Bosses and workers take on average 400 days to negotiate new contracts. The organizing challenge is significant, so how do you win?

The post How do I win a first contract? appeared first on EWOC.

by Mackenzie F

Throughout this harsh winter, we have watched the rising tide of fascism surge across our country, with trans communities squarely in its crosshairs. Kansas has revoked gender-affirming IDs with no grace period, clinics nationwide are shuttering their doors, and a myriad of anti-trans executive orders are being challenged in court. In Ohio, Republicans are working to dismantle bodily autonomy despite Issue 1 passing in 2023, and they continue to attack transgender people for simply existing in public life. Undeterred by these threats, Cleveland DSA holds the line on trans rights, maintaining our commitment to protecting the trans community.

Over the last year, we turned commitment into action.

By canvassing the city of Lakewood for weeks, building relationships with Lakewood City Council, and collaborating closely with community allies, we secured the passage of our Gender Freedom Policy. Cleveland DSA dedicated significant time and effort to developing this legislation, ensuring that it provides robust protections from law enforcement overreach for transgender and gender-nonconforming people within Lakewood, all without costing taxpayers a dime. 

Cleveland Heights and Lakewood have shown what is possible for the rest of Northeast Ohio, and other cities are taking notice. But the rest of this story is yet to be written. To win real safety for our trans neighbors, we must continue to build a strong, organized socialist movement in Cleveland. It is critical that Cleveland adopts our Gender Freedom Policy, not only to protect its own residents, but to send a powerful message: Ohio stands with the trans community.

Learn more about the Cleveland
Gender Freedom Policy here!

Cleveland DSA recognizes the power of collective action, which is why we are calling on all of our local allies to join the fight alongside us. From the AIDS crisis to every subsequent wave of government overreach, history has shown that our community survives only when we act together. This moment is no different. Pillars of our community like the LGBT Center, TransOhio, and Equality Ohio must stand in solidarity now more than ever.

The safety and dignity of our transgender neighbors rests on our shoulders. If you share our commitment to protecting this community, we urge you to take action. The legislation is written, and relationship-building with Cleveland City Council is already underway. But in order to move forward, we must gather at least 5,000 signatures from registered voters in Cleveland. While this may be no small task, we acknowledge that justice does not arrive by chance. It is built, block by block, by those who refuse to stay silent.

The state targets trans people not by mistake, but to divide us, to remind us that some lives matter more than others. We reject that logic. Trans liberation is not secondary to our movement; it is central to it. Because a world worth building is one where no one is left to struggle alone. So as the sun returns, warming both the land and our spirits, we invite you to join us in this crucial fight.

Here’s what you can do:

• Meet with one of our organizers to help collect signatures
• Attend one of our project meetings
• Contact your Cleveland City Council representative
• Talk to your loved ones
• If you haven’t already, join DSA. Join the fight.

We will not rest until we have shattered the chains that bind every one of us. Solidarity forever!

The post Trans Rights: We Will Not Rest! Sign the Gender Freedom Policy in Cleveland! appeared first on Democratic Socialists of America.

Previous entries — Part One, Introduction; Part Two, Electoral Politics; Part Three, Labor

As we learn from the successful organizing of the SPA, we must also acknowledge the SPA’s greatest failure. At the same time reactionary tendencies dominated the AFL, bigotry also had a far too common place in the socialist movement. Many prominent SPA members held racist and misogynistic viewpoints, and the membership of the organization (predominantly white and male) reflected this. While it is accurate that socialist politicians and the party’s position tended to be more emancipatory than other political organizations of the time, the lack of a strong anti-racist and feminist culture significantly weakened it.

While many women did join the party and played crucial roles as socialist organizers, the organization never reached anywhere near gender parity, with few women in leadership positions. This occurred despite an effort by the party to take a role in the movement for women’s rights. In 1908, the SPA endorsed the women’s suffrage movement and hired a full-time staffer dedicated to the cause.  Ruthenberg himself once argued that there was “no more important cause” than bringing women into the party.  But the demographic imbalance persisted. This situation was described by Cleveland local member Nellie Zell in her article “The Lone Woman in the Local”:

“The first thing that greets her is that same capitalist mind of these Socialist men who have invited her to come. . . . Indeed, it is a very embarrassing position for both men and women. They want her there, yet now that she is there, they don’t know what to do with her. To make the matter worse, they talk about things of which she has no knowledge, and to smoke or not to smoke is the burden on their minds, while she is wondering whether she had better talk or preserve that lady-like silence so much admired by members of the old parties… I wonder if you men fully realize what that word ‘Comrade’ means to us women?”

Put simply, the party was failing to present a comradely attitude towards women who were interested in socialism. Within a broader US social culture that discouraged women from being active and vocal politically, this resulted in a failure to recruit significant numbers of women into the SPA.

The SPA did not embrace anti-racism in the 1910s in the same way it did the suffrage movement. Many locals in the South operated under segregation, and several prominent socialist leaders were open white supremacists. The Ohio Socialist Party adopted a position in 1911 of encouraging the recruitment of Black members, but there was a failure to explicitly condemn racial oppression, rather than just class oppression of Black workers. This changed over time, as discussed in Eric Blanc’s article which focuses primarily on SPA congressman Victor Berger’s shift from holding openly racist views to being praised by the NAACP.  However, this tolerance of racism was an incredibly significant failure of the organization for the duration of the 1910s, when it was most politically relevant.

On the other hand, we can take some positive examples from the SPA’s national and linguistic diversity. Cleveland was a cosmopolitan city,  and the Cleveland local represented this well, including German, Bohemian, Polish, Jewish, Finnish, Hungarian, Lettish, Lithuanian, Slovak and Italian branches.. Nationally, there were similar language-based federations, with both posing an interesting question of internal governance. These groups represented a significant portion of party membership on paper, but in practice operated very autonomously. Some SPA members, like Ruthenberg, advocated for more centralization of the language federations, bringing them closer in line with the organizing of the party as a whole. Others advocated for the autonomous model as an effective way to organize immigrant communities. Ultimately, it is clear that the party’s diversity among European immigrant groups was a strength enabled through providing spaces for socialists of the same identity to coordinate. With the language federation’s tendency to effectively act as internal factions, Ruthenberg’s push towards centralization is understandable, although such practices should be accompanied with a clear understanding that solidarity, not assimilation, is the answer to xenophobic attitudes.

In many regards, DSA has come a long way from the open displays of bigotry and predominantly white male membership of the SPA. However, there is still much to be learned from their failure to stand with the oppressed – which is both a moral disgrace and a political weakness. With a membership and mass reach beyond DSA’s today, one can imagine how much stronger the SPA would have been had it built a membership that represented the broader working class. To avoid replicating this, DSA members should heed comrade Zell’s words. Even with the SPA supporting women’s suffrage, it did not create an environment conducive for women to organize. It is easy for a chapter’s demographics to self-perpetuate, as new members do not feel welcome in a space that does not look like them or their communities. In order to change this, we need consistent and proactive effort throughout all organizing projects, and structured ways for marginalized comrades to coordinate. To do otherwise will only serve to cement Cleveland DSA’s current place – as a predominantly white organization in a multiracial city.

Please return tomorrow for Part Five: Conclusion: The SPA’s Rise and Fall

The post History of Cleveland SPA Part Four: Diversity in the SPA appeared first on Democratic Socialists of America.

by R.K. Upadhya

The American Civil War is a key moment of US history. If you grew up in the US, you almost certainly spent a good chunk of time in grade school learning about the Civil War. It is also likely the case that this education was boring and unengaging. This is a tragedy, for in fact the Civil War era had profoundly radical and revolutionary dimensions, and should be a source of education and inspiration for the modern Left and the US socialist movement. Case in point: after Abraham Lincoln’s re-election victory in 1864, Karl Marx himself helped pen a letter of congratulations to Lincoln, celebrating the Union cause as a universal interest of the working class, and encouraged him toward complete victory over the Southern slavers. It is not often that we think of Marx and Lincoln as being contemporaneous – but they were, and while it is unknown if Lincoln actually read Marx’s letter, it is likely that Lincoln read at least some of Marx’s many articles in the New York Daily Tribune.

The Civil War was the culmination of the abolitionist movement, which emerged out of free Black communities of the North, and the slave revolts which rocked the South in the 1830s. And the abolitionist movement is where the US Left was truly born; it was in this fiery struggle against slavery that many of the ideas we hold dear today – anti-racism, democracy, anti-imperialism, and anti-capitalism – went mainstream and became a permanent part of American politics. There is a grand history for how this happened, with many moving parts. But one fascinating thread is the way in which the abolitionist movement in the US was connected with the emerging revolutionary socialist movement in Europe. Abolitionism being the birthplace of the American Left wasn’t just a matter of converging values, but based on a direct exchange of ideas and militants between the US and Europe – and in particular, the cohorts of revolutionary German exiles who immigrated to America in the 1850s.

Historical Context

The abolitionist movement started in earnest in the 1830s, after Nat Turner’s Rebellion in 1831, which galvanized free Black communities across the North and put an end to any doubts that enslaved people were happy with their lot in life. Over the course of the next few decades, it grew dramatically in popularity, organization, and militancy; its electoral expression was the Republican Party, founded in 1854, while its more revolutionary tendency was expressed via the likes of John Brown, Harriet Tubman, and other insurgent figures. By the 1850s, the question of slavery was the defining political issue in the US, fostering an intense amount of political and civil unrest.

At the same time, Europe was also undergoing convulsions. In parallel to the growth of the abolitionist movement in the US, the revolutionary socialist movement was growing, and founding figures like Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels were coming into the spotlight. The tremors finally erupted into an earthquake in 1848, when a wave of uprisings and revolutions shook the foundations of Europe, particularly in Germany. Workers, peasants, and other parts of a “revolutionary citizenry” assaulted and overthrew centers of monarchical and feudal power. Marx and Engels wrote and published The Communist Manifesto during this tumult; Engels himself was in the streets as a revolutionary soldier.

Unfortunately, the revolution in Germany gets crushed, and millions of Germans escape to Western Europe and beyond, fleeing harsh counter-revolutionary reprisals as well as general economic ruin. Many of these refugees and exiles end up in the United States; about one million Germans emigrated to America in the 1850s. And among this number, roughly 4,000 were hardcore revolutionaries, socialists and communists, organizers and militants, in addition to tens of thousands more supporters, followers, and sympathizers. This cohort was known as the “Forty Eighters”, exiles of the 1848 Revolution. And once in the US, the Forty Eighters immediately bolstered the ranks of an increasingly revolutionary abolitionist movement. This was a natural alliance; the nature of the Southern slaver elites was an uncanny mirror image of the tyrannical aristocrats that they had attempted to overthrow at home. And for the abolitionist movement, these veterans brought military experience, organizational discipline, and expansive ideas about liberty, labor, and capitalism, which coupled well with the parallel works of the leading abolitionist intellectuals.

Colonel Weydemeyer and General Willich

Two figures in particular represent the radical edge of the Forty Eighter abolitionists: Joseph Weydemeyer and August Willich. Both of these men were German communists and revolutionaries, who eventually ended up as high-ranking military officers in the Union Army.

The initial trajectories of the two men were similar. Both were Prussian military officers in the 1840s, who became radicalized by Marx’s writings about capitalism, class, and revolution. They rebelled in 1848 on the side of the Revolution, and fled west when the revolution was crushed. They made personal acquaintance with Karl Marx in London, and joined the Communist League and helped further develop revolutionary socialist politics in Europe. After a few years, both men emigrated to the United States, where they planted themselves among fellow Forty Eighters and made a living via political organizing and radical intellectual writings. And when the Civil War began, they enlisted along with large numbers of fellow Germans, and quickly rose up the ranks due to their previous military experience and their political fervour.

Compared to Willich, Weydemeyer was more of an intellectual type. He was a friend of Marx and Engels; in fact, it was Marx who directly suggested to Weydemeyer that he emigrate to New York City. Once there, he quickly got to work in left-wing journalism and organizing, joining a growing cohort of revolutionary Marxist voices that joined the abolitionist movement. He was a co-founder of what was arguably the first socialist organization in the United States, the American Workers League (which, despite its broad name, was almost entirely an organization of radical German immigrants). This group would later become the New York Communist Club.

When the Civil War began, Weydemeyer enlisted and quickly ended up as a technical aide to General Fremont, an abolitionist and a radical rival to Abraham Lincoln. Within a year, Weydemeyer was a Lieutenant Colonel and in charge of a volunteer artillery regiment. Later on in the war, he served as a Colonel of the 41st Missouri Infantry Regiment. Amusingly, throughout his active duty service, Weydemeyer kept up his intellectual pursuits, exchanging letters with Marx and Engels about the war, writing opinion pieces for local newspapers near his posts, and engaging in local debates. In 1864, when Marx helped found the International Workingmen’s Association (a.k.a., the First International), Weydemeyer printed out copies of the inaugural address and passed it out to his men (it is unclear how many of these Missouri infantrymen subsequently joined the cause of international communism).

After the war, Weydemeyer remained in politics, winning an election for the St. Louis County auditor. He ran the office as a Marxist, using his powers to strengthen tax laws and chase down war profiteers. Unfortunately, his tenure was short-lived; Weydemeyer passed away in August 1866 from cholera.

August Willich led a similarly colorful life, albeit one more oriented around military affairs.

An excellent book on his entire life, only a tiny fraction of which can be discussed here, is Radical Warrior: August Willich’s Journey From German Revolutionary to Union General.

Like Joseph Weydemeyer, Willich also knew Marx & Engels; indeed, Engels was Willich’s right-hand man during several battles in the final stages of the 1848 Revolution. But unlike Weydemeyer, Willich did not like Marx at all. Willich led the left-wing faction of the Communist League, and thought Marx was too conservative and was not eager enough to wage revolutionary struggle; for his part, Marx was not impressed by Willich’s intellectual standing. There may have also been some more personal animosity at play; Willich apparently was quite interested in Marx’s wife, Jenny, and would regularly come visit her at their home in London and engage her in long conversations about theory and politics. As Jenny Marx described, “He would come to visit me because he wanted to pursue the worm that lies in every marriage and coax it out.” It’s not clear if Willich ever coaxed out the worm; within a few years, he emigrated to the United States, engaged in radical writing, and organized among other German immigrants and Forty Eighters in the midwest.

When the Civil War began, Willich played an important role in recruiting fellow Germans into the military; he would become a Colonel, and then a General in command of an all-German infantry unit, the 32nd Indiana Infantry Regiment. Willich and his men quickly distinguished himself on the battlefield, helping win one of the few Union victories in 1861 at the Battle of Rowlett Station in Kentucky. This battle saw about 500 German infantrymen defeat over 1,000 Texas Rangers and assorted Confederate infantry. This battle is also commemorated in what is the oldest surviving Civil War monument, the Bloedner Monument, which was carved by a member of the regiment a couple of weeks after the battle. It’s a remarkable piece of history, since it’s likely that this battle is mentioned in many Civil War textbooks – but the radical historical context, that this victory was one of a revolutionary communist veteran and other revolutionary exiles, is papered over or ignored.

Willich and the 32nd would go on to fight in other major Civil War battles, including the 1862 Battle of Shiloh, the 1863 Siege of Chattanooga, and General Sherman’s “March to the Sea” in 1864. After the war, just like Weydemeyer, Willich went into government service and was elected as a county auditor in Ohio. In his later years, he went into academia. August Willich passed away in 1878.

Forty Eighters in Texas

The legacy of the Forty Eighters is also present right here in central Texas, where many Germans settled in the 1850s. San Antonio and the Hill Country were particularly popular – a legacy that still continues today, with cities like New Braunfels and Fredericksburg remaining centers of German culture, as well as smaller towns like Boerne and Comfort. Despite being in a southern slave state, just like their brethren in the midwest and the north-east, German immigrants to Texas were generally anti-slavery and pro-Union. In 1854, Germans in San Antonio caused a major political firestorm when they held a convention and passed a resolution condemning slavery. In 1861, during the Referendum on Secession, the counties with the most Germans tended to vote against secession.

As the war progressed, repression against Unionists escalated, with Germans being a major target. In 1862, the Confederacy passed a conscription law to mandate military service, which provoked German Texans Unionists to escalate into armed resistance – which in turn, brought martial law across the Hill Country and waves of violent reprisals. The struggle culminated in August 1862, when a band of Germans gathered up arms and attempted to escape to Mexico. Unfortunately, the Confederates caught wind and chased them down, eventually cornering them on the banks of the Nueces River, and defeating them after a pitched battle. Despite being right at the border, the German Unionist rebels were captured, and 34 executed on the spot. The dead were buried at a cemetery in Comfort, Texas, where after the war a monument was erected – the Treue der Union Monument, or, the “Loyalty to the Union” Monument – to honor them and the pro-Union beliefs that they died for. This monument remains in Comfort to this day.

Conclusion

These stories – of German Texan rebels, communist commanders, and the surprise emergence of Marxism in antebellum America – should make us recognize the importance of tracing back our own political lineage to this period. It was the abolitionist movement that established a long and unbroken legacy of socialist politics and struggle in the United States. Abolitionists went on into different movements after the war, expanding the struggle into labor organizing, civil rights, anti-imperialism, and feminism. After the abolitionist movement, came Radical Reconstruction; veterans of that went on into the Knights of Labor, and then the Industrial Workers of the World; then emerged the Socialist Party and the Communist Party, the Civil Rights Movement and the Black Panther Party, and so on. We should look at abolitionists as our own political ancestors, and with the connection to radical German immigrants, appreciate that revolutionary socialist politics has been in this country for a very long time.

And to draw a final parallel to then and now: the Civil War didn’t start out of nowhere. It was preceded by years of civil unrest, violence around elections, and collapsing legal boundaries. And one dynamic in particular, was the escalation of violence in the 1850s by federal agents against Northerners. After the 1850 Fugitive Slave Act, federal agents and southern bounty hunters and slave catchers had free legal reign to indiscriminately hunt down Black people to kidnap and enslave. This enraged public opinion across the North and galvanized abolitionists and their allies, who organized Vigilance Committees to track and disrupt federal operations, preventing arrests, staging jailbreaks, and engaging in pitched battle against the feds.

And it is a remarkable parallel today, when we have federal troops engaging in indiscriminate violence with impunity, hunting down immigrants, assaulting and murdering protestors, kidnaping people and whisking them off into a growing network of concentration camps. And in response, just like over 150 years ago, people are organizing and mobilizing, forming rapid response networks, tracking and disrupting federal operations. It is a beautiful thing, and shows how our political ancestors can echo through us today, even without our conscious knowledge. The struggle has been going on for a long time; and if there is to be another civil war, let us make sure we finish it for good this time around.

The post Between Marx and Lincoln: German Communists in the American Civil War first appeared on Red Fault.

Previous entries — Part One: Introduction; Part Two: Electoral Politics

There were two different approaches to “the labor question” in the 1910s SPA. The first approach was to work within the existing unions. In the early 20th century, the dominant AFL was composed of trade unions representing workers with specific skills, did not stand up for broader working class interests, and was bigoted and exclusionary towards racial minorities and women. Many socialists sought to confront the AFL leadership and push unions in a different direction. This included Clevelander Max Hayes, who would at one point win close to a third of the vote in the AFL leadership race, and is now commemorated in a namesake West Side high school. 

Others sought to follow the path of dual unionism, which was advocated by the SLP, and organized on a mass scale following the founding of the International Workers of the World (IWW) in 1905. Wobblies, as IWW members were at times known, favored industrial unions, which represented sectors or workplaces, rather than workers with specific skills. This advocacy for industrial unionism was shared by others in the SPA (including some in the AFL), but was not reflected within the party’s platform for most of the 1910s.

Labor organizing was another topic where Ruthenberg demonstrated a commitment to unity, despite the bitter divides among SPA members. As his biographer stated, “his primary interest was in labor’s struggle, whether led by a craft union or industrial union.” This principle of solidarity came to the forefront as worker organizing escalated. In 1911, Cleveland saw the historic International Ladies’ Garment Workers Union strike, with thousands of workers participating. In his mayoral campaign of that year, Ruthenberg argued that the power of the state should be wielded in favor of the workers through the swearing in “a hundred of the coolest heads among the strikers” as special police. Three years later, Cleveland teachers organized a union, working in solidarity with a group of mothers from the school districts. Ruthenberg again supported this organizing, which was ultimately derailed by the administration’s firing of pro-union teachers. This repression of worker organizing was upheld by a frequent enemy of workers – District Judge David Westenhaver, who effectively delayed the unionization of Cleveland teachers until 1934. The same year, Ohio miners were locked out of their workplace following the passage of a new labor law, which the mine owners hoped to appeal as unconstitutional. In response, Ruthenberg called on the Ohio Socialist Party to push for immediate state ownership and worker operation of the coal mines. Later on, Ruthenberg would unionize his own white-collar workplace, and lead mass rallies of workers including IWW and AFL members.

The unity practiced by Ruthenberg and the Cleveland local is admirable, and carried on within DSA’s labor organizing approach today. While there are still contentious debates to be had within DSA regarding our approach to labor organizing, the disagreement is over narrower territory.  This is largely a reaction to the changes in the labor movement within the past century, shifting predominantly towards industrial unions which are much more willing to embrace the entire working class. This has eliminated a considerable portion of the impetus for dual unionism. Instead, DSA labor work now focuses on organizing new workplaces into unions, and bringing existing unions towards a more militant posture and political unity with our aims. As we undertake this work, as I am honored to do as Cleveland DSA’s elected Union Liaison, we should strive for the same levels of mass organizing as the SPA, bringing thousands of workers towards a socialist vision.

Please return tomorrow for Part Four: Diversity in the SPA

The post History of the Cleveland SPA, Part Three: Labor appeared first on Democratic Socialists of America.

Before we start, we’re asking everyone to write to your elected officials to support H.794 and S.282. Tell them that you want to tax the rich for healthcare and schools!

GREEN MOUNTAIN DSA MONTH IN REVIEW

February was a month of incredible momentum for Green Mountain DSA, bookended by electoral victory and direct action. We are thrilled to open this newsletter by congratulating our endorsed Burlington City Council candidate, Marek Broderick, on their decisive Town Meeting Day win! Marek defeated a Democratic opponent with a strong tally of 301 to 187, securing a second term representing Ward 8. In the weeks leading up to the vote, our members made phone calls and knocked doors (again and again) across the entire ward to ensure voters had a plan. We are proud to stand behind a proven champion for renters, UVM students, and working-class Burlingtonians. Marek's leadership in passing a resolution to address deteriorating student housing is just one example of the socialist leadership we are building in Chittenden County.

At our February General Membership Meeting in Montpelier, members discussed our growing chapter-wide priority campaign, "Tax the Rich," supporting H.794 and S.282—legislation championed by our own State Senator Tanya Vyhovsky and Rep. Kate Logan that would generate hundreds of millions in revenue by making the wealthiest Vermonters pay their fair share. Green Mountain DSA organized a press conference at the State House in February and coverage by WCAX features Rep. Kate Logan detailing just how much working Vermonters stand to win by taxing the rich. The February General Membership Meeting also featured updates on our Palestine solidarity work (“No Appetite for Apartheid” campaign), and local ballot initiatives (“Proposition Zero” in Burlington). Alongside these campaigns, our chapter is deepening its foundation by launching weekly Saturday-Sunday socials to build comradeship and expanding our reach to southern counties through our “Statewide Expansion Working Group”. From electoral wins to anti-war action in coalition, your Green Mountain DSA is proving that another Vermont—one centered on working-class power and solidarity—is not only possible, but already being built. In solidarity, and see you at a meeting, social, or on the streets some time soon!

WE’RE BUILDING A FAMILY-FRIENDLY GMDSA

Green Mountain Democratic Socialists of America is working towards making our organization more accessible to parents and guardians. You can help us by letting us know if you would benefit from childcare being offered at our general meetings.

Please fill out our Childcare Needs Survey: https://forms.gle/6Mq1KHWGrc3QgLGv8 

GREEN MOUNTAIN DSA MEETINGS AND EVENTS

Our Labor Committee meets on the second Monday of every month at 6:00pm on Zoom, including Monday March 9th. 

  Our Electoral Committee will meet on Tuesday March 10. The electoral committee meets at 6:00pm on Zoom. 

🌹The next May Day Coalition meeting is Tuesday March 10 at 6:00pm at Migrant Justice (179 S. Winooski Ave., Burlington) and on Zoom. 

Talk about your job and learn about shop-floor organizing from peers at Workers' Circle (co-hosted with the Green Mountain IWW) on the second and fourth Wednesdays of each month, including Wednesday March 11 at 6:00pm at Migrant Justice (179 S. Winooski Ave., Burlington).

💰Our Tax the Rich Working Group will meet on every Sunday, including March 15 at 6:00pm on Zoom..

Find out how you can help our Membership Committee improve recruitment and involvement in our chapter on Monday, March 16. The Membership Committee meets on the 3rd Monday of every month at 6:00pm on Zoom. 

GMDSA's East and West branches will come together for another general meeting on Saturday March 21 at 11:30 a.m. at TBD (Most likely the Public Library in South Burlington). Newcomers are encouraged to show up at 10:30 a.m. for an optional “DSA 101” orientation. Everyone is welcome to join for coffee hour with snacks and discussion at 11:00 a.m. prior to the start of the general meeting.

🇵🇸 Our Palestine Solidarity Committee will meet on Monday March 23. The Palestine solidarity committee meets on the 4th Monday of every month at 6:00pm on Zoom. 

📱Our Communications Committee will meet on Monday March 23. The communications committee meets on the 4th Monday of every month at 7:00pm on Zoom. 

📑 Our Steering Committee meets on the first Monday of every month at 7:30pm on Zoom, including Monday April 6. All members are welcome to participate in the meeting discussion, only members of the steering committee can vote. We will have a hybrid meeting this month. We will be meeting at the Queen City Lodge Oddfellows Hall. The address is 1416 North Ave in Burlington. Email hello@greenmountaindsa.org for the Zoom link if you would prefer to join online

Add our Google Calendar 📅 - Check out our website 🌐

IMPORTANT DATES THIS YEAR

• International Workers’ Day: May 1, 2026

• 2026 Labor Notes Conference: June 12-14

• Vermont Primary Election: August 11, 2026

• Labor Day: September 7, 2026

• General Election: November 3, 2026

• Next GMDSA Convention: November 2026

• Next DSA National Convention: August 2027

We’re living in interesting times, comrade.

As I write, we are witnessing the opening salvos of what will likely develop into a major war of aggression by the US and Israel against Iran. The imperialist order is in decline across the globe. But, that also means the capitalist class that benefits from that order has never been more desperate — or more dangerous.

It’s clearer than ever that we have two choices: socialism or barbarism. We can have a world defined by peace, justice, and a dignified life for all people, or we can have a world defined by endless war, oppression, and suffering for all but an ever-shrinking circle of elites. It can feel hopeless sometimes, but that’s when we need to remember: there’s a power at the core of this monstrous machine. The force that keeps the wheels of this machine turning is our labor.

Our hands are on the switch, and we can turn off the war machine any time we choose. We just need to have enough hands pulling in unison.

The DSA is now more than 100,000 members strong, spread across all 50 states. We’re the largest socialist organization in US history by membership. And, our ranks are still growing fast.

Read on to see what we’ve been up to… and learn what’s coming next!

February Highlights

We started off the month with members braving the cold to kickoff the canvassing efforts to re-elect PDSA member Richie Floyd to St. Pete City Council. This is a critical project of our Electoral Committee, and although it’s only been a couple of weeks, we’re already well on the way to collecting enough petition signatures to secure Richie’s spot on the ballot (rather than buying ballot access, as most candidates do).

The Ecosocialist Working Group continued to advance our ongoing Dump Duke campaign, with organizers facing off against a representative from Duke Energy’s dark-money front group, to argue the merits of public power.

Our Education-Social Working Group hosted Capitalism vs. Socialism, the latest installment of our core training on the basics of organizing with DSA. In the session, which attracted nearly three dozen attendees (pretty good for a Friday night!), organizers explained why we believe that socialism is a superior system to capitalism, and how a socialist society compares to our existing capitalist one. And, our International Solidarity Working Group stayed busy, too, hosting a demonstration at the Chevron station on Sunset Point Road in Clearwater to protest Chevron’s complicity in the genocide in Gaza as part of the ongoing #StopFuelingGenocide campaign.

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: Re-Elect Richie Floyd

Our campaign to re-elect Richie Floyd to the St. Petersburg City Council is shifting into high gear!

Since launching the campaign last month, DSA members have doggedly showed up, weekend after weekend, braving both the cold and the heat to knock doors in District 8. While the campaign could simply buy ballot access, as most elected officials do, the members of our chapter agreed to take the same approach as we did with Richie’s first election campaign, doing it the grassroots way and collecting petition signatures to gain a spot on the ballot instead.

After just one month, we’ve already collected more than half of the 500 signatures needed! As of right now, the campaign is in good shape. But, we need to keep up the energy and get those signatures. This is a people-powered campaign, so let’s show the members of the capitalist class here in St. Pete what the people can do!

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: End 287(g)

Pinellas DSA, as a member organization of the Tampa Bay Immigrant Solidarity Network, hosted a public volunteer meeting on Saturday, February 21 at WonderWorks in Gulfport. Much like neighboring St. Petersburg, the Gulfport Police Department has signed a 287(g) agreement with ICE, volunteering their officers to work as deputized enforcers for the spear of the US regime’s fascist immigration policy. Our ongoing campaign aims to pressure local police departments in Pinellas County to end these agreements and to refuse to collaborate with ICE.

Following a presentation on local 287(g) agreements — including how they undermine public trust in law enforcement, drain public resources, fuel racial profiling, and erode due process — attendees went out to canvass neighborhoods across Gulfport, raise awareness about 287(g), and invite community members to sign petitions calling for an end to the city’s collaboration with ICE.

Our demand of local government officials is simple: No collaboration with fascism! No ICE in our streets!

CAMPAIGN UPDATE: Dump Duke

DSA members spearheading the Dump Duke campaign continue to pressure St. Pete officials to explore the feasibility of creating a publicly owned power utility in the city. We’re up against mounting resistance from dark-money groups funded by Duke Energy, including the Clearwater Energy Alliance and the St. Pete Energy Alliance. But, even with all the money Duke is throwing against us, we’ve got the people on our side!

Organizers with Dump Duke faced off against a representative from the Clearwater Energy Alliance as part the “Opposites Attract” debate series at Bayboro Brewing on February 9. We laid out a clear, practical case for public power — a publicly-owned municipal utility that puts reliability, affordability, and accountability ahead of corporate profit.

Dump Duke organizers also hit the streets at the Mezzo Market, speaking to St. Pete residents, asking their feelings about Duke Energy, and getting the word out that an alternative option is a real possibility!

If you haven’t already, make sure you sign the petition calling on city officials to fund a feasibility study on public power, and to begin negotiations with Duke Energy to end St. Pete’s relationship with the company. Also, if you’re interested in helping build support for public power, go to dumpdukefl.com to learn how you can get involved!

Upcoming Events

We have more than two dozen political events, working group meetings, and social outings scheduled in March. You can always view our full calendar of upcoming events, along with the most up-to-date times and locations, on our website: https://www.pinellasdsa.org/home.

Health Justice Working Group Meeting

Monday, March 2 from 7:00–8:30pm at Allendale United Methodist Church (3803 Haines Rd N. in St. Petersburg). Meeting will be hosted in Wesley Room & virtually via Zoom.

Housing Working Group & St. Pete Tenants Joint Meeting

Tuesday, March 3 from 7:00–8:30pm at Allendale United Methodist Church (3803 Haines Rd N. in St. Petersburg). Discuss and take action on the housing crisis in St. Pete at this joint meeting between the St. Pete Tenants Union and Pinellas DSA.

Socialists in Office Working Group Meeting

Wednesday, March 4 from 6:30–8:00pm at Allendale UMC.

Run DSA: Glow in the Park 5k

Thursday, March 5 from 6:30–8:00pm at Allendale UMC. Join us in the Hybrid room for a basic training on protest marshalling.

Canvas for Richie Floyd

Saturday, March 7 from 10:30am–1:30pm at Gladden Park Recreation Center (3901 30th Ave N. in St. Petersburg). RSVP at richiefloyd.com/volunteer-rsvp.

Self-Managed Abortion Canvass

Saturday, March 7 from 2:30–4:00pm at the President Barack Obama Main Library (3745 9th Ave N. in St. Petersburg).

General Meeting & Social

Sunday, March 8 from 2:00–3:30pm at Allendale United Methodist Church (3803 Haines Rd N. in St. Petersburg). To be followed immediately after by the Socialist Social Hour, with food and (non-alcoholic) drinks provided!

International Solidary Working Group Meeting

Monday, March 9·from 6:30–8:00pm. This will be a virtual-only meeting. Zoom Link.

Book Study: Health Justice Now!

Tuesday, March 10 from 6:15–8:00pm at Allendale UMC. Join us to read and discuss Timothy Faust’s Health Justice Now: Single Payer and What Comes Next. We will be meet in-person in the Hybrid Room and via Zoom.

Bylaws Meeting

Wednesday, March 11 from 6:30–8:00pm. At Allendale UMC, in the Teresa Room.

Cuba: An American History Reading Group

Thursday, March 12 from 6:30–7:30pm at Allendale UMC. Meet us in the Wesley Room for our final discussion of Cuba: An American History.

North County Meeting & Social

Friday, March 13 from 6:30–9:30pm. Location TBD.

Canvas for Richie Floyd

Saturday, March 14 from 10:30am–1:30pm. Location TBD. RSVP at richiefloyd.com/volunteer-rsvp.

Safe Self-Managed Abortion Info Session

Sunday, March 15 from 11:00am-12:00pm at the President Barack Obama Main Library in St. Pete.

Boca Ciega Apartments Canvassing

Sunday, March 15 from 1:00–2:00pm. Canvass the Boca Ciega Apartments (3401 37th St S. in St. Petersburg) to inform and encourage tenants to attend a tenants meeting, where they can tackle the issues facing their property together!

Steering Committee Meeting

Sunday, March 15 from 7:00–8:30pm at Allendale UMC.

Fundraising Committee Meeting

Monday, March 16 from 6:30–8:00pm. Our chapter’s monthly fundraising check-in and brainstorming session at Allendale United Methodist Church (3803 Haines Rd N. in St. Petersburg). Will be hosted in the Hybrid Room, as well as virtually. Zoom link.

Electoral Committee Meeting

Wednesday, March 18 from 6:30–8:30pm. To be hosted at Allendale UMC in the Wesley Room.

Ecosocialist Working Group Meeting

Thursday, March 19 from 6:30–8:00pm. Hosted at Allendale UMC in the Hybrid Room.

Labor Committee Meeting

Friday, March 20 from 6:30–8:00pm at the Pinellas Classroom Teachers Association offices (650 Seminole Blvd. in Largo).

Canvas for Richie Floyd

Saturday, March 21 from 10:30am–1:30pm. Location TBD. RSVP at richiefloyd.com/volunteer-rsvp.

Dump Duke Social & Canvass

Sunday, March 22 from 10:30am-2:00pm at Dell Holmes Park (2741 22nd St S. in St. Petersburg).

International Solidarity Working Group Meeting

Monday, March 23 from 6:30–8:00pm. Meeting at Allendale UMC in the Hybrid Room.

Canvas for Richie Floyd

Saturday, March 28 21 from 10:30am–1:30pm. Location TBD, but RSVP at richiefloyd.com/volunteer-rsvp.

Pinellas DSA Orientation

Saturday, March 28 from 2:30–4:00pm. New member orientation hosted at Allendale UMC in the Hybrid Room.

DSA Nature Walk

Sunday, March 29 from 10:30am-12:00pm. All this organizing can wear you out — refresh and recharge with comrades on a nature walk at Sawgrass Lake Park (7400 25th St N. in St. Petersburg)!

NOTE: All dates and times are subject to change, so check the website regularly for updates!

STATEMENT ON DSA-LA’S ENDORSEMENT FOR MAYOR

Two left candidates who are DSA-LA members are now challenging Mayor Karen Bass in her re-election campaign: Councilmember Nithya Raman and Reverend Rae Huang. This has raised questions about DSA-LA’s endorsement for Mayor.

As with all major decisions for our local chapter, political candidate endorsements are driven and democratically decided by DSA-LA members.

Our endorsements require thorough discussion and debate because an endorsement from DSA-LA is not just another logo on a campaign mailer. When our members vote to endorse a candidate, it comes with a serious commitment of resources and time. We have a detailed and robust process for ensuring that any campaign we endorse is also building our movement.

At this time, DSA-LA has not endorsed anyone for Mayor in 2026, and any future endorsements will only be considered if motivated by a petition and approved if voted on by the chapter’s membership.

Should a mayoral candidate receive DSA-LA’s endorsement, we will throw the full weight of our power behind their campaign. For now, we are focusing that power on our already-endorsed candidates that make up the Shake Up City Hall slate—Marissa Roy for City Attorney, Rocio Rivas for LAUSD School Board, and Hugo Soto-Martinez, Eunisses Hernandez, Faizah Malik, and Estuardo Mazariegos for City Council.

Our Shake Up City Hall slate is made up of renters, immigrants, union members, and devoted DSA-LA members who are going to fight against ICE, the fascist Trump administration, bad bosses, and billionaires. That’s why we endorsed them. Winning these six races—the most we’ve ever endorsed in one election cycle—will be a monumental achievement toward building a Los Angeles for the working class. Sign up to get involved at shakeup.la.

-2026 DSA-LA Steering Committee

Years ago–during Trump’s first term–I listened as clergy colleagues addressed a committee of the Minnesota legislature in a hearing to determine how the state would respond to Trump’s harsh anti-immigrant policies. One pastor’s testimony was simply a recital of biblical passages concerning love of neighbor and care for the immigrant. Because she was allotted only five minutes, she couldn’t finish the long list of such verses.

Today, even Capitol Hill journalists have caught on that the religious chest-pounding from some in this regime stands in sharp contrast with the rising chorus of defiant activists reciting biblical verses. Earlier in February, one journalist asked the Speaker of the House to address the difference, and Mike Johnson leaped at the chance, declaring that “borders and laws are biblical.” 

What Are Walls for?

Johnson’s statement is true, of course. It’s been a go-to talking point on the religious Right ever since the first Trump administration, when some evangelical scholars rushed to defend cruel and inhumane border policies by stolidly observing that “biblical cities had walls.” 

In fact, as responsible biblical scholars can attest, the most prominent archaeological remains of “biblical” walls today are their massive gate complexes. “City gates in ancient Israel (ca. 1200–586 BCE) were fortified, multi-chambered structures serving as the primary hub for civic, judicial, and economic life. . .”

In other words, one of the primary functions of “biblical walls” and their gates was to open a city, responsibly, to the world around it, as people gathered in and moved through those gates to connect with one another. 

But Johnson’s obsession with “borders” seems to have some other focus: naked partisan ambition, perhaps. Let me stipulate that a morally responsible case can be made for open borders (just a few examples here), but no one on “the Left” is advocating letting violent men swarm into U.S. cities and rampage through neighborhoods, in violation of fundamental Constitutional rights.  That’s official DHS policy you’re thinking of. 

It bears note—again—that according to the DHS’s own records, only a tiny percentage of the people seized off the streets or out of their homes,  thrown into concentration camps, or deported are actually violent criminals—a smaller percentage than in the U.S. population generally.

Love Thy Neighbor—or Not

In contrast, Mike Johnson considers just one passage, Leviticus 19:34, supporting care for the immigrant. He sniffed that “whether [radical Leftists] know it or not, that passage happens to be from the instructions Moses delivered to the Israelites when they were on their journey through the wilderness in Sinai, before they reached their own Promised Land.” 

He apparently means that because that verse occurs before anything like a bordered Israelite state has been established, it can’t be taken seriously as relevant for actual nations today. 

“CONTEXT,” he declared in all caps, “IS CRITICAL.”

If that statement had appeared in an undergraduate’s paper, I would have circled it in red, written “exactly right!” in the margin—and then asked why context mattered not at all in the rest of his exposition. 

Come to think of it, let me take off my tweed jacket, roll up my sleeves, and spend some time with this argument.

. . . 

So, Mike—may I call you Mike? —you go on to explain that verses like that one, or the “Greatest Commandment” of love of neighbor, were “never directed to the government, but to INDIVIDUAL believers.” Somehow you think that lets you, and the masked brutes prowling U.S. cities, off the hook.

Actually, you might pay closer attention to the verse you just quoted, from the King James translation (of course). Note that in its archaic, 16th-century English, the verse interweaves the singular thou and the plural you: “But the stranger that dwelleth with you [plural] shall be unto you [plural] as one born among you [plural], and thou [singular] shalt love him as thyself [singular].” Note, too, that the command continues, as so often in the Torah, with a reason: “for ye [plural] were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your [plural] God.” 

It’s hard, then, to follow your insistence that this command is addressed only to the “individual.” The “thou” here is called on as a member of a people, and called to identify with a collective experience that should draw them into empathy and solidarity with the “stranger in their midst.” 

You’re right, of course, Mike, that this command doesn’t refer to the borders of a nation. In fact, all of the narrative of the Torah takes place before any of “the congregation of the children of Israel” enter the “promised land.” 

That’s really the point. The Torah reads as God’s formation of a people, independent of their dwelling within specific geographical borders. Yes, later in the story (in Numbers 34) God stipulates just what will be the bounds of the land that the people Israel will occupy. But even later, in Deuteronomy 17, God warns the people that if—in envy of the nations around them—they set a king over themselves, they will be courting danger. Not surprisingly, that’s what happens, and the text warns in anticipation that the establishment of the nation’s borders will take place only later, after the people, who are the Lord’s focus here, have taken what the Lord describes as the wrong direction. 

Even later (Deut. 28), Moses issues a lengthy warning to the people (in the future indicative, Mike, which means the warning also functions as a prophecy of what will happen). The people will turn away from the Lord and, in punishment, “the Lord will bring a nation from far away, from the end of the earth, to swoop down on you like an eagle.” That cruel foreign invader will destroy the nation and disperse its people. Those appear to be retrospective references to the Assyrian conquest in the eighth century B.C.E., which allows scholars to date the main body of Deuteronomy. 

The climax of the book, toward which one could argue the whole of the Torah has been driving, is the solemn, countervailing promise that Moses gives to the assembled people (chapter 30): if—later, after their dispersal “to the ends of the world”—they will turn again in obedience, the Lord “will bring you back . . . into the land that your ancestors possessed” (30:4-5). 

Attentive readers will note some anachronism there. Moses seems to be speaking “over the heads” of the throng assembled before him on the plains of Moab, to address a later generation, living after the Babylonian Exile (sixth century B.C.E.), when the (relatively) more civilized Persian emperor Cyrus the Great allowed exiles to return to Jerusalem. Modern biblical scholarship recognizes the anachronism and recognizes its role in the wider cultural context (there’s that word again) of the ancient near east: a later generation addresses their own situation by revitalizing older tradition and attributing the result to an ancient lawgiver. 

It’s clear from the books of Ezra and Nehemiah that the Torah was made “the law of the land” under Cyrus’s direction. Serious biblical scholars recognize that, discussing the relationship of “Persia and Torah” and describing the final Torah as “the literature of colonial Yehud,” a phrase first popularized by the late, great Norman K. Gottwald. 

At this point, Mike, I’ll admit I don’t seriously expect you to follow this argument, because it’s so uncongenial to your commitments. You are what any contemporary Bible scholar would recognize as a literalist, probably a Fundamentalist, and not a curious one at that. We recognize your type in the classroom pretty early in a semester. You’re not really a student: you’re a provocateur, and no one is going to change your mind.

I hope I’ve not gone too far into the biblical-scholarship weeds. I just want to point out that there is a world of actual study of the Bible in its historical context, which for some of us really is critical. That means recognizing that the final form of the Torah didn’t fall from heaven into Moses’s hands; that it was created centuries later, in solemn retrospect, by people who were trying to discern the divine will in the course of their own history. It wasn’t written to speak to people living on some other continent two and a half millennia later, though centuries of white Christian Protestants have insisted that they are precisely the Bible’s long-awaited subjects. 

More directly to the point of your concern, Mike, the Torah doesn’t imagine that any people can be kept holy through strict border controls. Holiness is a matter of doing right by their neighbors—which is why the single command you discuss appears as part of what scholars call the “holiness code” in the book of Leviticus.

This is a good place to observe that the ways any of us reads the Bible always say more about us than about the Bible. You presume that the Bible provides the blueprint for a white Christian America, to which everyone else must “assimilate”—a line that received an appropriate response from Stephen Colbert. 

You present your neat division of labor as the master-key to interpreting the Bible. “The Bible,” you write, “teaches that God ordained and created four distinct spheres of authority—(1) the individual, (2) the family, (3) the church, and (4) civil government—and each of these spheres is given different responsibilities.” All that “love of neighbor” stuff in the Bible, so popular on the “progressive Left,” applies, you insist, only to the “INDIVIDUAL” (sic); in contrast, you write, “the CIVIL GOVERNMENT is established to faithfully uphold and enforce the law so that order can be maintained in this fallen world, crime can be kept at bay, and people can live peacefully (Rom. 13, 1 Tim. 2:1-2).” 

It’s interesting that you don’t cite any Bible verse  that lays out that division of labor—but not surprising. No such categorization of responsibilities ever appears in scripture. You or, more precisely, the Christian Dominionists on whom you rely made it up. The reason is pretty clear: You prefer a scheme that gives you authority over the rest of us to actual biblical teaching.

Let’s give those verses in Romans more attention than you’ve managed, Mike. (Full disclosure: I’ve written two books on the Letter to the Romans in the context of Roman imperialism, and an additional scholarly essay just on this passage, 13:1-7.) 

There is no divine “calling” or “establishment” or “authorization” of government in these verses; the Greek participle tetagmenai (rendered “ordained” in the King James Version, and “appointed” in the New King James Version) has a restrictive sense and might better be translated “set in rank,” the way a drill sergeant might snap unruly troops to attention. The punitive role of governing authorities is described in the indicative—as a matter of fact—and not as a positive value. 

You seem attracted to the calm assurance in verses 3 and 4 that “rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil”; so, the one who does right has nothing to fear. To you, as to everyone in this administration and abroad in MAGA world, that means that people like Renée Good and Alex Pretti were self-evidently evil-doers, and their deaths are their own damn fault. 

Leave aside for a moment the breathtaking indifference to brutality expressed in such sentiment. Even at the level of reading ancient biblical texts, this facile moral embrace of whatever the government does fails miserably. 

The apostle Paul knew perfectly well that government authorities were lethally dangerous to innocent people; after all, he declares that “the rulers of this age” crucified the innocent Jesus (1 Corinthians 2:8), and later in that letter, assures his readers that at “the end,” Christ will destroy “all rule and all authority and power” and thus put “all enemies under His feet” (15:24-25). Paul describes his own record of being arrested and beaten by civil authorities as evidence that he is a genuine messenger of God, which is the opposite of how you want us to use the Bible (4:9-13). 

Scholars more chastened by actual history know that reaching for Romans 13 to buttress government authority has been the ploy of governments that have no intention of acting virtuously: Nazi Germany, apartheid South Africa, any number of other brutal dictatorships since. The passage remains something of an enigma, but over the last half century, scholars have observed the following:

1. Paul thinks his hearers have good reason to be afraid of the civil authorities (the words “terror” in v. 3 and “fear” in v. 7 are the same word in Greek, phobos). That good reason is precisely that the authority “does not bear the sword in vain” (v. 4). (Paul wrote that line at a time when the new emperor, the teenage Nero, was requiring his speechwriters to insist that he had brought peace throughout the Empire without even touching a sword.)
2. The Roman sword remains a constant lethal danger, as Paul affirms earlier in this same letter: “For Your sake we are killed all day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter” (8:36).
3. Precisely because Roman authorities had proven themselves a deadly blunt instrument in putting down tax protests in nearby Puteoli, then again in a mass expulsion of Jews from Rome in a habitual over-reaction to civil unrest, Paul knows his own people are at greatest risk if the civil authorities crack down over any disquiet. 
4. And that’s why, in unfortunately stereotyped language, Paul here urged his (non-Jewish) readers to keep their heads down and their noses clean—advice he himself usually did not practice. 

The Bible for Thee, Not for Me

All of this is relevant historical context, yet none of it seems to matter to you, Mike, so I want to ask a few more questions.

If you took seriously the division you outlined between biblical instructions for “the individual” and those for “civil authorities”—why wouldn’t you accept the first as decisive for yourself?  Sure, you’ve been elected to the House, and your colleagues have made you Speaker, but if you had known what the Bible commanded you as an individual, why would you ever have sought public office? Indeed, why would you aspire to be an “agent of wrath,” instead of a righteous lover of mercy, as the Bible does expressly command? 

It seems to me that no Bible verse or biblical commentator is quite as important for your “theology” as the logic of Nazi jurist Carl Schmitt, a favorite of self-styled right-wing intellectuals like Peter Thiel (and his protegé J. D. Vance). For Schmitt, what made a nation was sovereignty, and what constituted sovereignty was the power to declare a state of exception to the laws that everyone else had to follow. That’s why you want to be in government, Mike—especially in this government, where declaring national emergencies is the most convenient way to ignore Congress, the courts, and the Constitution.

And why else, Mike, would you reach for the Bible to explain your eager participation in this regime? Even if you were right about the Bible’s authorization of government as God’s “agent of wrath,”  nobody asked you to serve the Bible. 

Instead, you were asked to swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, which begins, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” 

I know that’s loaded with all sorts of language you’d prefer was not there: “domestic Tranquility”? “general Welfare”? “the Blessings of Liberty”? It’s pretty obvious you would rather be doling out punishment to “bad guys,” so you prefer to think that’s what the Bible authorizes you to do. 

In 1964, Marshall McLuhan taught us to recognize how often “the medium is the message.” The principle has no more apt illustration than you addressing a roomful of journalists and, over their heads, the American people, to tell us that the Bible authorizes you and your Republican colleagues to ignore the basic morality and decency to which so many of us feel bound. That moment—the medium of your self-righteous little Bible study—is the message you find in the Bible: you and your people decide, we obey. 

Fantasies of self-righteousness and the divine power to punish wicked others, fed by apocalyptic texts in the Bible, are rife in the present regime. More attentive readers of Revelation, or the prophecy in Matthew 25, will notice that no government officials, no military commanders appear in biblical visions of heaven, or heaven on earth. It is clear enough from the Beatitudes Jesus pronounces in Matthew 5 that the blessed are not those who have used force to assert their will but the poor in spirit, the meek, those who hunger for justice, those who make peace.

Don’t worry, Mike–there’s still time to read up.  

The post The Bible and the Border: Mike Johnson Explains It All (or Does He?) appeared first on DSA Religious Socialism.