Since March 2025, Buffalo DSA has endorsed LOLA’s Communities Not Cops campaign, with overwhelming support from our general membership. As this project begins to receive the citywide attention and debate it deserves, the Buffalo DSA Steering Committee reaffirms our support of efforts to educate and agitate against a police training facility and shooting range on Paderewski Drive. We also urge all members of Buffalo DSA to follow LOLA’s calls to action re: demanding Common Councilmembers vote “NO” on the rezoning of the Paderewski Drive location, as listed on their Instagram page.

The creation of a police training facility increases the Buffalo Police Department’s capacity for targeting working-class Buffalonians through violent interventions, especially those in minority ethnic groups and within our city’s poorest communities. This is especially heinous considering Paderewski Drive was once home to a community center; we are disappointed to see the city invest in more militarized policing, rather than restoring a public civic space. This is completely counter to the just city we deserve – not just for those in the immediate neighborhood, but for working class communities citywide. We have been disappointed by the limited scope of debate around this project to this point, which suggests that only the immediate neighborhood will be impacted by this facility. We encourage comrades and neighbors to consider the larger ramifications of a police training facility of this kind.

Said limited scope of debate stems from a source actively collaborating with the Buffalo Police Department to push this project through. The Central Terminal Neighborhood Association is claiming a mandate to speak for the entire area, despite reports that opposition to the project has now spread beyond LOLA’s initial campaign, and to Broadway-Fillmore community members who have just learned about the project relative to its progress. Neighbors deserve fair representation of the project to them, rather than vague promises of a “community benefits agreement” with BPD – the details of which include only surface-level commitments toward “youth programs” in part of the facility and keeping neighborhood trees intact. We also condemn undignified smear tactics, printed or otherwise recorded publicly, that concerned citizens across Buffalo are only seeking cameras or clicks.

As the Common Council, the Buffalo Police Department, and other crucial city officials collude to advance this project via their Sep. 2 vote, we once again doubt their belief in democratic processes, and question the Central Terminal Neighborhood Association’s mandate to speak for the city on the matter.

Our chapter’s vision for demilitarized policing takes from the rich history of American socialism, notably from the legacy of American socialist Eugene V. Debs. Debs stated in 1918, after his conviction for violating the Sedition Act:

“While there is a lower class, I am in it, while there is a criminal element, I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free.”

While we cannot speak for a long-deceased comrade, Debs’ rhetoric throughout his life demanded the liberation of the working class from oppression and tyranny. To aid and abet the tyranny of modern policing is antithetical to the American socialist tradition.

By: Yash Khaleque

Theme song: Kino — Peremen

DSA National Conventions are a truly unique social phenomenon. Terminally online sickos swarm the streets of Chicago like an invasive species, sporting their red lanyards and esoteric emblems, chanting “Death, Death to the IDF” outside a fashion store turned nightclub. The Convention is a gathering of over a thousand influential organizers and thought leaders within our organization set towards the task of charting the course for the next two years. The energy of the room is excited and exuberant, ready to tackle whatever fresh hell the world has in store for us. It makes you feel like there are no obstacles the party cannot overcome, and that change is right around the corner.

Convention is a place where ideological caucuses, which are usually not impactful in day to day work, find themselves as the forefront institutions deciding the future of American socialism. They organize campaigns to lobby undecideds in their favor. Tables end up littered with the myriad literature that gets handed out. Tensions certainly rise over aggressive politicking, procedural nonsense, and decisive votes, but we often come out of the experience with greater respect and solidarity for our comrades across factional lines.

Perhaps it’s easier for victors of a political struggle to feel jovial about it. I write this as a member of the Marxist Unity Group (MUG), which accomplished nearly all of its strategic aims this year.

• The Light and Air publication continues to be unrivalled in print newsletters analyzing the previous day’s proceedings and upcoming votes. Not even the Trotskyists from Reform & Revolution (R&R) could match our paper game!
• We won 3 out of 3 National Political Committee seats we contested, and we assisted our R&R allies in scoring a seat as well.
• Won key policy votes, including the last second buzzer beater R07: “Principles of Party Building.”

The topic of Palestine featured heavily in this year’s convention, two years into the genocide in Gaza, and the proceedings were absolutely phenomenal. “A weapon is a weapon” said Rep. Rashida Tlaib at the plenary session, a clear attack against Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s vote for Iron Dome funding.

It’s been said you can differentiate between different types of communists by when they think the Russian Revolution failed. Similarly, one may identify tendencies based on when they soured on AOC. For me, it was when she voted for President Biden’s strikebreaking measures against railway workers after the 2023 derailment and environmental disaster in the prophetically named East Palestine, Ohio. This is not merely a fringe opinion — a resolution to censure AOC was agendized even before the Iron Dome incident.

While we ran out of time before this could be debated, the question of electoral discipline and renegades will be continuously prescient in our burgeoning party-like structure, especially as we assume executive office in NYC and Minneapolis in the coming months. It shows that victory alone is not enough, and that we need to understand what to do with it or else face disaster.

MUG advocates for a couple of principles on electoralism: A Strategy of Patience where we seek a majority in the legislature, or at least dominance in the streets, prior to taking executive office. We also back a Tribunes of the People model wherein electeds work to build the socialist movement as a whole rather than merely their influence in government. This means unconditionally supporting the people against injustice without making backroom deals for expedience or “pragmatism.”

The other bombshell on the topic was the passage of R22: “For a Fighting Anti-Zionist DSA,” which has been the cause of some charged discourse online. I’ll leave it to other articles to explain the mythbusting around this resolution in greater detail, but I will reiterate that it does not sanction mass purges of DSA, require un-endorsement of Zohran Mamdani, nor imply that nay voters are all Zionists. What struck me about this piece is that the failure of the 2023 version of the resolution at Convention caused the Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM) to issue an embargo against cooperation with DSA. Over the next two years, 50+ chapters representing about 40% of national membership worked to pass local versions of this to restore relations. With the culmination of this resolution as national policy, inshallah we can return to work with PYM and the rest of the movement.

What saddened me about moving to Detroit was that the metro’s status as the center of Arab American and Muslim life is not reflected in its DSA chapter. Back in Dallas, the YDSA and Students for Justice in Palestine ran thick as thieves, and the Anti-War Working Group did their all for international solidarity. In nearly a year of being in this chapter, not once have we done education on Palestine or made solidarity work a chapter priority. In the DSA 2.0 we’re inaugurating, I’m now confident we’ll find our way back to the righteous path.

And what is this new DSA? It is the internal and external recognition of DSA as its own thing and not merely a faction of liberals. Passing “Principles of Party Building” does not automatically conjure political independence and partyist structure into being. But rather it is a useful barometer for how the majority seeks to move and a benchmark for local and national bodies to meet. It must be stressed that political independence is more than whether the ballot line reads Democratic, Independent, or Socialist. It’s about whether we can formulate and execute action without reliance on state and capitalist institutions. As it stands, Detroit DSA is still dependent on the progressive blob/NGO complex for direction. We need to develop the desire to instigate against the ruling order on our own terms and learn to ditch the training wheels of the liberal coalition. This I believe is a growing conversation within the chapter that will become increasingly relevant as we head towards a national turning point in 2028.

It would not be wholly accurate to boast about a #MUGSWEEP without addressing a couple near misses that overperformed expectations in such a way that defeat actually stung. The first is R34-A01: “A Fighting Socialist Program for DSA,” an update and expansion to Workers Deserve More. The vision and objectives of the proposed program are too long to elucidate here and we recommend interested readers to refer to the Resolutions Compendium. A strong belief of mine is that the national program ought to be decided by the Convention. With the failure of this amendment, it will default to a Program Committee chosen by the NPC whose members are selected from national body leadership, general membership, and the NPC itself. What this means is that our program will be written bureaucratically and through horse trading in personnel selection. This centers politicking over actual politics. We would hope that Convention delegates would be the ones voting among a number of draft programs, but alas only MUG-R&R had the initiative to try to advance one.

A second failed item of note was CR10-A01: “A Partyist Labor Strategy.” It’s based on the idea that only an independent socialist party can provide the basis for an independent labor movement and effectively connect actions between the economic and political spheres. It’s the sense that we need a visible socialist nucleus in the unions to point out the failure and betrayal of the reformers (e.g. the Teamsters’ turn to the Republicans). A need for a partyist approach to labor was shown in the dissolution of the UAWD, a source of controversy in our chapter. As I am neither UAW nor an auto worker, I am ultimately dispositional on who’s right and wrong. But what I did find disconcerting is that DSA members were central figures on both sides of the split. An argument has been expressed that we should be free to act as we please outside of DSA. The problem with this line of thinking is that it shows outsiders the impression that DSA is an incoherent [dis]organization incapable of leadership.

More broadly, this touches on the topic of democratic centralism, a core advocacy of the authors’ vision of internal democracy. It’s best described as “diversity of thought, unity of action,” a middle ground between the “Tyranny of Structurelessness” that arises from laissez-faire governance and bureaucratic centralism, a leadership-centric “rule of experts.” It entails respect for the majoritarian decision while maintaining freedom to criticize it and organize for change. For example, many in New York spoke against endorsing Zohran for mayor, yet took action in key organizing roles anyway. Let’s work to build a culture of democratic discipline here as well.

I joined MUG right after the 2023 Convention. In high-level terms, MUG is a caucus that purports orthodox Marxism, democratic republicanism, and a practical approach to revolutionary ethos. What I found compelling about them was their grind in producing convention bulletin articles and the renowned 500-page MUG Reader, the mandatory study book for prospective members. It showed to me that this is a group that’s truly dedicated to learning from the successes and failures from the past, and that they seek to raise up quality membership rather than merely whip votes. The potency of our crew has been made evident in the ideas we’ve pushed into becoming DSA consensus: pursuit of programmatic unity (as opposed to ideological unity), the need for a democratic republic, and now partyism. Plus, our logo is super cool. And that’s what matters most, right?

DSA has come a long way since I joined it in October 2018. Gone are the days of looking towards Bernie Sanders’ next campaign as our savior. Gone are the stagnant doldrums of the Biden era. We asked for change, and we got it!

Bonus track: Utro v Tebe — Karl Marx

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

We Asked For Change And We Got It was originally published in The Detroit Socialist on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

By: Micah J.

Reflecting on the 2025 DSA National Convention, I feel profound joy, excitement, angst, and trepidation. The theme of this convention was “Party Building,” and the debates and resolutions were primarily focused on preparing ourselves and our organization — our Party, if I may be so bold to say at this point — for the next decade. When reflecting on this convention, I am likewise reflecting on the past decade of the DSA (the birth and maturing of what many call the “new” DSA) and on my own life. Writing this in August 2025, I am 27 years old, turning 28 this coming January. I reached adulthood concurrently with the DSA renaissance; my political awakening was the 2016 election, in which I voted for the first time, casting my vote for Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Primary, and then refusing to vote for Hillary Clinton in the General Election.

I am seized with the joy, hope, and confidence in a better world, in a way typical of revolutionary socialists. I am likewise quick to sink into melancholy, despair, and bitterness at the state of the world, also in a way typical of revolutionary socialists. Therefore, as I reflect on this convention, I am simultaneously filled with pride in our organization, certainty in the righteousness of our cause, and assuredness in our inevitable victory, as well as with fear of our coming struggles, of the enemies we must overcome, and the possibility that — though the working class will someday triumph — we, as in the DSA, may lose. This is a possibility that all of us must honestly reckon with, and was the fate of nearly every liberatory organization (socialist, communist, progressive, or what have you) in history. This is not to say that we should approach our struggle fatalistically, with our eyes on our own destruction, as if it were a foregone inevitability, or even a purifying self-sacrifice (a la Jesus, Johnny Silverhand, or Macbeth — pick your favorite reference). It is however something that is occupying my thoughts. The ramifications of this past convention, particularly with the resolutions that were passed, mean an inevitable heightening of contradictions, both within our organization, as well as with how our organization relates to our society as a whole. We are far stronger after this convention than we were before it, and that is the point I will try to make in this piece. But as we become stronger, so do the challenges and enemies that we will have to face.

Before I plunge forward, I must make clear my own affiliations, as I was not a neutral party at this convention. I am a member of the Marxist Unity Group (MUG), and am a fervent partisan for Orthodox Marxism. I recognize and understand the central role of the mass socialist party in the revolutionary struggle. I dream of a socialist democratic republic, first in North America and then throughout the entire world, in which the working class will have taken its rightful seat as the ruling class. And I believe that the working class, by winning the battle for democracy and becoming the ruling class, will lead humanity towards a stateless, classless, moneyless society, in which the means of production are held in common and used for the benefit of all, towards a society in which human history will truly begin: communism.

The Anti-Zionist Resolution: Reification and Honesty

The first and most clear evidence of our organization’s maturation is the passing of Resolution 22, “For a Fighting Anti-Zionist DSA.” It is difficult to put into words the joy I felt seeing the adoption of this resolution. At long last, the Democratic Socialists of America has shed the last vestiges of labor Zionism that had so plagued it through much of the late 20th century. This is both its own qualitative, self-conscious step forward, as well as a natural, necessary advancement that was, frankly, a long time coming. I do not mean to imply that anti-Zionism is not already the hegemonic position within DSA, nor do I doubt the commitment of comrades who voted against this resolution towards Palestinian liberation (1). Rather, I liken this resolution to a person soberly reflecting on their past, realizing how far they have come, and that they are not the same person that they were only a handful of years previously. Having realized this, they then create a new path forward for themselves.

As I already stated, the underlying principles of this resolution are hardly controversial. Rare is the DSA member who in 2025 would say that they support Israel’s right to defend itself, or who are under the delusion of equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, or who does not believe that the cause of Palestinian liberation is currently the nexus of the global anti-imperial struggle. Such views, though they may have been more common five years ago, or ten years ago, or certainly 20 years ago, are now rejected automatically by the newest member walking into their first meeting. What was missing was taking these principles and turning them towards programmatic ends. What does it mean for DSA to be an anti-Zionist organization? Is it enough for its members to merely chant “Free Free Palestine!”? This resolution seeks to answer that question, ensuring that DSA is firmly anti-Zionist, not just in inclination or rhetoric, but in actual practice.

Much of the content of this resolution is dedicated towards laying out groups that we must ally with, and campaigns we must join in, and the principles for future alliances, campaigns, and coalitions. These are all, to a group, chosen for their committed anti-imperialist actions and stances. The fact that these principles have been set forth, and that these groups (such as Stop Fueling Genocide, the Palestinian Youth Movement, the Palestine Solidarity Working Group’s No Appetite for Apartheid campaign, etc.) have been chosen by us to ally with, are natural consequences of the principles that all of us in DSA (and certainly all of us in Metro Detroit) hold proudly.

In light of our shared principles, we have through this resolution finally set down on paper something that we all understand and already believe: that there is absolutely no room for Zionism within DSA. Just as we will have no truck with those who say that trans liberation is a distraction from workers’ rights (as if trans rights are not workers’ rights), we will likewise not tolerate Zionism, either in behavior or in rhetoric. This resolution therefore stipulates that any member who can be shown to “have consistently and publicly opposed BDS and the Palestinian cause,” shown to be “currently affiliated with the Israeli government or any Zionist lobby,” or shown to “have knowingly provided material aid to Israel” is “thereby committing an expellable offense.” I am proud to be a member of an organization that takes such a firm, righteous stance — a stance that is a natural application of the principles of the vast majority of the national membership, and of every person within the Metro Detroit chapter.

(1) Almost every single person who thinks this way has already quit the organization, especially since the beginning of the Israeli offensive two years ago, when DSA held strong to its professed anti-Zionist stance.

Building the Party, and the Terms of our Struggle

One could say, quite honestly and accurately, that every resolution, every amendment, and every debate slot contained within it implications for what this coming “decade of party building” would be. The full scope of all of this will be elaborated in the countless reports and reflections that are even now being written. I want to home in on one particular resolution, which was, in fact, the last resolution that was debated and voted on in the entire convention — just barely squeaking in after a great deal of procedural obstruction throughout the weekend had caused massive delays in the agenda. This was the succinctly named “Principles of Party Building.” The purpose of this resolution was to go beyond implications and inferences for what the formal structure-building principles of our party may be, and states in clear, no-uncertain terms what it means for us, for DSA, to be a party in a qualified sense.

The resolution acknowledges that DSA does de facto already operate as a party, from a certain point of view. We already have a culture of political independence, we already run candidates under a DSA platform (though the explicit party line displayed on ballots still eludes us), and we are already talked about by the bourgeois press as being our own thing, distinct from all other political formations, the Democratic Party in particular. This last point especially is something that deserves its own careful appreciation. We are long past the days in which DSA and Democratic Socialists are considered a “progressive wing” of the Democratic Party, or even a fringe of the Democratic Party. Observers watching from the outside, even as the convention was ongoing, spoke of us as the center of a new type of movement. Now, to be sure, a curious liberal watching from the sidelines will have neither the understanding nor the vocabulary to describe our movement, but they can still see and feel that something is different about us.

Thus enters the “Principles of Party Building” resolution, and we have before our eyes the language that liberals lack, which we may use to describe ourselves, our Party, and our movement. In Point 1, we have the motivation for a revolutionary party program, the purpose of which would be to orient our party towards the goal of the democratic socialist republic, in which the working class holds political hegemony, acting, for the first time in American history, as the ruling class. Points 2–4 state the principles for our internal structure. We are to be a maximally democratic organization, in which decisions are made from the bottom up at general meetings, chapter conventions, and national conventions. Members shall be free to associate and group together in factions with distinct political lines, and thereby contribute constructively to the direction of our party. A diversity of views will be protected, as long as the promoters of that line are acting honestly and openly, without contradicting fundamental socialist principles, and with the understanding that after an honest debate and a vote is taken, all participants in that debate and vote will accept the results as legitimate and valid, and will be eager to carry out the decisions of the body. We most directly see this in Point 2, where we read, “Members must be able to critique the party’s program and organize to change it, as long as they are willing to accept fighting for it as the democratically-determined expression of DSA’s goals.” This is the essence of democratic centralism.

Points 5–8 state the premise and means for our operation within the current bourgeois state. We acknowledge the unfortunate reality that when running a candidate for office, we by sheer necessity will in nearly every instance be forced to run the candidate on the Democratic ballot. This is purely a tactical question, and must not be mistaken for any idea of reforming or realigning the Democratic Party. We thus are doubly compelled to build our own robust internal infrastructure and hold steadfast to our principles in order to avoid getting swallowed up in the whirlpool of the Democratic kraken. Our tactic is “party surrogate,” but always with the commitment to our own internal democracy, and with the long-term view of total opposition to the Democratic Party, the capitalist state, and all other bourgeois institutions. Properly stated, then, our formula must be “party surrogate in form, clean break in content.”

And finally, Points 9 and 10 state that though our current front of struggle is within the confines of the United States, our true fight is global, international. We are tasked to, even now, today, begin making connections and finding points of unity with comrades across the globe. We in the United States must make double — triple — sure of this, as we shoulder the burden of working within the core of the global imperialist machine. Just as the American state projects its influence throughout the globe, we must in turn form relationships and alliances with genuine socialist projects throughout the world. At convention, we heard from comrades from other nations, and in particular we received video messages from Cuba and from Jeremy Corbyn in the UK. I wept listening to the message of solidarity from our comrades to the south, in the only socialist republic in the western hemisphere, that is so cruelly kept under the boot of American imperialism. Our efforts in building solidarity with comrades in other nations must necessarily lead to the formation of a new International, through which we may struggle on every front in the global fight against capitalism. I dream of the foundation of this new International, and hope that this International will be the one that finally unites the human race.

Until the Final Conflict

And now the responsibility is ours, Motor City comrades, to take this convention, with its decisions and consequences, and march on. I will not lie to you all and withhold the fact that part of my jubilance in writing this article about this convention is because I was on the winning side of nearly all of the most consequential decisions. It is not because of any special insight or personal brilliance that I and my comrades in MUG achieved nearly all of our goals for this convention. It is rather because principled, unapologetic, proud Orthodox Marxism is the correct line. It was correct in 1871, correct in 1917, and it is correct today in 2025. Our organization, our Party, is maturing, and is therefore finding it necessary to ground itself in the proud tradition of historical Marxism. There is no shortcut on the road to power, no weird trick through which we can avoid the historical necessity of an independent mass socialist party. It is this line that I am convinced of, and because of it, I have absolute faith in DSA, and in the international working class.

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

Fear and Resolve: My Faith is in DSA was originally published in The Detroit Socialist on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Seattle Democratic Socialists of America demands the immediate release of Zahid Chaudhry, a 52-year-old decorated and disabled veteran, who was detained today by ICE during a citizenship interview in Tukwila, WA. SDSA had the privilege of getting to know Zahid and his wife, Melissa, during her campaign against U.S. Representative Adam Smith in 2024. Neither Zahid nor Melissa have been informed of the legal basis for Zahid’s detention.

We must continue to stand against the unlawful detention of our community members. Seattle DSA will always stand in solidarity with all those who have fallen victim to our ever-expanding police state. While Zahid was someone our members knew personally, we know this ongoing battle is being waged with the expectation that those with privilege will not defend strangers who are not like them. In our fight against fascist violence, our mission is to deny the Trump administration that possibility. We believe that remaining unified behind those from different backgrounds and experiences is a crucial aspect of solidarity, and we take any attack on those in our communities as an attack on all of us.

Seattle DSA strongly condemns the use of immigration detention as an ongoing tool of political repression. We encourage our members, and the community of Seattle and King County, to get involved in resisting the continued kidnapping, targeting, and detention of immigrants, regardless of criminal background. When violence facing our communities comes from our own government, it is our collective responsibility to protect each other, care for one another, and keep ourselves safe.

Our Immigrant Justice Working Group will be holding a Migrant Accompaniment Training on Sunday, August 24th, and our Palestine Solidarity Working Group will be co-hosting a picnic with Seattle Families for Palestine at Columbia Park that same day. Finally, on Sunday in Tacoma at 2pm SDSA will be joining a coalition of organizations for an Emergency Protest at the NW Detention Facility. Please be sure to check our event calendar for more details. 

ICE OUT OF KING COUNTY!

The post Statement Regarding Arrest of Zahid Chaudhry appeared first on Seattle Democratic Socialists of America.

The power of collective change begins at local elections. In the upcoming 2026 California Primary Election there are over 50 elected official seats on the ballot and DSA-VC seeks members who are interested in running for the below offices (table).

DSA-VC will be closely following the incumbent announcements, delegates, and campaigns. Look for the official DSA-VC 2026 Voter Guide in July 2026.

Are you interested in running for office or joining the DSA-VC Electoral Committee?

Send us an email here!

2026 California Primary Election Deadlines

January 22, 2026. Last day for propositions to qualify to appear on the ballot
February 9 – March 6, 2026. Declaration of Candidacy and Nomination Paper Period
March 6, 2026. Deadline for California statewide primary candidate filing
March 26, 2026. Certified List of Candidates for the June 2, 2026, Primary Election will be posted

2026 California Primary Dates – Voters

• The last day to register to vote for the June 2, 2026, Primary Election is May 18, 2026.
• All California active registered voters will receive a vote-by-mail ballot for the June 2, 2026, Primary Election.
• Your county elections office will begin mailing ballots by May 4, 2026.
• Ballot drop-off locations open on May 5, 2026.
• Vote-by-mail ballots can be returned by mail, at a drop-off location, or your county elections office.
• Vote centers open for early in-person voting in all Voter’s Choice Act counties beginning on May 23, 2026.
• Vote-by-mail ballots must be postmarked on or before Election Day and received by June 9, 2026.

Looking to become active in DSA-VC? Come help table at our county college campuses for the 2025-2026 school year.

We had an absolutely fantastic time with our comrades at the 2025 DSA National Convention! Many of our Steering Committee members were serving as delegates for their chapters so we were able to catch up in person – some of us meeting IRL for the first time!

And of course – we have news to share with you regarding the direction of DSA’s national electoral work as determined by Convention as well as updates from our Socialist Cash Takes Out Capitalist Trash fundraising project!

For the NEC, Convention kicked off with us hosting an electoral-themed social on Thursday night, where participants were invited to make buttons of their favorite nationally-endorsed DSA candidates and partook in a get-to-know-you BINGO as they mingled with our candidates and electeds. The activity prompted people to meet comrades from chapters running campaigns with national endorsement, socialize with people who serve on their chapter’s electoral working groups, and connect with comrades from a variety of chapter sizes. Participants received an NEC bucket hat!

Electoral Workshop Results

On Friday, we hosted an electoral workshop to an overflowing room of participants!

At the NEC workshop, we had attendees complete an Electoral Program Report Card where they graded their chapter’s programs according to a variety of pillars of our electoral work (endorsements, leadership development, SIO work, etc.). We got 96 responses, which provided the NEC with an unprecedented look into our chapters’ electoral programs across the country. 

The Steering Committee is pouring over the responses and will share a summary of our findings once we complete it.

Missed the workshop and want to grade your own electoral program? Check out our slides and then fill out your report card.

We also had great conversations at our table – leading to 38 applications being submitted by DSA members wishing to join the NEC. 

Electoral-Related Resolutions & Amendments Passed at Convention

This convention was a pivotal one for the future of our electoral work! Check out the following resolutions which will change the course of our electoral strategy both locally and nationally.

• NEC Consensus Resolution: This resolution sets a new course for our national and local electoral work, including running candidates on independent ballot lines, updating our national endorsement criteria, creating a national socialists in office network, and issuing best endorsement practices recommendations for locals.
• Towards Deliberative Federal Endorsements: This amendment to the consensus resolution updates our federal endorsement criteria, requiring Q&As with federal candidates and more deliberation prior to endorsement.
• Carnation Program Amendment to NEC Resolution: This amendment to the consensus resolution sets a goal of running 5 candidates for Congress in 2028 running on a platform of 5 priority issues, including ending U.S. militarism, Medicare for All, and more.
• Invest in Cadre Candidates and Political Independence: This amendment to the consensus resolution commits to prioritizing running more cadre candidates at the local level, expanding the NEC’s fundraising efforts, and increasing staff capacity to support NEC.

Next Steps

We’re very excited to begin implementing these mandates from convention, including our very own NEC Consensus Resolution. If you want to help out with this important work, please join the next all-member NEC call, or if you’re not a member apply to join the NEC!

Nationally-Endorsed Slate Fundraising at Convention

National Convention was the perfect opportunity to do some fundraising for our slate of candidates! Through the QR code at the table and promotion from Chanpreet during convention, we were able to get 104 donations during convention – 54 of which were first-time donors!

Since the start of convention, we have raised an additional $6,029.94 for our slate candidates (currently Denzel McCampbell, Jake Ephros, Joel Brooks, Kelsea Bond, and Willie Burnley Jr.) on top of the $61,659.32 we had already raised so far this year!

Thank you to everyone who attended the National Electoral Commission’s events! We hope to see you at our upcoming all-member meeting so we can get to work on implementing the mandates from convention.

Shout-out to Cleveland DSA and Snohomish County DSA for allowing us to borrow your button makers. And thank you to Nick W for your button production run prior to convention!

– Your National Electoral Commission Steering Committee

On August 23rd, Bernie Sanders will be hosting a “town hall” event with Rebecca Cooke, candidate in the 2026 Democratic Party 3rd Congressional District election, near Viroqua. This follows his June 19th endorsement of her. We, the Executive Committee of the Coulee Region chapter (CDSA) of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), denounce this endorsement and campaign event and urge Senator Sanders to withdraw this endorsement.

Senator Sanders has been a principled socialist for his entire life, and has been a leader and inspiration for millions of progressives and socialists for decades. This made his endorsement of Rebecca Cooke extremely shocking. Rebecca Cooke is no socialist, or even a progressive. She refuses to endorse Medicare For All. In 2024, she was “grateful” to be endorsed by the genocide-apologist organization Democratic Majority For Israel.¹ In June of this year, she was a featured speaker at “WelcomeFest”, a convention of the anti-progressive wing of the Democratic Party, sharing the billing with genocide-apologists and neoliberals.² In the struggle between progressives and reactionaries within the opposition to the current fascist regime, she has declared on which side she places herself- it’s not with us, and it shouldn’t be with Bernie Sanders.

There are two other candidates in this primary, namely Laura Benjamin and Emily Berge, who would make far more sense for Senator Sanders to endorse. Both have endorsed Medicare For All. Both have better stances on Palestine. Laura Benjamin is a member of DSA, is committed to socialist principles, and is a fiery public speaker. Emily Berge is firmly in the La Follette Progressive tradition and has years of experience in local elected office.

For these reasons, in the spirit of socialist comradeship, the Coulee Region chapter of Democratic Socialists Of America urges Bernie Sanders to withdraw his endorsement of Rebecca Cooke.

COULEE DSA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE & CHIPPEWA VALLEY DSA OC, AUGUST 19^th, 2025

Coulee Democratic Socialists Of America can be found at https://coulee.dsawi.org/, on Facebook, on Instagram, and by emailing couleedsa@gmail.com. Chippewa Valley DSA can be reached at chippewavalleydsa@gmail.com

1“DMFI PAC announces new endorsements in Arizona, New York, & Wisconsin” https://dmfipac.org/news-updates/press-release/dmfi-pac-announces-new-endorsements-in-arizona-new-york-wisconsin/

2“I Just Got Back From the Centrist Rally. It Was Weird as Hell.” https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/welcomefest-dispatch-centrism-abundance/

The post Bernie Sanders Endorsement of Rebecca Cooke A Betrayal of Socialist Movement first appeared on Coulee DSA.

Ten years ago, the Illinois General Assembly passed a ridiculous law signaling unconditional political support for Israel. Now we have an opportunity to repeal it.

Former Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner, a Republican and private equity investor who held the position from 2015 to 2019, was a political failure on his own terms. Once he got into office, he made it clear to the Democrat-controlled legislature that he would not sign any budget unless it was passed alongside the regressive “reforms” that constituted his Turnaround Agenda for Illinois. The legislature did not budge and as a result Illinois went more than two years without a budget. Rauner tried to take everyone in the state hostage, and he did a lot of harm trying to make the Illinois regulatory environment more like Republican-dominated Wisconsin. Today, he is remembered as a bush-league do-nothing who couldn’t get his agenda through Springfield.

But there was one thing that Rauner and the Democratic majority did agree on: that people should face consequences if they have the wrong opinion about Israel. In 2015, the General Assembly unanimously passed legislation that prevented the state from investing public pension funds in any company that participated in the Boycott, Divest, and Sanctions (BDS) movement. BDS is a non-violent campaign to economically pressure Israel into adopting policies that would respect the rights and dignity of Palestinians. It functions similar to the boycott movement against apartheid South Africa in the late 20th century, encouraging consumers to spend their money ethically and pressuring businesses to divest from a country that systematically violates human rights.

Rauner drinks chocolate milk to celebrate the concept of diversity during Black History Month, February 2018.

In opposition to BDS, pro-Israel lobbying groups have convinced a super majority of state legislatures across the country to pass laws that impose a variety of legal consequences on individuals and organizations that participate in the boycott against Israel. The version that Rauner signed, which was among the first of its kind, created the Illinois Investment Policy Board. The law gave the board the authority to withdraw Illinois pension funds from any company that participates in a campaign to “penalize, inflict economic harm on, or otherwise limit commercial relations with the State of Israel or companies based in the State of Israel or in territories controlled by the State of Israel”. Essentially, any company that refuses to do business with Israeli companies or the Israeli government can lose investment from the state’s pension board, regardless of why or how they are choosing to sever their relationship.

There has never been a better time to get rid of this law. It does absolutely nothing to benefit Illinoisans, and it punishes constitutionally protected opposition to blatantly illegal actions taken by Israel. The law does nothing to fight anti-Semitism; in fact, it makes it worse. The law seeks to make support of Israel non-negotiable, and that position is firmly out of line with the wishes of a majority of Democratic voters across the country. As efforts to finally repeal the law escalate,  people of conscience have an opportunity to bring state law into line with the will of Illinois voters.

What the law does, and why it’s extremist.

For the uninitiated, most state and municipal employees in America are enrolled in a defined benefit pension retirement plan. These pensions pay out a set amount determined by a formula to retired public workers each month over the course of their lives, effectively acting as a 401(k) with a guaranteed payout. To ensure these benefits are funded, employees and the state government contribute money to a pool that is invested in the private sector. The returns on these investments are used to help pay for pension obligations. This model benefits everyone: Springfield uses the stability of a pension to attract workers that might otherwise pursue for-profit careers, retirees have a guaranteed source of income after they stop working, and companies receive extra investment that can help them grow. It is also very common for governments to form oversight boards to manage their pension investments. This ensures that the funds are stewarding public resources well, and they prevent state money from being invested in firms that actively harm the public interest. In Illinois, Springfield has passed laws that prohibit investment in companies that “shelter migrant children” (i.e., participate in Donald Trump’s nightmarish mass deportation plans) and companies based in a few countries that have been sanctioned by the federal government.

They also prevent the fund from investing in companies that refuse to do business in Israel. This already makes Illinois’ anti-BDS law unique compared to the other similar laws in the state; there are no other countries that companies are punished for not investing in. The law is very clearly meant to disincentivize firms from considering a boycott by excluding them from receiving any of the money that state pension funds invest in the private sector.

The law does not differentiate between motives. If a company decides to stop doing business with Israel because its board is dominated by avowed anti-Semites, then it is ineligible to receive any pension investment funds from Illinois. But what if a firm’s leadership divests because they agree with Amnesty International’s conclusion that the country is practicing apartheid? Or because they believe that what the IDF is doing in Gaza constitutes genocide? Or because the Israeli government regularly treats minorities who live in Israel as second-class or non-citizens? Or because they are disturbed by the number of Americans killed by the Israeli military or Israeli militias? Or because they are horrified by the Israeli refusal to allow food, baby formula, and medical aid to enter Gaza, resulting in mass starvation? The Illinois General Assembly made no distinctions between these reasons when it passed the state’s anti-BDS law, so the Illinois Investment Policy Board is forced to consider these motivations equally worth divestment.

This is already extreme, but the truly ridiculous part is that the law also punishes companies for boycotting illegal Israeli occupations of foreign territories. Since the conclusion of the Six-Day War in 1967, the Israeli government has encouraged its citizens to cross the border into Palestinian territory and establish ‘settlements’ there. These self-described ‘settlers’ retain their Israeli citizenship, can vote in Israeli elections, are protected by the Israeli military, and live their lives under Israeli law. Their Palestinian neighbors who live in these areas do not enjoy any of those rights. Many of them are denied self-representation and live under martial law imposed by a government they have no say in. Palestinian families in the area are regularly dispossessed and attacked by settlers. In fact, it is widely acknowledged that the Israeli government is using settlement as part of a strategy to prevent the creation of a Palestinian state, giving Israel an excuse to indefinitely control the region without having to offer Palestinians any sort of rights or sovereignty. Just this month, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich unveiled a new settlement plan that he claimed would “bury the idea of a Palestinian state”.

Illinois prohibits investment in any company that refuses to do business in these settlements, despite the fact that they are illegal under international law and that they exist to deny the two-state solution that most American politicians claim to support. 

Embarrassingly enough, the most well-known invocation of this anti-BDS law was used to punish a company for violating this portion of the statute. In 2021, the ice cream company Ben & Jerry’s (whose founders are both Jewish) announced that it would no longer sell their products in the West Bank because of the illegality of the settlements. The company also clarified that they did not support BDS as an organization. Ben & Jerry’s products would continue to be sold in Israel proper, and the company’s founders identified themselves as supporters of the country. This decision prompted the Illinois Investment Policy Board to pull any pension funds that were invested with the brand’s parent company, Unilever. Effectively, an ice cream company decided not to do business outside of Israel while continuing to do business in Israel. As a result, the State of Illinois declared it would blacklist the company and all of the firms they were associated with.

This law grants symbolic and unconditional support to Israel, including implicit support for policies that many people in the state consider to be criminal and in opposition to U.S. interests. Even if you think it’s appropriate for Illinois to engage in these kinds of sweeping foreign policy commitments, this is the wrong one to make.

The law doesn’t fight anti-Semitism

One common argument in favor of anti-BDS laws is that they are a protection against bigotry or an environment that encourages it. Rauner’s initial statement after the state’s law was signed in 2015 proclaimed that Illinois was standing up against anti-Semitism by distancing the state from boycotts. Other organizations like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) have taken the stance that BDS itself isn’t inherently anti-Semitic, but that it creates an atmosphere where engaging in anti-Semitism is more acceptable.

There is nothing about this law that actively combats anti-Semitism. It does nothing to address the enormous 900% increase in anti-Semitic incidents across the country in the last ten years, and it does nothing to discourage hateful rhetoric. It is simply a way to punish businesses for taking a moral stance against genocide or for responding to consumer demands to do the same. These kinds of laws are also an attack on the right to free speech and free association guaranteed under the U.S. constitution, and their legality is dubious at best.

There’s no actual prohibition against supporting bigotry written into the law. It punishes companies that boycott Israel, but there are plenty of disgusting people in business who say and do anti-Semitic things that wouldn’t lose out on the opportunity for state investment. Right-wing businessman and extremist provocateur Elon Musk is a perfect example. 

Not a bit from The Producers, somehow.

Regardless of whether you think Elon Musk throwing up a Nazi salute in January 2025 was an intentional expression of anti-Jewish hatred, he has a long history of embracing the kind of vile rhetoric most people would instantly recognize as anti-Semitic. Musk has indicated that he believes Jewish Americans are part of an anti-white conspiracy to flood the country with “hordes of minorities”. Under his direction, Twitter/X changed its moderation rules to allow a surge in anti-Semitic posts that have caused advertisers to flee en masse. The AI chatbot that his company built for the website has called itself MechaHitler and often launches into unprovoked rants about people with Jewish-sounding last names. Musk has received so much backlash that he’s felt the need to do damage control by visiting Auschwitz and making a PR trip to Israel alongside Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Despite Musk’s repeated anti-Semitic comments and behavior, he hasn’t ruled out doing business with Israel, so Springfield is technically allowed to invest pension funds in his companies. The purpose of this law cannot be fighting the spread of anti-Semitism if it allows for Illinois to engage in a financial partnership with someone like this. Its only logical purpose is to shield the Israeli government from criticism.

Finally, it’s worth considering whether this kind of law could actually increase anti-Semitism. The State of Illinois has (wrongfully) declared to the world that it views an entire ethno-religious group to be inseparable from another country halfway across the world. They have also declared that there is no acceptable way to criticize that country, even as it engages in a genocide that most people (rightfully) find morally reprehensible. The potential effects of this kind of rhetoric were neatly summed up by New York Times journalist Ezra Klein on his podcast a few months ago:

I am a Jewish person…it is very important that it is possible and understood to be possible that you can be anti-Zionist without being anti-Semitic…you just have to be able to be against what the Israeli state has become and not be anti-Semitic. I think it is an incredibly dangerous game that pro-Zionist people have played trying to conflate those things. Because if you tell people enough that to oppose Israel is to be anti-Semitic at some point they’re going to say “Well, I guess I’m anti-Semitic”.

If Klein is right about this, our state’s anti-BDS law could be creating social permission for more conspiracy-minded people to slip into open bigotry. Is that worth risking to preserve a law that doesn’t do anything to fight anti-Semitism?

The biggest obstacles to repeal are elected officials, not voters.

All of these criticisms were true ten years ago, but it mattered very little at the time because supporting Israel has been a bipartisan project in American politics for decades. The real reason that it is an opportune moment to repeal the law is that there has been a seismic shift in how the electorate views Israel. 

Since the Israeli government launched their brutal response to the October 7th attacks, we have seen poll after poll after poll after poll showing that Americans view Israel more negatively than ever before. This is true across party affiliation, but it is especially true among Democrats. Now that Joe Biden has not been in a position to excuse Israel’s behavior and Trump is using the issue to justify illegal, politically motivated deportations, a clear majority of Democratic voters has come to sympathize more with the Palestinian cause than with the Israeli state.

There is an enormous gap between how party elites and voters think about this issue, and most Democratic politicians have yet to catch up to their base. Illinois has been no exception. Only one of the candidates running to replace retiring Senator Dick Durbin, Representative Robin Kelly, has indicated a willingness to pursue an arms embargo against Israel, and the vast majority of the Illinois congressional delegation in the U.S. House of Representatives has consistently refused to substantively criticize the government’s Israel policy. At the state level, only a minority of Democratic legislators have signaled their support for legislation to repeal the anti-BDS law.

This is disheartening regardless of whether politicians are deeply ideologically committed to what Israel represents or whether they have just decided to avoid challenging powerful interest groups. But there are signs that this gap between party elites and their voters nationwide could start to close. In New York City, home to more Jews than any other city in America, outspoken critic of Israel Zohran Mamdani handily won the Democratic nomination for mayor with a plurality of the Jewish vote, in part because of his views on Palestine. Over half of Senate Democrats recently voted to oppose some military aid to Israel, including both Senators Durbin and Duckworth of Illinois. Some Democrats in Congress have even started to call for the U.S. to recognize a Palestinian state. Just as crucially, it does not appear that Israel’s right-wing government has any plans to end their illegal invasion and blockade of Gaza, making the issue more pressing than ever.

It is possible to get Democratic politicians to adopt the positions their base holds under these conditions, even if it’s for entirely cynical reasons. A repeal of our state’s anti-BDS law would not just be popular, it could set the stage for even more policy changes on the national level, especially as Democratic candidates begin to position themselves for a presidential run in 2028. 

With this in mind, Illinois-based groups that have committed themselves to changing our country’s relationship with Israel like Chicago DSA should consider joining the Illinois Coalition for Human Rights as supporting organizations, and should come up with local campaigns to lobby their state officials. The ones that are planning to endorse candidates for state-level office should also take advantage of the upcoming March primaries to ask fresh faces to sign on as a condition for their support.

Like-minded individuals should also make an effort to tell their representatives this is an important issue to them by sending them messages like this one. They should consider getting involved with organizations like Jewish Voice for Peace Chicago, CAIR Action Illinois, and IfNotNow Chicago that have already signed on to stay engaged with the repeal campaign.

To steal a turn of phrase from the infamous American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), supporting Palestine is “good policy and good politics” within the Democratic Party. The only question now is whether we can get our elected officials to wake up to that reality while we have the momentum.

The post Now is the Time to Repeal Illinois’ Extremist Pro-Israel Law appeared first on Midwest Socialist.