On April 7, 2025, the University of Washington issued a statement informing the community that five current UW students and four recent graduates – who are still engaged with training programs at the university – have had their visas unilaterally revoked by the federal government. At this time, the university has not shared the reasons why these student visas have been revoked, but claim there is no indication that the decision is related to student activism, as has been the case for students at several other universities recently.

The university has demonstrated disdain for student activists and their recent decision to abandon prior commitments to consider divesting from the Israeli settler colonial project shows this. It is clear that this statement was issued to get ahead of any accusations that UW may be collaborating with ICE and capitulating to the federal government at the expense of student safety and inclusion of immigrants in our communities. However, the statement does not condemn the actions of the federal government, nor does it explicitly deny collaboration with immigration agencies, nor does it guarantee the university will abstain from engaging in such activities related to these or future immigration disputes. Given the gravity of current political conditions, it is a wholly inadequate statement. 

This event signals what’s to come. In the months and years ahead, we can expect to see continued repression of students, staff, and faculty, and punitive consequences for immigrants in particular. This is certain to have a chilling effect on free speech on campus, discouraging solidarity and direct action when it is needed most. We call on UW to consider reaffirming their stated values that they want to make the world a better place and that they are deeply committed to serving all their students. This is an opportunity for UW to stand up for its students’ safety and freedom of speech.

We must remind the University of Washington that it remains culpable in the vilification of students, staff, and faculty as a direct result of their Palestinian identity or solidarity. Even if the university is not actively collaborating with immigration agencies regarding the nine individuals currently facing deportation – or those who are sure to be impacted in the future – it certainly assisted in placing a target on many immigrants’ backs over the past eighteen months.

We call on the University of Washington to join other academic institutions, like Rutgers, that are taking a firm stand against the Trump administration’s attacks on academic freedom, and commit to prioritizing the safety of immigrant students, staff, and faculty by refusing to collaborate with or capitulate to federal agencies that aim to cause harm or forcibly remove immigrants from our communities. Additionally, we call on the Seattle City Council, Mayor Harrell, University Police, and the Seattle Police Department to similarly condemn the actions of the federal government and commit to refusing to collaborate with anti-immigrant federal agencies.

Let us be clear: this administration’s attacks will not end at international students, faculty, and staff. As we have witnessed the past year-and-a-half, Palestine solidarity activists immigrant and citizen alike have been doxed, dismissed from their jobs, and subject to law enforcement harassment. This administration is currently testing the limits of its capacity at state repression on marginalized communities, but it will not stop there. An attack on one is an attack on all. Only by standing together in solidarity will we defend ourselves and secure our collective liberation.

Today, our coalition of education advocates, parents, and public school employees condemns the Indiana legislature’s advancement of SB1.  SB1 contains only slightly modified language from SB518, the property tax sharing […]

The post How to Organize Memphis Midsouth DSA Style first appeared on Memphis-Midsouth DSA.

• Our Stitching Social is this Saturday April 5th at noon, at the Northside Branch Library. Bring a craft project you’re working on and chat with comrades!
• We are co-hosting a Happy Hour with Abortion Forward on Thursday, April 10th 7:30 PM at Urban Artifact! This is a great chance for our members to build relationships with pro-choice organizers in Cincinnati and across Ohio!
• Our series of Self-Defense Trainings continues this Friday April 11th at 6:00 PM! As always, we’re joined by an experienced self-defense instructor. There will additionally be a social at about 7:00 PM following the self-defense course.
• We are co-hosting a Death of Stalin movie showing with Topia Coffee Cooperative on April 12th at 6:00 PM, located as always at Topia Coffee Cooperative! This is a movie rated R, so be mindful of childrens’ attendance, but it’s a lot of fun as well! Drinks and snacks will be available for purchase, but RSVP quickly-we have a maximum capacity of 20 for this event!

---

A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right

The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man – state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

– Karl Marx

As a matter of survival, socialists need to move past models from professionally-managed organizations that focus on campaigns and trainings, and think about long-term organization building through the transformation and empowerment of members.

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now or ACORN was an Alinskyite organization that at its height in the early 2000s had something like 150,000 member families, just about all of them poor, and the majority of them Black and Latino. They boasted the ability to “activate” people in more than 700 communities across the United States. In 2009-10, as a result of a bogus scandal based on a fabricated video, ACORN collapsed in the matter of a year or so. While various chapters survived in different forms under different names, they are a shadow of what ACORN was. 

ACORN fell because it was not resilient or durable under intense pressure, not because of the scandal itself. The organization knew they had a target on their back. Attacks from the right and center were not a surprise. But because that attack undercut the leadership of a fundamentally top-down organization, the absence of member democracy made the organization easier to knock over. 

ACORN provides lessons. Many are positive, like their dedication to organizing some of the poorest workers, often in Black and brown communities. Their downfall teaches us a lot by negative example. 

Over time, ACORN’s non-ideological, very locally focused and staff-heavy community organizing relied on more and more grant funding. This meant they had to show results on a grant cycle. That consistently nudged them towards mobilizing more than organizing. To show numbers, more than to politically empower and transform members into political actors. Eventually their policy campaigns had their members acting more like public relations than political leadership. But a truly mass movement is owned by its participants. That’s why it can’t be decapitated easily. It is not one that will be prone to being co-opted by funding and institutional jobs. 

Emma Tai touches indirectly on the problem of professional campaign-focused “mobilizing” models in a recent essay in Convergence. Tai makes a broad case against “anti-politics,” and the role of “professional democratizers” — organizers with movement jobs — in building the movements we need to resist and ultimately defeat the right. Tai’s essay is a welcome contribution to the discussion on this point.  As one of the architects of Chicago’s United Working Families, Tai can fuse both theoretical understanding with deep and broad experience in local politics and organization building. 

Tai’s experience prompts her to ask a series of questions that get to the heart of what building a truly democratic movement organization means: “How many dues-paying members does an organization have? What decision-making power do they have? Do they elect their own leaders? Do they vote on a platform or political endorsements? Do they move with discipline once that vote is cast[]?” The questions about dues-paying (i.e., direct) members and their decision-making rights is of particular interest, particularly given the historical models NGOs and unions have pursued when building coalition-style movement organizations: where organizations join a coalition institutionally but have little incentive to have their own members join directly, that leaves decision-making in the hands of movement professionals or parochial leaders concerned only with the narrow interests of their own organization. This dynamic alienates members from that umbrella group, undercuts the unity of action Tai asks about, and leaves coalitions prone to infighting between leadership groups. It is why political advocacy coalitions or “networks” so rarely, if ever, amount to more than the sum of their parts.

The problem Tai is grappling with is essentially the problem of movement bosses–of the fact that “the left” generally has drifted towards undemocratic and top-down models that treat democracy with hostility. Democracy is hard, sometimes chaotic, and — crucially — sometimes binds leaders to decisions they don’t personally agree with. That phenomena isn’t unique just to just political advocacy NGOs but also pervades many of the most influential unions. The logic of NGOs has pervaded and become the logic of left organizations and that has created a strata of professionals who step in and “absorb” working class self activity at its critical moments. 

It is the problem with which many of even the most successful movement organizations and coalitions have found themselves struggling. Self-reflecting, two early leaders of the Sunrise Movement, the climate-action youth organization, talk about some of the contradictions and internal tensions that arose as a result of their structure and organizing approach. One thing that shows through is the distinction between “staff” “core” and “volunteers.” These three groupings are discussed as being at odds with each other at a few different points throughout the essay.

As the mass movements of the early and mid 20th century have faded out of living memory, “mobilization” has been treated more and more as the same as “people power.” That assumes that numbers alone are proof that a movement is “mass.” 

We know that numbers aren’t enough. “Mobilizing” large numbers of people is not equal to a movement, especially when that mobilization needs little decision-making or commitment from participants. Hundreds of millions of people vote in elections; millions of people respond to fund-raising texts from Democrats; millions fill out auto-generated emails to Congress. These individual acts accumulated do not mean a movement. 

At the same time, we know that “democracy” in the abstract is no guarantee of revolutionary, radical, or even progressive politics. European far-right parties have used referenda to stoke xenophobia and confused nationalism. “A lot of people voting” does not guarantee a progressive result. No; there is a much more challenging and interesting relationship at work.

Mass movements have to be democratic so they’re not easily knocked over. So that the mistakes or corruption of leaders can’t undermine or destroy the project. They have to be democratic to resist being co-opted. Proximity to power is intoxicating, and only an engaged and empowered membership can be the designated drivers who can snatch the keys away from distant leadership. 

Still, mass movements have to be informed and led by cadres who were themselves changed through class struggle, whether against bosses, landlords, or arms of the oppressive state. Leadership requires “mobilizing” — putting members into motion in class struggle in order to both change the world and change themselves. So mobilization  is also an essential part of the project of building a durable mass movement. 

The mobilizations we prioritize have to be democratically developed and carefully chosen. They can’t just be anything; they should come up from members’ experiences, molded with more experienced comrades, and include political education to help members understand why they are experiencing what they are experiencing and give it a broader meaning. Mobilizations should be easy to access for busy people without being empty of political content or requiring little active participation. 

That is the virtuous cycle of building a durable, democratic mass movement in organization. Putting people into strategic motion to sharpen their class consciousness analysis of the world; developing them into cadre political leadership; bringing their fellow members along with them; and so having socialist outcomes to democratic processes. This virtuous cycle contrasts with focus on campaign models that gained popularity in professional movement NGOs since the 2010-11 uprisings in the US. 

The “Momentum Model” was Made for Grant Cycles

Sunrise, like many progressive nonprofit organizations and coalitions over the last decade, has in its lineage something called the Momentum Model, an organizing “community” that developed the “Momentum Living Model,” an approach to progressive or “social movement” organizing. For a number of years this model was widely adopted. If you’ve come across “train the trainers” or “campaign in a box” style of organizing approaches, then you’re somewhat familiar with it. Momentum cites Justice Democrats, IfNotNow, and Sunrise as three of its successes. 

The model is a bit difficult to explain in plain language or concrete terms. There is a lot of organizer-speak in the formal explanation on their website, but in short, the Momentum Model seeks to fuse mass protest direct action with “structure-based organizing,” a generalized term for what is essentially Alinskyite organizing.

Mass protest is clear enough: minimal structure and leadership, appeals to the general public, and putting as many people on the streets as possible. Mass protest relies on moments of public and community outrage, combined with charismatic leadership and deployment of forms of communication, like local press, radio, church pulpits, social media networks, etc. 

Alinskyite community organizing, of which ACORN is the most successful example, is the local and issue-focused work of building small organizational “bases” in contained areas where there can be a relative advantage for a base of well-organized people. Alinskyite community organizing relies on paid organizers who develop organizational (not political) “leaders,” who in turn cultivate volunteers or activists. Staff is necessary because the work is very intensive and incremental. Small wins prove the value of the organization, which helps develop more leaders and recruit more activists etc. 

The Momentum Model “hybridizes” these two approaches into a “cycle” (this cycle isn’t quite described as being sequential): “escalation,” where people engage in mass nonviolent action (like the summer 2020 uprisings against police violence); then “absorption,” where these newly activated people are “brought into the movement,” which means directing people looking for political direction towards “asks” or simple tasks–another way to say “mobilizing.” This is a quote: “Absorption can mean new people signing an online petition, joining a mass call, or attending an orientation training.” Note the examples used. 

It goes on: “Good absorption doesn’t just move people onto a ladder of engagement — it puts them on an elevator of engagement so that the most enthusiastic new leaders can step into high levels of responsibility quickly.” It is unclear what the practical difference between a “ladder of engagement” and “elevator of engagement” is, unless it is meant to suggest that whereas a ladder requires the person climbing it to put in effort, an elevator allows people to passively move upwards. (Note, the Momentum Community website has recently become private, thus the lack of links). 

After “escalation” and “absorption” comes “active popular support,” which seems to be the articulation of specific demands on power (“defund the police”), which after being made can both “absorb” people and contribute to “escalation” into mass protest or direct action. 

Whether the Momentum Model is good, or works, is not really the point. Clearly it has been effective sometimes and less effective at other times. This isn’t a wholesale critique of that model. What is interesting for us is that the Momentum “cycle” is not a model for building a democratic, mass organization. The words “democratic” and “democracy” do not appear anywhere in the thousands of words describing the Momentum Model. 

It is a model for building campaigns. It developed in a material system where metrics and engagement are critical to getting grant funding; campaigns show good metrics through  “engagement,” (“volunteers sent one million texts”). That can certainly be effective for building an organization. The more effective your organization is (or looks) the more easily money will flow into the organization, whether from major foundations or from other types of “partners,” like large progressive unions, who see it as a viable partner on a particular issue.

But just because campaign engagement metrics impress funders and influential progressive leaders, that does not mean it will bring masses of people into it in a sustained way that will keep them engaged and committed to the organization for years. 

The Work is Important but Needs Meaning 

Obviously a political organization has to do things–it has to run campaigns, it has to show that it can be effective and win things. But winning campaigns is not the same as building a resilient and democratic organization. To the contrary, a rapid cycle of campaigns that rely on intense staff involvement and reliance on a “core” of super-activists can be a recipe for burn-out, disappointment, and, importantly, frustration with the speed of decision-making that excludes deliberative and collective decision-making. Deliberation and decision-making have to work, together with the experience of struggle in campaigns to change a person and win their loyalty for a lifetime. That forms a strong foundation that makes a movement and an organization difficult to destroy. 

Socialists shouldn’t idealize democracy or confuse “meetings” with “organizing.” But we should deeply connect the two things. Deliberative democracy and organizing activity have to be so deeply entwined with each other that they cannot be separated. Members have to, to the maximum degree possible, feel that they are the collective owners of the organization. Organizations should strive for bigness; should try to break out of the “anti-politics” of parochial localism; and should build for resiliency and durability, even when it is less exciting than a short-term win or the allure of proximity to power.

The post Break the Cycle appeared first on Midwest Socialist.

By Erica T. and Gabriel E.

Efforts by the executive board of Northwest Oregon Labor Council (NOLC) to affiliate the Portland Police Association (PPA) leave us no choice but to speak out as rank-and-file members of unions (AFT and Teamsters) affiliated to the NOLC. The Labor Council is the largest federation of local unions, which speaks to local and state politicians on behalf of labor.

As trade unionists, we see through this cynical attempt by the police to shield themselves from accountability and budget cuts. They’ve gotten used to bloated personnel and equipment budgets, absurd overtime payouts, and immunity for violent misconduct. But with four socialists elected to City Council, the police union is suddenly trying to brand itself as a “friend of workers.”

We don’t buy it.

For years, the police association stood by and watched while city workers faced and fought job cuts and Portland residents suffered diminished public services. Even now, with $60 million in cuts on the docket for community centers, parks, and roads, the Mayor’s proposed budget does not recommend any cuts to the police bureau. Why? Because police help enforce the business interests of the wealthy, business owners, and the capitalist class.

When City of Portland workers represented by LIUNA Local 483 struck in 2023, dozens of local unions turned members out to the picket line, bringing pallets of water and boxes of food. To be fair, the police did show up — to harass the picket at the wastewater treatment plant in North Portland. Nobody walking the picket line was sporting any PPA gear. The PPA is completely out of step with the values of organized labor.

What is a police “union” for?

Police unions do engage in collective bargaining, but their purpose extends far beyond negotiating their contract. In 2012, Portland Police officer Christopher Humphreys was suspended for beating to death James P. Chasse Jr., who was unarmed and suffering from mental illness. What was the PPA’s response? They fought to overturn the suspension and then marched through downtown, sporting signs that said, “I Am Chris Humphreys.”

Has the police union undergone some sort of rebirth since 2012? Absolutely not. The PPA’s own past immediate President, Brian Hunzeker, was fired after he and another officer colluded to leak false information about then Portland City Commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty to the The Oregonian and conservative political group Coalition to Save Portland, in hopes of smearing Hardesty’s character. This misconduct cost taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars in the subsequent settlements.

Their recent opposition to mild police accountability measures, including Resolution 2025–047 (a measure to clarify bias standards for the Community Police Oversight Board) is their latest effort to avoid accountability for extreme acts of violence and racial bias. This freedom from oversight is not a “privilege” any of us would expect, nor desire, in our own jobs and workplaces.

Also this year, PPA members used the legal authority of their jobs to intimidate labor-backed elected officials who publicly support police accountability. As The Oregonian recently documented, five on-duty officers — two wearing Portland Police Association-branded baseball caps — descended uninvited on Councilor Sameer Kanal’s February 2025 town hall. The officers, dispatched by North Precinct Commander Rob Simon, lingered silently amid constituents, creating a palpable tension that erupted in jeers from attendees.

Days later, Councilor Angelita Morillo encountered a similar tactic: two uniformed officers appeared unannounced at a Montavilla neighborhood event she attended, lurking at the back of the room without engaging attendees. When Morillo approached them for answers, they refused to identify the lieutenant who ordered their presence and abruptly departed.

Armed officers leveraging their union’s insignia and state-sanctioned authority to surveil critics not only violates principles of worker solidarity, but it erodes public trust in law enforcement’s role as community partners. We’re proud that Councilors Kanal and Morillo — both DSA members — did not concede to PPA intimidation.

Why the cops’ sudden interest in labor?

Labor unions are more popular than at any time in generations, but the percentage of Americans who say they have a “great deal or quite a lot of confidence in the police” is now at 48% — a twenty-year low. It’s clear why the cops want to infiltrate the labor tent. It’s equally clear that PPA’s inclusion in the labor council would be extremely divisive, based on their recent history of intimidation, bullying, and misconduct against labor-back elected officials, and actions of intimidation at the picket lines of striking workers.

In 2020, Pacific Northwest unions turned out members to support the #BlackLivesMatter movement; many local unions passed resolutions supporting the aims of the Black Live Matter movement, including accountability for police here in Portland. Up in Seattle, the local labor council voted in 2020 to eject the Seattle Police Officer’s Guild, citing the council’s commitment to dismantling racism:

“As a union movement, it’s our responsibility to fight for all forms of justice. In the Martin Luther King County Labor Council, we believe that there can be no justice without racial justice. Any union that is part of our labor council needs to be actively working to dismantle racism in their institution and society at large. Unfortunately, the Seattle Police Officer’s Guild has failed to do that work and are no longer welcome in our council.

Since the killing of George Floyd, communities of color in Seattle and around the United States have spoken loud and clear that the status quo will no longer be tolerated. We have listened to our community and responded by doing the right thing.”

As rank-and-file union members, we took our unions’ commitments to fighting racism seriously. It’s clear our comrades in other unions feel the same way. A petition backing NOLC delegates who oppose the PPA affiliation is approaching 400 signatures in less than one week; signatories are rank-and-file members of 34+ local unions from the building trades to the service sector — public workers at the City of Portland and beyond.

What’s next?

Labor Council delegates, who represent each of the affiliated locals, will vote on the PPA’s affiliation bid on April 28th. In the meantime, rank-and-file union members continue to organize to demonstrate our opposition. On April 13th at 6pm, Portland DSA Labor is hosting a Zoom event featuring author and local union member, Kristian Williams, in conversation with local union rank-and-file. Williams is the author of “Our Enemies in Blue: Police and Power in America” as well as the forthcoming book about Portland, Policing the Progressive City. We are esteemed that retired Oregon Coalition of Black Trade Unionists Secretary-Treasure Deborah Hall will facilitate the event. RSVP here for the Zoom info.

As unionists we must see every struggle as an organizing opportunity. If you are a member of NOLC, talk to your co-workers about this issue. Ask them to oppose the addition of PPA to your Labor Council. Add your name to the growing list of unionists demanding no cops in the Labor Council!

The post Portland’s police union is trying to use the labor movement to avoid budget cuts appeared first on Portland DSA.

Thorn West: Issue No. 229

State Politics

• The California State Senate has restricted press access to legislators, while in both chambers of the legislature, a large number of bills under consideration are designed to shield information from the public.

• Former Los Angeles area Congressman, Xavier Becerra, who also served as President Biden’s Health and Human Services Secretary, has joined the pool of high-profile Democratic candidates vying to be Governor Newsom’s successor in 2026.

City Politics

• Following a Los Angeles Times California Pubilc Records Request, the Mayor’s office asserted that it was not obligated to release texts sent by Mayor Karen Bass during the immediate response to the wildfires. Now, the Times is suing the city.

• Mayor Bass and a contingent of councilmembers traveled to Sacramento to request help from the state in making up what is projected to be a billion dollar budget shortfall. The city council is also proposing the creation of a citizen’s budget advisory group.

• The city council voted to expand the Fair Work Week ordinance to include fast food workers. The ordinance entitles workers to receive their work schedules 14 days in advance, in addition to other protections, and originally only applied to retail workers.

NOlympics

• An angry tirade delivered by Councilmember Tim McCosker during a council session has drawn attention to the “backroom deals” that have diverted many of the 2028 Olympics venues out of the city.

Transportation

• Earlier in the month, lawyers for Metro, the transit authority that oversees public transit across LA County, argued that Metro projects within city limits do not have to comply with Measure HLA, a citywide safe streets ballot measure. This week, Metro unveiled a redesign of Vermont Avenue that adds dedicated bus lanes, but does not include bike lanes, which would not be HLA-compliant.

• Metro is currently considering several proposals for a public transit alternative to the 405 freeway. Transit activists are advocating for underground heavy rail. This week, community meetings about the project were abruptly cancelled. A subsequent update from Metro asserts that they will be rescheduled.

Housing Rights

• The LA County Board of Supervisors has voted 4–0 to strip over $300 million from the budget of the Los Angeles Homelessness Authority (LAHSA), which administers homelessness services for both the city and county. The county will instead administer the funds through a new County-only agency. Mayor Bass and several councilmembers, including recently elected DSA-LA councilwoman Ysabel Jurado, opposed the move. LA Public Press spoke with several unhoused people about their experiences and frustrations with LAHSA. Today, the CEO of LAHSA resigned, citing the county’s decision as the motivating factor.

Environmental Justice

• CalFire has released a new draft of the fire hazard zone map for Southern California. The new map unsurprisingly expands the area in Los Angeles County zoned as hazardous.

• Dwell interviews Dr. Lucy Jones—who for years advised the city about earthquake preparedness—about climate change resiliency in Los Angeles, including what steps can be taken locally, without the support of the federal government.

The post County BOS Divests From LAHSA + Metro Refuses to Comply With Measure HLA Guidelines appeared first on The Thorn West.

The Trump administration is carrying out a historic power grab. The Republicans are trying to cut taxes for billionaires, gut public services and environmental regulations, destroy unions, and intimidate workers. To distract and divide the working class, the Trump Administration is ramping up deportations of immigrants and attacking LGBTQ+ folks, abortion rights, and racial justice […]

If you think that you would like to be a staff organizer, here are five important steps you can take.

The post 5 steps to becoming a staff organizer within your union appeared first on EWOC.