isolated and somewhat paranoid individual.

In 1973 he was busted for being involved in an attempted sale of a huge amount of cocaine (probably set up by narcs, but nevertheless he was there). He disappeared and went underground shortly thereafter. He resurfaced in 1980 as Barry Freed, an environmental activist with a surgically altered face in upstate New York leading a campaign to preserve the St. Lawrence River. He eventually served four months for the cocaine bust and continued his activism against the CIA, the War on Drugs, and similar issues. He was diagnosed with a bipolar disorder in 1980 and in 1989 he committed suicide at age 52.

Unlike Jerry, Abbie stayed true to his leftist ideals to the end. He deserves respect but had some large human failings that were exposed in his brother Jack Hoffman’s book Always Running: the Lives of Abbie Hoffman. The larger Yippie project, to influence the country’s culture and politics toward the left through mass media interventions, also deserves respect. But it is flawed as a larger strategy: it should be seen as simply one tactic among many to move the consciousness of the American public to the left. We also need serious analysis and strategy, an affiliation with the labor movement and grounding in the working class.

So I say, may the Yippie spirit carry on, as one of many emanations from a growing socialist movement in the United States. I hope the DSA will be at the center of that movement.

By: The People’s Transit Alliance

5 minute read

tw: racism, sexual assault

This past Saturday, Feb. 4th, 2023, was Transit Equity Day, “a collaborative effort of several organizations and unions to promote public transit as a civil right and a strategy to combat climate change…” organized by Labor 4 Sustainability. 

For Transit Equity Day 2023, the People’s Transit Alliance held a canvass of transit riders in Downtown Berkeley to discuss what improvements could be made to the bus system, the planned service redesign, and the importance of transit workers and riders building power together.

Labor 4 Sustainability chose Feb. 4th, Rosa Parks’ birthday, in order to honor her legacy as a civil rights icon, and her courageous action taken on a segregated bus on December 1, 1955. Those of us raised in the United States know the story of Rosa Parks, and her refusal to give up her seat to a white passenger.

What is less well known is her long history as an organizer for the NAACP, her radical politics, and her lifelong commitment to fighting white supremacy in the United States. 

The People’s Transit Alliance wishes to share this neglected side of Rosa Parks’ story. As we organize in her name, we must disrupt the whitewashed version of her life that is taught in schools, and used by politicians and corporations to maintain the very systems of oppression that she spent her life fighting against.

Rosa Louise McCauley was born on February 4, 1913 in Tuskegee, Alabama. She grew up with her maternal grandparents and mother. Her grandfather was a follower of Marcus Garvey, and taught young Parks the importance of self-defense, sitting on his porch with a shotgun when the Ku Klux Klan came into town.

She was a member of the African Methodist Episcopal Church for her entire life, where she learned a “theology of liberation that affirmed the equality of all people, laid forth a Christian responsibility to act and provided sustenance to struggle against injustice.”

Mrs. Parks first met her husband, Raymond Parks, while he worked as an organizer on the Scottsboro Boys case. Mr. Parks was a committed activist and revolutionary, who often had to hold secret meetings and avoid police, who were seeking to harass and arrest him for his activism. He and Mrs. Parks attended Communist Party meetings, and worked with other important socialist and communist organizers in the Deep South.

Mrs. Parks began working with the Montgomery NAACP in 1943, where she would soon meet E.D. Nixon. Nixon, Parks, and a small group of activists at the NAACP would lay the groundwork for the Civil Rights Movement in the decade leading up to the bus boycott. 

Parks worked as the secretary of both the Montgomery and Alabama State chapters of the NAACP, seeking justice for black women who had been raped by white men, and black men who had been wrongly accused of sexually assaulting white women.

She and Nixon represented a working class presence at the NAACP, which was often dominated by more affluent members of the black community. When the national NAACP directed local chapters to expel members with socialist or communist tendencies, Parks spoke out against the purge. The Montgomery chapter refused to carry out the resolution.

On December 1, 1955, when Mrs. Parks refused to give up her seat on a segregated bus, she was not the first to do so. Claudette Colvin, who was 15 years old at the time of her arrest, had refused to give up their seat months before Parks, as had others.

In fact, it was a case against Colvin, not Parks, that was brought before the Supreme Court and led to the decision that bus segregation was illegal.

Parks’ decision to remain in her seat was not wholly spontaneous, but a result of her growing frustration with the lack of success that negotiating with the city government had produced, as well as an intimate understanding of the consequences of taking such an action.

Often, Parks’ role in the boycott is diminished. Rather, it is seen as the moment where Martin Luther King Jr. achieved national prominence. However, this version of events ignores Parks’ work as a carpool operator, and a key member of the inner circle of organizers at the Montgomery NAACP.

Eventually, due to death threats, red baiting, an inability to find work in Montgomery, and disagreements over the direction of the Civil Rights movement, Mrs. Parks and her husband were forced to move to Detroit.

In Detroit, Mrs. Parks worked tirelessly as an organizer, particularly focused on freeing political prisoners, expanding access to reproductive rights, defending the rights of women prisoners, and defending black women who had been sexually assaulted. She was a primary organizer of the Joann Little Defense Committee.

Rosa Parks’ politics were truly radical, and clearly opposed to the goals and actions of the powerful politicians who claim to honor her legacy today. She called Malcolm X her personal political hero, and believed in the power of organized nonviolent direct action and the moral right to self-defense.

In 1973, she wrote a letter that included the statement, “The attempt to solve our racial problems nonviolently was discredited in the eyes of many by the hard core segregationists who met peaceful demonstrations with countless acts of violence and bloodshed. Time is running out for a peaceful solution. It may even be too late to save our society from total destruction.”

She was a committed supporter of the Black Power movement, showing up to support radical organizations such as The Black Panthers and working alongside the League of Revolutionary Black Workers and Republic of New Afrika in the wake of the 1967 Detroit Riots.

She was also an outspoken opponent of the Vietnam War, apartheid in South Africa, and the march towards war in the aftermath of 9/11.

To recount the entirety of her activism, organizing, and incredible life is beyond the scope of this article. Rather, our goal with this piece is to shed light on an important piece of history that is often ignored, in favor of a quiet, modest Rosa Parks.

Organizing around public transit was not her primary political project but rather one part of a broader struggle against white supremacy, patriarchy, and imperialism. On this Transit Equity Day and beyond, The People’s Transit Alliance seeks to carry Parks’ radical history into the present and imagine organizing for a better transit system as one part of a broader struggle.

When we organize transit workers and riders, we build power at a key political and economic intersection in the East Bay. We reconnect organized labor with a radical political project, and develop concrete strategies to improve the working conditions of those that operate the transit system, which in turn improves riding conditions.

Public transit serves the East Bay’s multiracial working class. It ensures that workers can get to their jobs, the grocery store, doctor’s appointments, places of worship, friends and family, and access all parts of the city.

Improving public transit alleviates the economic burden of maintaining a car, lowers the carbon emissions that deepen the climate crisis and pollute the air we breathe, improves mobility for disabled people, and provides critical access to the working poor of the East Bay.

Transit organizing is a key priority in the fight against white supremacy, the climate crisis, patriarchy, and liberation of the working class. To honor Rosa Parks on Transit Equity Day, we must remember that we are still fighting the same systems of oppression she began fighting more than 80 years ago.

Solidarity forever!

Note: For further reading about the incredible contributions of Rosa Parks to the Civil Rights Movement and beyond, please visit these links:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/12/01/how-history-got-the-rosa-parks-story-wrong/

https://archive.org/details/rebelliouslifeof0000theo_i7s2/page/n24/mode/1up?view=theater

The People’s Transit Alliance is a project of East Bay DSA, organizing for an equitable, democratically controlled transit system that serves the multiracial working class of the East Bay and beyond.

As the election for a new Nevada State Democratic Party Chair approaches, the Las Vegas chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America feels compelled to state publicly that the chapter has not endorsed any candidate. We also want to shed light on what the admittedly disappointing relationship between LVDSA and the NSDP has been like for the last two years. 

After the clean-sweep election of a slate of LVDSA members into party leadership in 2021 on the Progressive Slate, a media storm ensued, with outlets across the country lamenting or cheering the rise of socialism within a state party structure. The slate, which spun out of the Nevada for Bernie infrastructure, which had strong connections with DSA, was indeed largely elected by DSA members who also deliberately held positions on the State Central Committee and who organized an NV Dems caucus called Left Caucus (which then acquired new progressive members outside of DSA, as well).

After the Progressive Slate won the election, it was discovered that the vestiges of the famed “Reid Machine,” who held these positions prior, had seen the writing on the wall and – legally, though clearly unethically – flipped a kill switch that effectively gutted the party infrastructure, transferring hundreds of thousands of dollars out of the party coffers, giving the entire staff parachutes that allowed them to quit en masse, and leaving countless bills unpaid and files unorganized. 

Ready to be mobilized, we awaited instructions. The instructions never came. Nor, indeed, did any real communication. We openly acknowledge our part in allowing the relationship to fall flat. We deferred to the people who’d actually won these offices, naively expecting them to think of us as partners in organization and mobilization. After the election, Left Caucus also fell off in attendance and capacity; as is so often the case when a big campaign ends, all but a few major players scattered when a new project didn’t present itself. 

Initially, despite our lack of communication, we watched with pride while the NV Dems made some bold statements: one arguing for Palestinian rights that drew the national ire of politicians and pundits, one demanding clemency for Indigenous political prisoner Leonard Peltier, and more. Still, the principled statements were just statements; we saw no significant organization toward these positions, no push on legislators themselves, and no call to action for community members who wanted to see these political viewpoints moving more than just reactionary newsmen to action.

As the term went on, we saw the ostensibly-progressive coalition move more and more to the center, making administrative and political choices that were more in line with the corporatists that we pledged to beat than the grassroots organizers who pushed the initial victory. As the Ghost of the Reid Machine played dirty trick after dirty trick, the ostensibly progressive leadership oscillated between playing respectability politics and making compromises to the center. 

Decisions like ending their support for our Holiday Solidarity food distribution – an annual event that both feeds the community and once gave us a rallying point for the coalition that would elect the slate in the first place – were unfortunate, though not surprising, given the corporate media backlash that came from their promotion of the event the year before. 

As socialists, we do not think the rightward shift is a moral failing of leadership; we have seen the same thing happen over and over when socialists enter Democratic Party politics. The corrupt, corporate-fueled machine (and its aide-de-camp, the mainstream media) is a moderating force, even for the proudest leftists.

Even when leadership attempted strong reforms – for example, leadership’s national push for a formalized removal of dark money from Democratic Primary races via a DNC resolution – there was no communication, no ask of us as DSA members to mobilize our comrades around the country to lobby their local party officials; we learned about this empirically good (if futile) policy push only through the mainstream media, like everyone else.

The Party, however, took no stance when every single one of our elected State Representatives proudly voted to condemn “the horrors of socialism,” and indeed continued to do free messaging for the handful of so-called progressive Representatives who insisted that voting against socialism was necessary for passing a progressive agenda.

This is our lesson, and we hope socialists everywhere will pay close attention: the Democratic Party is a dead end. It is a “party” in name only; truly, it is simply a tangled web of dark money and mega-donors, cynical consultants, and lapdog politicians. The establishment is Lucy with the football: no matter how effectively socialists organize for power, the establishment will simply pull the football away, using dirtier and dirtier tricks. Enough falling for the tricks and even the most dedicated socialist can’t help but give up and play the ugly game. We don’t want milquetoast progressive reformist-reforms; we want socialism. We won’t get it by playing the DNC’s games, and we won’t get it by being a mildly obnoxious thorn in their side, either. Our task is to out-organize them entirely, and not merely within the confines of the voting booth.

Now re-election approaches. The former Progressive Slate’s stances do not differ significantly or materially from their opponents’, nor do their general tactics. We would note that it is unfortunate that the party chair is receiving accusations of misdeeds related to the SCC membership list. We believe that it is more likely that the establishment democrats do not understand their own processes, which made it easy for us to win elections in 2021. That said, this kind of rules-lawyering and parliamentary sleight-of-hand makes it very difficult for regular working class people to engage with politics at this level, which has always been seen as a net positive by the ruling elite.

We cannot offer this slate our organizational support, either on paper or through organized action, despite the fact that some of the slate members continue to be DSA members. We also will not be supporting the election of a lifelong corrections officer or the reinstatement of the explicitly corrupt Reid Machine. As socialists and abolitionists, we believe in something better: a politics of hope, where communities build themselves up, invest in their own democracy, and demand accountability and transparency from their community leaders, elected and unelected. We will prepare for a future where we can belong to a true worker’s party, one which is unapologetically anti-capitalist. We believe in socialism and that is the only fight we’ll be investing in.

At our 2023 Annual Convention, members voted to endorse two Priority Campaigns: a Labor RnF Strategy and a Tax the Rich Campaign.

Membership also voted for a new Steering Committee. The winners are:

• Co-Chairs: Keller S. and Kira M.
• Secretary: Eric CK.
• Treasurer: Emma D.
• Membership Organizer: Jocelyn R.
• Communications Organizer: TJ S.

Resolution and Bylaw Amendment Results

A New Approach to Organizational Structure – Passed (14-1-0)

Co-Signers: Keller S., Amber R., Mac C., Joe B.

Whereas, Syracuse DSA has undergone a change in membership engagement and committee involvement…

Whereas, the demands of Committee leadership are a significant strain on those individuals…

Whereas, several Syracuse DSA committees have dissolved or gone dormant in the last 12 months…

Whereas, there currently exists no formal mechanism for small working groups to engage in chapter work without full recognition as committees… 

Whereas, greater coordination between committees is a tangible and worthwhile goal…

Be it resolved that the Syracuse DSA Bylaws be amended to add the following language:

ADD:  Article IX, Section 5. Organizing Committee and Organizational Structure

1. The Organizing Committee (OC) of Syracuse DSA (composed of Steering Committee members and co-chairs of all chartered committees) may elect, with a simple majority, to organize chapter committees under the structure of the OC. The OC and Steering Committee (SC) will convene regular meetings in which the work of standard committee meetings takes place, for all committees that are organized under this structure. Committee members may share their work and provide updates as necessary to the entire OC in order to facilitate greater connection between committees and reduce the overall burden of scheduling for committee members. 

2. All chapter members in good standing are encouraged and welcome to attend and participate in OC meetings, and all chapter members in good standing in attendance at a given meeting will be considered voting members of the OC. 

3. The chapter Co-Chairs are responsible for convening and facilitating OC meetings but may delegate roles as needed. 

4. Regular minutes should be taken for all OC meetings, as well as for any breakout sessions that may occur. The chapter Secretary is responsible for recording minutes but may delegate responsibilities as needed. 

5. The OC may, by simply majority, empower chapter members to form Working Groups under the guidance of the OC. Working Groups must be composed of at least 2 chapter members in good standing, and may engage in organizing work similar to a full committee. Working Groups will adhere to the same duties and responsibilities of a full committee, except for leadership roles. Working Groups will not have formal or elected leadership positions and must adhere to any guidelines laid out by the OC. Working Groups should be considered temporary structures, with a goal of either disbanding at a given date or event, or converting into a full committee. Working Groups are obligated to regularly report their work and provide updates to the OC. 

Proposal to add a Labor Officer Position to the Steering Committee – Passed (15-0-0)

WHEREAS, labor organizing is fundamental to any socialist strategy to build power;

WHEREAS, because of labor organizing’s importance to all aspects of our work, it is important to institutionalize a labor focus on our Steering Committee, the most central body of our chapter;

WHEREAS, Syracuse DSA needs a purposeful, thought out labor strategy and needs leadership who can prioritize the execution of this strategy;

WHEREAS, Syracuse DSA does not and did not, for most of 2022, have a functioning labor committee;  therefore, be it

RESOLVED, that in Article V Section 1 of our bylaws the list of Steering Committee positions be edited to include a Labor Officer;

RESOLVED, that in Article V Section 5 of our bylaws the list of elected local officers be edited to include a Labor Officer;

RESOLVED, that in Article V of our bylaws a new section will be added after Section 10 which reads:

Section 11. Labor Organizer:

The Labor Organizer will be a voting member of the steering committee who will be responsible for engaging the chapter in deciding and executing a labor strategy.;

RESOLVED, that the first election for Labor Officer will be held immediately should this resolution be passed; and
RESOLVED, should this election fail to result in the election of a Labor Officer then a new election for Labor Officer will be held at the chapter’s April general meeting.

Plan a Conference of the Local Left – Passed (13-0-2)

Endorser: Brian E.

Co-endorsers: Mac C., Marianna P., Jermaine C., Jocelyn R., Emma D.

Be it resolved that the chapter will initiate the planning of a conference of the local Left to be held in the second half of 2023 or early 2024.

Be it resolved that we will initiate conversations with other local Left organizations, with an encompassing definition of the Left, including all long-term coalition partners in addition to others we might like to be in coalition with and including a variety of kinds of organizations. Conversations will determine the level of interest of each organization reached out to and solicit initial thoughts about its goals, scope, timing, length, structure and content.

Be it resolved that interested organizations will be asked about the level of involvement they will commit to, with clear expectations for each level: a) planning and coordinating, b) promoting, or c) attending.

Be it resolved that organizations that join the planning will jointly determine the overall plan for the conference and will determine what kind of content should be prioritized.

Be it resolved that Syracuse DSA will seek to strengthen mutual understanding and relationships with other conference participants, that we will foster conversations about topics that inform our work but that do not naturally arise in the course of campaigns or other current coalition work. We will seek mutual recognition of points of agreement with other Left organizations and will seek comradely understanding of points of disagreement.

Be it resolved that Syracuse DSA will seek to foster greater cooperation among local Left organizations and unorganized Leftists.

Be it resolved that all parts of Syracuse DSA, be they committees or other projects, will participate in the planning and coordination of the conference and support its success.

Resolution for An Alternative Housing Model – Passes (14-0-1)

Author: Eric CK

Co-Sponsors: Max L., TJ S.

Whereas the American housing system is built upon structures of racism and inequality, which are exacerbated by capitalism; and

Whereas our current housing system will never be able to properly address concerns of tenants and at the very best provides limited and criminally unenforced protections to said tenants; and

Whereas Syracuse’s housing stock and quality are controlled by slumlords who have no intention to properly care for or maintain property conditions; and

Whereas Syracuse has one of the highest rates of childhood lead poisoning and poverty in the United States; and 

Whereas Syracuse DSA has been an active member of the Syracuse Tenants Organizing for Power (STOP!) alongside the Syracuse Tenants Union, Party for Socialism and Liberation and members of the Communist Party and;

Now, therefore, be it resolved that Syracuse DSA recommits itself to the STOP! Coalition and building tenant power across Central New York; and

Be it further resolved that Syracuse DSA will emphasize tenant organizing by sharing STOP! trainings and events regularly with DSA membership; and 

Be it further resolved that Syracuse DSA will encourage its members to work as part of STOP! and further the coalition’s capacity for form tenant associations and further the work of the Syracuse Tenants Union (STU); and

Be it further resolved that Syracuse DSA members who are actively engaged or become actively engaged with STOP! will commit to further discussion and creation of an alternative housing model; and

Be it finally resolved that members engaged with STOP! will continue to build upon established projects, such as creating a land trust, and will work in collaboration with the other coalition members to create a sustainable and long-lasting tenant movement across Syracuse. 

Proposal to Revitalize the Labor Committee – Fails (6-6-3)

Author: Eric CK

Co-Sponsors: Emma D., TJ S., Max L., Andrew B.

Whereas labor organizing and activism have been the heartbeat of DSA and other socialist organizations; and

Whereas Syracuse is one of the most union-dense areas in the United States, having three unionized hospitals and a dozen unionized grocery stores, and strong union representation in logistics, education, and other industries; and

Whereas there has been a wave of class-struggle from the Sysco Strike, and unionization of Communication Service for the Deaf, Syracuse University Graduate Students, TCGplayer Authentication Center workers, Hamilton College student admission workers, and Starbucks baristas in Liverpool; and

Whereas several important contracts are expiring in 2023 and workers may go on strike, from UPS workers with the Teamsters and 13,000 workers at Tops Friendly Markets across Upstate NY and Northern PA  with the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW); and

Whereas Syracuse DSA’s Labor Committee has been inactive since March 2022; and

Whereas we must organize on the shop floor to transform our unions into democratic organizations capable of self organizing in conflict with the capitalist class; and

Whereas Syracuse DSA needs to create a space for union members in our chapter to come together to stand in solidarity and advance their own struggles against the boss and to transform their unions; and

Now, therefore, be it resolved, that Syracuse DSA commits to reactivating our Labor Committee to serve as the basis for supporting our labor work and recruiting individuals into ongoing labor campaigns; and forming a base for our socialist organization in the working class of Syracuse 

Be it further resolved that the Labor Committee will meet monthly in a union-business, a business or location that is unionized or in the process of unionizing, including but not limited to the Liverpool Starbucks and Tops Friendly Markets Fayetteville cafe; and

Be if further resolved that the Labor Committee will serve as a space to skill-share and provide community for workers and union-members; and

Be it further resolved that Syracuse DSA, through the Labor Committee, will assist in the strengthening of socialist aligned unions and the creation and maintenance of reform caucuses in different unions at the request of other Rank and File union members; and

Be it further resolved that Syracuse DSA and the Labor Committee will work in tandem with  reform caucuses, including but not limited to, RailRoad Workers United, Reform UFCW, Teamsters for a Democratic Union, and Unite All Workers for Democracy (UAW); and

Be it further resolved that the Labor Committee will coordinate solidarity actions with working-class individuals and union campaigns, and provide assistance with the implementation of the Rank-and-File strategy as laid out in the Labor priority resolution; and

Be it further resolved that the Labor Committee will focus on providing trainings for DSA members working in the healthcare and education sectors; and

Be it further resolved that the Labor Committee will implement the Strike Ready DSA 2023! program laid out by the National Labor Committee to aid striking workers in Syracuse, Central New York, and beyond; and

Be it further resolved that the Labor Steering Committee Officer should regularly communicate with and act on the advice of the Labor Committee. 

Be it finally resolved that the Labor Committee will involve local labor members in its work and work alongside other DSA committees to ensure that the priorities and needs of workers and union members are addressed in all of DSA’s work. 

The post Chapter Convention 2023 Results appeared first on Syracuse DSA.

Without a guarantee of healthful food to all, we will be unable to move forward or effectively organize any form of alternative to capitalism.

A special offer, for DMV socialists.

Drag is an art with deep roots in New York City’s queer communities of color that has much to offer to all people who are interested in liberating themselves from traditional and patriarchal ideas of gender. That’s part of why it’s become a target of the organized far-right both here in NYC and nationally, with public libraries and other community venues facing protests over their regularly offered drag performances and story hours. Local politicians have also experienced far-right threats for merely expressing support for drag. On tonight’s edition of Revolutions per Minute, we’re live with Drag Story Hour NYC storyteller Oliver and  organizer and parent Desiree to discuss the many aspects of drag, and how New Yorkers have come together to reject the far-right threat and show the beauty and power of queer community.  

To learn more about Drag Story Hour NYC, visit dshnyc.org. 

January 17, 2023

The Charlotte Metro Democratic Socialists of America steering committee calls on the CATS bus system contractor RATP DEV USA to accept CATS workers’ collective bargaining demands.

Over the last few months of negotiation, CATS’s contractor has been trying to push a raw deal on bus operators. The company is threatening to cut pensions, remove dependents from their health insurance coverage, and ignore bus operator’s safety concerns. After years of pandemic and inflation it’s unconscionable that an employer would threaten to stop covering medical expenses for loved ones, and pretend a raise below inflation would make up for this. 

The bus operators have voted 254-14 to strike, which may begin as early as February 6th if the company continues to ignore their workers’ concerns. This strike will undeniably inconvenience many people who depend on public transit. We are disappointed that CATS and many local media sources have framed this as the fault of the workers. The workers are going on strike to defend the benefits they currently have and win the dignity we all deserve. It’s the company’s  focus on profits over their workers that is threatening to hurt riders.
As climate change increasingly threatens society, we need to do everything we can to cut back on emissions. This includes investing in our public transportation and the workers who operate it. If we let our city and its contractor keep mistreating the workers and families that keep the buses running, we’re going to struggle to find enough workers to keep up with the transit expansions we’ll need to avoid the worst of climate change.

We stand with our bus operators and their authorization to strike. A win for them is a win for all of us. It’s a win for public transportation, a win against climate change, and most importantly, a win against capitalist exploitation.

Solidarity Forever!

Charlotte Metro Democratic Socialists of America Steering Committee

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.