Politicize Me! The need to prioritize a politicized Salt Lake DSA
“What do politics have to do with me? I’m not an immigrant, or a black person, or a Muslim, or a Jew, or gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, or a woman, or an old person, or a young person, […] or a student, or union member, or artist, or journalist, or scientist, or a public employee. I don’t breathe the air or drink the water; I don’t live in a coastal region that will be affected by sea level rise or an arid region that will be affected by drought or fire. I don’t like chocolate, wine, or coffee, or other commodities that will no longer be available due to climate change. I’m not mentally ill, pregnant, disabled or currently being shot at, so… what do politics have to do with me?”
– Nato Green, political comedian and labor organizer, “What do politics have to do with me?” from “The Whiteness Album”
Avoiding political conversations is an understandable self-preservation instinct for many. In organizing circles this impulse must be avoided to openly discuss meaningful pathways toward productive action. In an organizing body as new as Salt Lake DSA, these conversations are complicated by two main issues:
- there is no comprehensive, baseline socialist vision with which all membership is guided by, and
- as such, there is no unified goal for SLDSA to move toward, allowing space for conversations to devolve from “us vs. the problem” to “me vs. you”.
Note that this specific devolvement is usually what makes people averse to these conversations in the first place. Our politics are how we see our personal values show up in the world, so any disagreement can feel like an attack on one’s moral compass. That conversation isn’t worth that risk. However, if we provide foundational political education for the chapter and actively connect our projects to the politics of Salt Lake, we can collectively move forward on a vision of SLDSA as a party-like organization. We can create a socialist Salt Lake City by helping members find confident humility in their political stances.
The overall goal of the [Draft] Prioritization of a Politicized Salt Lake DSA resolution (what a mouthful) is to identify a distinct political vision for the Salt Lake DSA chapter. This would take place in two broad phases. The first step is to provide members a space to form and refine their own political ideals. This means facilitating discussions and identifying chapter-wide values. The second step is to tangibly work towards these ideals within Salt Lake City; this is where we learn how to act as a political body.
If we are able to do this, SLDSA will be better at engaging members, affecting change in our locale, and bringing the socialist message to fruition. The political education we provide would be a source of confidence for those still understanding the wider systems we are up against; connecting the education to immediate issues in Salt Lake would exemplify these systems in action to newer members; in turn, our members (and those generally interested in socialism) can look to us as a way to visualise what socialism looks like in practice.
As a whole, DSA is looking to build towards becoming a recognized party in the United States. As the democratic party continues to fail workers, and people are becoming increasingly desperate for alternatives to the two-party system, it is crucial that our chapter carries its weight in becoming a credible alternative. After the 2024 election, Salt Lake DSA has become overwhelmed with new members. This means we now have the luxury of various perspectives; our new membership is composed of people with varying degrees of political knowledge and understanding of civics. But this is a double-edged sword. With such variation, we lack a political vision within the SLDSA chapter, complicating member engagement. Without a solidified platform that establishes a vision of DSA within Salt Lake, members are not likely to understand the importance and nuance of being an intentional political body.
By addressing the issues outlined above, we will be able to provide members with the tools to form and express their own political stances, discuss these issues together as an organizing body, and move forward on actions that intentionally match our principles as a socialist organization. Ultimately, the goal of prioritizing items that increase our politicization is to aid SLDSA in becoming a strong, public-facing organization within Salt Lake City.
Politicizing DSA in Words and Principle
“How can I know what I think till I see what I say?”
– Graham Wallas, professor of political science and author of “The Art of Thought”
Standardizing political education amongst the chapter will allow members the opportunity to define their personal politics and build confident humility in these discussions. Building out our members’ vision of socialism will give SLDSA an understanding of how to move as an organized class. Determining the pathway ahead can only be done through providing a platform for budding socialists to interpret and envision a world without capitalism.
The actual methods for providing education and gathering feedback from members on their political visions will have to vary in ways that respond to the needs of the chapter. One such method is already in the works: SLDSA has just passed a resolution to Restart the Socialist Night School Program. This will be a great way for us to understand how the chapter actually views socialist ideas and for us to discuss how these ideas show up in the world at large. However, the Socialist Night School is unlikely to cover ground with all of the chapter and can only cover so much information per session. To make up the difference and truly deepen our understanding of socialism, we will need to consider a variety of methods: Include a Civics 101 somewhere in the onboarding process, conduct internal townhalls with leadership, create a platform of local issues with members’ input, etc.
While we learn to navigate the surge in membership, we will need to be flexible in addressing the varying degrees of political education. If we can adapt accordingly, SLDSA will be able to unify membership behind a shared goal, increasing member retention and our ability to meaningfully address capitalist issues in Salt Lake.
It is possible to use the upcoming Mayday Convention as a way to gauge the feasibility of various approaches. However, as we are a month out from convention and leadership is still navigating the membership surge, I believe we will have to be explicitly mindful of capacity. One way we can approach this would be to hold a handful of “focus groups” which discuss what ways members want to increase their political knowledge and identify common principles within the chapter. It is arguable if all this is worthwhile in the face of capacity issues. We’re already working on ballot initiatives, community building, and carrying out political campaigns. We’re already doing the work. So what would actually change with the chapter?
Politicizing DSA in Action
Identifying, and subsequently aligning, SLDSA’s principles with the actions we take as a chapter will help membership trust our motivations and allow us to be a united, public-facing organization. We can look to National DSA’s ability to navigate both reformist and revolutionary tactics for inspiration. Identifying techniques National has used, and applying principles identified within SLDSA to these techniques, we can begin to put our money where our mouth is.
At various levels, DSA chapters are experimenting with a two-tiered endorsement system: endorse democratic candidates on specific issues, and endorse explicitly DSA candidates running on a DSA platform. This is a necessary tool for us to learn to utilize within our chapter. Through projects like the Trans Sanctuary City Outreach campaign, we can begin to identify city council members, legislators, and other types of representatives who hold similar values to those identified in SLDSA. From these reps, we can pick out potential mentors who can help us run candidates of our own for municipal positions. While we work through National’s playbook on taking action, we can also begin to activate our base by using our identified platform to:
- release political statements on Salt Lake-specific issues
- host more public-facing town halls like our SLDSA town hall in December and recent “Don’t Mourn, Organize” event
If we are able to utilize these different actions correctly, we can expect two main effects: membership engagement will increase (whether that be gaining new members or increasing member retention/involvement), and SLDSA will have a larger impact on the local political scene. We first achieve this by gaining membership trust. If we spend the time giving members the tools to identify and express their politics, listen to their collective concerns, and then move forward with actions which address those concerns, we will be one of only a handful of genuinely effective organizations within SLC. This will lend us an air of credibility with the wider public. From there, we can use public statements and town halls to clarify the political goals of each action we take. This is where we distinguish ourselves from reformists, even when utilizing reformist tactics. Through these actions, SLDSA will be able to successfully convert from a generic leftist NGO into a credible alternative to the two-party system within Salt Lake City.
So, Politicize Me!
“The personal is political, and the political is personal”
-Anne Koedt and Shulamith Firestone, prominent writers and theorists of the Second Wave Feminist Movement
There’s something I believe is truly critical about this moment in time that keeps getting lost in the chaos: People are looking for solutions. While many leftists have seen the system’s pathway for decades (if not centuries), the working class is on the brink of collective class consciousness in the search for said solutions. At this time, people don’t want to just accept the lesser of two evils or settle for some reform. After decades of removing curriculum on civics from education, expanding ways in which legislators receive donations from billionaires (i.e. SuperPACs), and deliberately dividing people through curated algorithms, people are understanding that every aspect of our society has been intentionally crafted to dull us out of engagement. Anything and everything that is worth discussing has been put behind a wall of “too political to discuss”. So please, politicize me. Let’s talk.
The increased difficulty of having these conversations is intentional and we need to lean into it while we have the eyes and ears on us. Providing political education, hosting discussions over Mayday Convention, learning to work with representatives, and overall engaging in civics as socialists are the ways we offer ourselves as a solution to the working class. As we approach convention, both locally and nationally this year, I want to encourage open conversations and flexible minds as we navigate various approaches to a politicized Salt Lake DSA.
References
Camejo, Peter. 1970. “Liberalism, Ultraleftism or Mass Action.” https://www.marxists.org/archive/camejo/1970/ultraleftismormassaction.htm (March 23, 2025).
“Electoral College | Civics 101 | PBS LearningMedia.” https://utah.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/electoral-college-civics-101/electoral-college-civics-101/ (March 23, 2025).
Graham Wallas. 1926. The Art of Thought. http://archive.org/details/theartofthought (March 25, 2025).
Green, Nato. “What Do Politics Have to Do with Me?”
“Leninism vs. Marxism – What’s the Difference?” This vs. That. https://thisvsthat.io/leninism-vs-marxism (March 23, 2025).
Nadeem, Reem. 2022. “As Partisan Hostility Grows, Signs of Frustration With the Two-Party System.” Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/08/09/as-partisan-hostility-grows-signs-of-frustration-with-the-two-party-system/ (March 25, 2025).
Npec, Dsa. 2023. “What Is Socialism?” DSA Political Education. https://dsa-education.pubpub.org/pub/what-is-socialism/release/6 (March 25, 2025).
“Ocasio-Cortez Tops Democrats’ Poll on Reflecting Party Values.” https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5198380-ocasio-cortez-leads-democrats/ (March 23, 2025).
“Platform – Seattle Democratic Socialists of America.” https://seattledsa.org/platform/ (March 25, 2025).
Reform & Revolution. 2025. “Reform & Revolution.” https://reformandrevolution.org/ (March 25, 2025).
“Sarah NPC Platform.” Google Docs. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MV9yskPsKXo7XDSzUfwdNFwlnz2l7pReCKam4Cr0Qe0/edit?tab=t.0&usp=embed_facebook (March 23, 2025).
“Super PAC – Ballotpedia.” https://ballotpedia.org/Super_PAC (March 25, 2025).
The post Politicize Me! The need to prioritize a politicized Salt Lake DSA first appeared on Salt Lake DSA.
How to Organize Memphis Midsouth DSA Style
You see a pressing need that you want to organize to address with your comrades. You step up to get it done. Fantastic!
Our organization is tailor-made for this kind of volunteer initiative. We come together for our shared work and shared resources. We stay for the solidarity.
This is a great starting point. But, how do you go about doing the work? There is without a doubt a ton of space for original approaches and a diversity of organizing principles. But, we have some experience in our chapter of successful ways to organize, and some unsuccessful ones. We have learned the hard way that if a project is not followed through on, or if it falls apart, it can be demoralizing and hurt our organizing as a whole.
Our work is sometimes humble. But, it matters. It matters in a profound sense. We are actively organizing for power, affecting working people’s lives, and affecting one another. Memphis Midsouth DSA is contributing to the political scene in west Tennessee in a way no other organization is. So, we have an obligation to do this work as well as we can.
This is written from a perspective that says that we are an organization of organizers who organize others. Many of us have never done anything like this before, and this document is meant to help you keep in mind some basics to accomplish your organizing goals.
Below you will find some general to-dos that apply to nearly any kind of organizing. This won’t tell members what to do strategically, or in the big picture. But, it does recommend some things you should probably think through along the way to make what you do is successful. This will be useful for members in general, but co-stewards of committees should read carefully and discuss what follows.
Big Questions & Getting Started
Often our organizing gets done in Organizing Committees and Ad Hoc Committees. Check out our chapter bylaws to see what those are and how to create them. Other tasks are so short-term that we just carry them out informally, and we will need to do organizing in other forms in the future.
But, before you start the process to form an Organizing Committee or Ad Hoc Committee, you should think through and answer a few questions about what you imagine it doing…
How does this committee fit into long-term socialist goals?
We should have an answer for this question for everything we do. Our goals generally are to:
- To increase working people’s power over the economy, politics, and their lives; and
- To build institutions and capacities that prepare us to win in future conflict.
As we discuss below, organizers should spend time learning from, actively supporting, and building positive relationships with existing local liberal, left, and radical organizations that do similar work. At the same time, you should be reading books, listening to podcasts, watching videos, and talking to experienced comrades to clarify what exactly a socialist movement can do that is different from the typical work of the Democratic Party, academic researchers, or the non-profit industrial complex. We are not doing the same things as well-intentioned liberals, nor do we have the same vision. We should be able to explain to one another exactly how it is an organizing project we hope to take up is a worthwhile form of socialist organizing.
What related work is already going on nearby or in general? Can we connect to, learn from, or support that work?
Our chapter is relatively new in the political landscape. Often when we have great ideas about what to organize around, there are already some folks doing something like that. They could be in another group nearby, internationally, or in another DSA chapter. Before we decide that we would do better at a similar project, we should check out and learn from any work that is already being done.
At minimum, we can use what we learn about what is already being done to inform what we do. We can either study others’ methods to improve our own approach, or we can see what might be missing in existing work. Perhaps it might be the best choice given our situation to organize to support existing work without coopting it? Or, perhaps the existing work does something good, but are there important pieces missing that we could contribute?
How can our chapter advance this work using a committee?
Before forming a committee, you should think through whether our chapter is capable of doing the work, and if using a committee is the best way to do it. As a part of that process, you should identify some other member(s) excited to organize around the same thing as you who have the time and energy to do the work with you. However, you might decide we don’t have the capacity to do a project because our members are stretched too thin. Or, it might be that our members lack the skills to do it the right way. If that is what you figure out, that’s okay! There are still lots of things that can be done to prepare to do some important piece of organizing, and there is always more to do for our existing work.
How will this committee organize others?
It is easy to just do something yourself. It is much more difficult to organize others. And yet, a central way we can get stronger is by organizing increasing numbers of working people and their allies. One goal you should keep in mind is that through our organizing you should help cultivate those we organize with into becoming organizers themselves. That way, our strength will ideally grow with each organizing project we undertake.
So, as you start gearing up to start a committee, you should think through how you will try to set up the work to enable us to not just accomplish it, but organize others in the process.
What investigation should you do? How can you learn before and while you act?
Nearly every kind of organizing should be informed by some kind of research. We almost never know enough based on casual observation when we first meet on a subject. Learning and knowledge generation are perennial and necessary political activities that support meaningfully developing strategy and tactics. None of us know spontaneously what the best way to act is.
We are socialists, so we have good politics and we usually care about the right things. Our members are thoughtful, so we often make careful decisions together. And we are democratic, so we all have a say in our meetings and what the majority says is what we do. But, that doesn’t mean that we have all relevant information to make good and successful plans.
There are several areas of knowledge you should aim to speak to when forming a committee, or have a plan to develop that knowledge through the committee’s work:
- Socialist theory: are there tried practices in our movement we can learn from?
- People’s perspective: What do the people affected by a relevant issue think about the problem we want to organize around? What do they think will address it? Will they work with us to accomplish those goals? The people aren’t always right, but knowing where they are at will help us decide what to do.
- Expert knowledge: Are there experts like veteran organizers or academics who have expertise related to what we want to organize around? Can we draw on that knowledge or include them in some way? What is the legal and/or political-economic landscape we will be interacting with as we organize in this area? How should that influence our plans?
- Organizing situation: Who else is doing work in the area relevant for the committee you want to work on? Can we learn from and support them? Are any of these groups doing work we think is harmful, wrong, or are they hostile to us?
Developing these different areas of knowledge is a part of how we build informed and strategic movements that actually win.
Research isn’t only about sitting in a room with a spreadsheet—it’s about preparing to take on the forces that exploit us. The best organizers aren’t just passionate—they’re informed and prepared. When we build campaigns without talking to the people most affected, we fail. But when we strategically listen, learn, and plan, we are much more likely to win.
Capitalists rely on working people being disconnected, uninformed, and isolated. Socialist organizers do the opposite—we connect, learn, and build power together. A successful working-class movement starts with people coming together, listening to and learning from each other, and figuring out how to fight back.
In other words, investigation, research, or study isn’t just about collecting facts—it’s about learning how to win. When we do these right, they form a weapon to fight for power.
That said, having all of the relevant knowledge that should inform our organizing is not always possible. Especially if you’re new to organizing, you often have very little of the knowledge you need to make organizing successful when you first get started.
That’s okay! We all start from somewhere.
A helpful first step is to consult those with more experience to seek their mentorship. Others’ experiences are always a vital resource. For co-stewards, this consultation is required. You should aim to learn from and coordinate with other co-stewards and veteran organizers early and often. If you are a co-steward, you have accepted responsibility to facilitate a consequential institution for our shared chapter. It would be irresponsible if you did not seek the guidance of those who have played a similar role before. Stewards often learn the hard way what works and what doesn’t while running chapter organs, and they have knowledge of how to navigate the chapters’ social structure. Even if they organize in a significantly different area than you, they can help you figure out a great deal.
In part through discussing with comrade-mentors, you can also start to figure out how to step-by-step gain access to the various kinds of knowledge you eventually need to obtain. Your comrades can help you identify the things you do not know, and ways you can begin addressing them. Sometimes, you can address knowledge gaps through organizing others into your committee’s work who know more about specific topics than you. Collectivity is a strength! Beyond mentorship, regular consultation among our co-stewards should be a norm for healthy sharing of experiences and reflection in our chapter.
Preparing for a Meeting
Okay. You have a problem you want to organize around, and some ideas of how to do it. You have buy-in from your comrades. You have thought through the questions outlined above, and you’re ready to proceed. Now, how do you get ready for a committee meeting?
First, a good place to start is to think through what you want to get out of the meeting. You should be able to answer the questions: What specific decisions need to be made at the meeting? What do you want people to do afterward? The content and plan of the meeting should be guided by what you want it to accomplish. You may decide to reflect or study to prepare to discuss one or more of the subjects you want to cover. Alternatively, you might want to ask someone else to be prepared to guide discussion of a topic or more on the agenda. In general, members should do what preparation they need to contribute to informed and practical decisions about the questions before the committee.
Second, make sure that you have meeting logistics figured out. This includes booking or deciding on a meeting space. Even if your meetings are recurringly at the same location, it is better to over-communicate with the space’s stewards ahead of time to make sure that they know to expect us. Also, in picking a meeting place, you should think about what kind of space will be able to hold your attendees, the noise level, and other functional logistical questions (is it a restaurant? Do you have plan for how to split the bill? Etc.).
Additionally, make sure that any different roles members need to play at the meeting are spoken for. Usually organizing committee meetings need: a note taker, stack keeper, someone to sign all attendees in, and a facilitator. The job of the facilitator is discussed further below in the section, “At the Meeting.” However, someone else besides the facilitator should take notes on major points of discussion and decisions made, keeping those safe and sharing them according to policies established by the chapter. It is up to the committee whether one, two, or three persons take on responsibilities to facilitate, keep time, and take stack.
It is also often a good call to occasionally rotate these and other committee responsibilities so that it is not always the same person(s) playing one or all of these roles. This helps to prevent the most involved (or the most likely to volunteer) from getting burned out. It can also help new members gain skills and develop stronger ties with their comrades.
Third, you need to get people to the meeting. So, who do you need to get there? In most cases, it is a good step to advertise it to other members. There are several steps that you can take depending on the situation.
- You can get in touch with our Communications Coordinator or Secretary to send out a mass email or mass text to our network to promote the upcoming meeting. You should give them at least a week of advance notice before you want the messages sent out. But, it is probably best to start this process at least two weeks before your planned meeting, and even earlier can sometimes be helpful depending on how much building for the meeting is required. When you contact these officers, you should also ask if they think posting your meeting on our event calendar is a good idea.
- Send a couple of messages over our group chats. Often members will be responsive over one medium, but not another. So, for each of our normal ways of communicating, it is helpful to send out a line to other members.
- Personally contact each individual who expressed an interest in the work of the committee, made a commitment to do work for it, or made a commitment to go to the meeting. We should all show up every time we can when we are a part of a committee, as this helps to reinforce momentum. But, we are all busy, and a nudge from you can help to remind others of what they have to do.
- Prepare an agenda. There are lots of examples we can draw from, and you can ask a co-steward of another organizing committee to provide you some. In general, an agenda should outline the broad topics of discussion, and say how much time you expect to be spent on each topic.
At the Meeting
This is your time to shine!
In many ways, organizing committee meetings are central to the life of our shared chapter. If you are a co-steward, you have some particular responsibilities at meetings to structure them to ensure strong outcomes and make sure that folks leave energized, ready to do their work. These meetings should also be democratic. If you are not a co-steward, you don’t have to structure the meeting. But, it is still your responsibility to help make sure that the meeting is successful. You should support your co-steward(s) to make the meeting effective, inclusive, and energizing.
Structure
A meeting should usually follow the agenda you made for it. If it gets off track, it can be helpful to check in to see if folks are okay with the deviation, or ask them politely to refocus and address the topic before the meeting. It is also important to not regularly go over the time allotted for a meeting. People are busy. They may hesitate to come to a next meeting if they don’t know if it will take up a lot more time than it is scheduled to.
Someone should facilitate the meeting, making sure that folks take turns speaking and new or otherwise quiet voices are heard. The same person who facilitates might also take a queue of those who want to speak, or they may ask someone else to do it. Usually the facilitator is a co-steward, but they don’t have to be. It can be useful for those who are considering taking on an officer role in the future to take on leadership responsibilities like facilitation to get some practice before they have to do it regularly.
A facilitator or anyone at a meeting can often helpfully advance the meeting by listening carefully and reframing points of discussion to clarify disagreement, agreement, and points where decisions need to be made. If decisions cannot be made quickly, or important disagreements resolved, discussion can be tabled for a future meeting or another medium.
Effective, inclusive, energizing
Meetings should be spaces for effective discussion and decision-making. Each meeting should have some specific decisions it makes that advance its committee’s work. Ideally each person, including each new person, leaves with an action item that they agree to accomplish before the committee’s next meeting.
This is a part of what makes our meetings inclusive. People show up because they want to be involved in our work, and often don’t know what they think should be done prior to their arrival. Therefore, committee meetings that aim to include new members should have some meaningful regular practice(s) that contribute to the committee’s goals that it revisits each meeting that new people can plug into.
Feeling a sense of momentum and a larger vision guiding a committee can be energizing. In addition to plug-and-play, recurring activities that new members can participate in, you should make sure that the committee’s discussion is often centered on the ongoing and long-term work related to its strategic goals. These occasionally are more difficult for new members to jump into, but having a sense that they are a part of something that is going somewhere can be a part of what leaves them inspired to get more involved.
These strategic goals are often the reasons why the committee exists in the first place. So, the committee may be sacrificing strategic objectives for short-term busy work if those objectives are not regularly discussed at meetings. It is both good for the morale of committee members to advance a committee’s strategic goals, and good for advancing our socialist aspirations.
Also, we recommend that you do not consume alcohol until after any meeting is over where chapter business is discussed. For many, a drink at a meeting is not a problem. But, for some it is, and we should set an example for our comrades that help us all to approach our shared work with enthusiastic, comradely gravity. Save drinks together for after our work is done if alcohol is your jam. We can socialize and get to know one another with some additional confidence that we regularly give our work the attention it deserves.
Finally, members and co-stewards in particular should assert and reassert why we are doing work together, and what it requires of us. By placing our work in this larger narrative, we gain and maintain perspective on why we do the work and keep showing up.
Democratic socialism
Our meetings are democratic. But what does that mean? Here, we mean that decisions are made by members through majority votes. A majority is half the members who don’t abstain at a meeting plus one vote. If there are 15 people voting on a decision, and 7 vote no on a decision, then 8 have to vote yes for the decision to be adopted.
We also want to deliberate. Our comrades are worthy of our respect. That respect requires that we make efforts to persuade one another to our views, rather than just steam roll over their objections. We are all in this movement and in the same organization for good reasons, and we should try to aim for agreement when we can get there. When we cannot agree, often we should compromise.
Meaningful deliberation can also help your committee feel democratic. Even if decisions are made through a majoritarian procedure, without discussion where counter-arguments, or different views, can be articulated, your votes can feel—or actually be—formalistic. So, if you’re planning the agenda for committee meetings, you should consider occasionally building in extra time to check in, and let unspoken concerns be articulated by members and other attendees. Once in a while build into a meeting 10 minutes to discuss a chosen question or three, like: What’s working? What’s missing? How are people feeling? What did you expect when joining this committee? What are you surprised by? What aligns with expectations?
In general, carefully making space for attendees to speak to the whole meeting or through small groups is important. People often remember what they said and how they felt, rather than what others say to them. Having them feel like a part of the meeting through playing a part in it will help them to feel invested in it.
We also need to be okay losing a vote. An important part of building powerful organizations is that we end up being in them with tons of people. As our numbers grow, which they have to, we will be surrounded by more and more people who disagree on how to accomplish our goals. We have to be comfortable losing even important votes. Often, even when our position gets voted down, we should still carry out the decisions of our committees together. We can work over time to convince those who disagree, but we won’t get anywhere if we insist the organization always does what any one of us wants.
If you are a co-steward, a skill to develop is to identify when there are disagreements in a committee that rise to the level of needing a vote. A facilitator can ask for proponents of important decisions to formulate their proposal as a motion so that it is clear what it is that members are voting on. Next, you should ask if there is a ‘second’ for this motion. If someone offers a second, you can call for a vote where members can vote yes, no, or abstain. You can always decide to table important decisions for later if consultation, study, or more deliberation is necessary to have the best result. A member participating in a meeting can also put forward a motion of their own accord that also must be seconded to before it is voted on. Regardless if the motion was put forward with the facilitator’s help or not, it is the facilitator’s responsibility to help ensure that debates over motions take place fairly, and that our norms of comradely discussion are adhered to. Socialists should have thick skin to disagree productively and patiently when appropriate, instead of avoiding differences of opinion or tough conversations.
Following Up
Some say that 80% of organizing is following up. Check in with those who agreed to tasks (which should often be everyone), and see how their work is going. Or, ask what they thought about the meeting, or if they want to chat to talk through the work.
At this stage, we are all volunteers who may face a personal cost for doing this work. And the thicker are our relationships, the more developed our trust and mutual support, the more reasons we will have to stick around and keep doing the work. It is our sense of duty to each other and the people that will help attendees stick around and sacrifice for others.
For anyone who agrees to take on an action item, your main responsibilities between meetings are to do what you said and to be communicative. Aim for 90% or more completion of action items in the time you commit to. We cannot always do things in the way we expect, and we often juggle a lot. So, it’s important to check-in with your comrades and let them know how the work is going. This is always the case, but it is especially true if you’re running into any kind of serious obstacle. When we almost always do what we say we will, we help to build momentum and a culture of respect for our common project. However, if work often does not get done—or is late—it can really take the wind out of our organizing sails. It can result in a slow collapse of our organizing.
So, we recommend co-stewards or others helping with leading work check-in between each meeting. Four kinds of persons are a high priority. First, those who attended the last meeting, and those who missed the last meeting. It can also be important to have actual conversations with new people and those facing tricky obstacles of whatever kind to help them stay connected to the committee.
As committees grow, this can become difficult for co-stewards to handle alone. This can be an opportunity to involve in leadership tasks to members who are consistent, trustworthy, and strong communicators. You can ask them to step forward, strengthening your committee by training more folks in follow-up skills, and building the capacity of our chapter in turn.
This relates to a different point: We should be aware that not everything we do is going to work perfectly. That’s okay, and normal. Sometimes things won’t work out, or things will come up. Over time, members should be developing skills to adjust to things going awry. This goes hand-in-hand with being able to spot organizing obstacles, communicating clearly when we have issues with our comrades, and addressing obstacles and issues so as to overcome them
A Reinforcing Process
This brings you back to preparing for the next meeting. Follow-up should contribute to preparation for the next gathering so that a part of what you can discuss is how all or nearly everyone accomplished their tasks. Committees and their particular meetings should have clear short and long-term goals, so that it can determine whether or not it has been successful in its aims (for example: PROC might plan an assembly of renters as a structure test. So you can measure your success, you might specify a specific number of tenants in attendance you need to get to turn out to the assembly, a certain quality of deliberation, or a specific outcome of a vote at said assembly). At most meetings you should sum up your efforts: what works, what doesn’t, and what new things we can try. By doing so in a repeating cycle we can regularly build on previous experience to develop new socialists’ skills and knowledge through practice.
That practice isn’t all we should learn from, as should be clear from the discussion above. But, it is nonetheless an important reservoir, that if we do this right, should be enriched by you and your comrades over time.
Go, organize others. Help them learn tools to change the world!
The post How to Organize Memphis Midsouth DSA Style first appeared on Memphis-Midsouth DSA.
4/03/25 Newsletter
- 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
County BOS Divests From LAHSA + Metro Refuses to Comply With Measure HLA Guidelines
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.
April Labor Branch Newsletter: The Resistance to Trump is beginning – Protest Saturday & other events
Johnson City Survivors Were Ignored Because the System Protects Men Like Sean Williams
Ronan Farrow’s March 24, 2025, New Yorker article on the case of Sean Williams, one of America’s most prolific sexual predators, exposes more than just individual evil—it reveals systemic rot. For years, Williams drugged, raped, and recorded assaults on dozens of women and children in Johnson City, Tennessee, while local police ignored, dismissed, or even enabled his crimes, according to Farrow’s reporting. Federal prosecutor Kat Dahl’s efforts to hold him accountable were met with obstruction, retaliation, and eventual firing.
Police as Enablers, Not Protectors
From the beginning, the Johnson City Police Department (JCPD) appears to have treated Williams with alarming deference. When Mikayla Evans fell five stories from his apartment—an incident suggesting foul play—officers delayed securing evidence, allowed Williams to tamper with security footage, and left his apartment unsupervised, according to the New Yorker article. Later, when Dahl pushed to investigate rape allegations, detectives are alleged to have shrugged off victims, mocked her concerns, and slow-walked warrants. Their indifference wasn’t accidental; it was systemic.
Williams himself claimed he bribed officers through an ex-girlfriend, Alunda Rutherford, alleging payoffs to avoid scrutiny. While these claims are contested, the JCPD’s behavior fits a pattern: according to the audit by the Daigle Law Group, between 2018-2022 officers failed to even interview suspects in 69 out of 105 rape cases with identified perpetrators, routinely closed sexual assault investigations prematurely, and ultimately paid a $28 million settlement to survivors—a tacit admission of systemic failure.
Class, Power, and Impunity
Business owners like Sean Williams get treated as a special class of people that are better than the rest of us. He wasn’t just some lone criminal—he was a wealthy businessman embedded in local power structures. His depredations were open secrets, his drug trafficking an unspoken perk for those who turned a blind eye. Even while evading arrest, he moved freely, exchanging texts with one prominent real estate agent, according to court records, and selling at least three properties in Johnson City. This is how class operates under capitalism: connections and capital buy impunity, while working-class victims—especially women—are disbelieved, shamed, or ignored.
The police’s contempt for survivors reflects broader societal problems. Victims like Briana Pack and Kaleigh Murray were dismissed as unreliable—too drunk, too traumatized, or too “uncooperative.” When Dahl warned that Williams might be targeting children, Chief Karl Turner brushed her off. Compare this to how police treat petty theft or drug use among the poor: relentless pursuit, brutal enforcement, and prison time. The system punishes regular people while shielding predators who operate with money and influence.
The Failures of “Justice” Under Capitalism
The JCPD’s internal report admitted systemic failures—interrogating victims like they were suspects, closing rape cases without investigation—but no high-ranking officials faced consequences. Instead, the city has agreed to pay $28 million in an attempt to bury accountability under legal settlements.
This isn’t unique to Johnson City. Across the U.S., police departments resist oversight, budgets balloon while social services starve, and survivors of sexual violence are gaslit by the very systems allegedly intended to protect them. The Williams case is extreme but not exceptional—it’s the logical endpoint of a capitalist system where justice is commodified and power and wealth flow to those who already have the most power and wealth.
Johnson City Needs a People’s Budget, Not a Bigger Police Budget
According to the Tennessee Lookout, City Manager Cathy Ball “has had the power to initiate an internal affairs investigation for the past two years that could scrutinize the actions and conduct of those implicated in the Williams case, including herself.”
Instead, Ball ordered any internal investigation be put on hold until the resolution of the class action lawsuit, court records show. That lawsuit is settled. What now?
Change won’t come from polite requests. It will take organized tenants, workers, and survivors showing up at town halls, budget meetings, and elections to demand justice.
For a start, we are calling for community-based Town Halls to discuss this issue, as well as future issues, where the Johnson City Commission can listen to us without the strict limits that city commission meetings place on our time and our experiences, where only twelve people can speak for a total of three minutes each. We need to have a say in what happens next.
But transparency and dialogue are not enough. There is also the question of money. At the time Dahl filed her federal civil complaint in June 2022, the city budget granted police $15,526,561 of the General Fund. The current city budget, drafted by Ball’s office last year and approved by our current mayor and three of our sitting commissioners, increased that figure to $19,370,928. That’s a raise of nearly four million dollars for a police department whose malpractice is set to cost us tens of millions more, to say nothing of the harm it facilitated.
The choice before Johnson City is about priorities.
We demand the Johnson City Commission freeze the police budget and invest funds where they belong: in public trauma care for survivors, affordable housing to stabilize families, and mental health responders and mediation teams that replace police where appropriate. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re what happens when we put victims before wealthy business owners.
Change won’t come from polite requests. It will take organized tenants, workers, and survivors showing up at town halls, budget meetings, and elections to demand justice. The money exists. The power exists. The people must come together and demand it.
The Unwilling Guardians: Why Liberal Opposition Falters Against Fascism
When fascism ascends, the conventional opposition often proves surprisingly ineffective, even complicit. This paradox becomes comprehensible when we understand not just political theater but the underlying material interests at play.
The established opposition shares more with its supposed adversaries than with the working people it claims to represent. Both mainstream parties ultimately serve as different management teams for the same economic system. While they disagree on methods and rhetoric, they agree on fundamentals: the primacy of profits over people and the necessity of maintaining existing class relations.
This explains why resistance proves tepid. Meaningful opposition to fascism requires challenging concentrated power—both political and economic. Yet the liberal donor class, its leadership’s personal wealth, and its institutional inertia all align against such confrontation. They fear genuinely popular movements more than they fear their ostensible rivals.
Historical evidence confirms this pattern. In Weimar Germany, the right-liberal German People’s Party and left-liberal German Democratic Party supported various authoritarian consolidations in the name of anti-Communism. The former backed the declaration of martial law in Prussia that helped clear the way for Hitler’s rise, and the latter’s deputies even backed the Enabling Act that granted Hitler dictatorial powers in 1933.
In Italy, liberal parties sought accommodation with Mussolini rather than alliance with labor movements. In Chile, centrists undermined Allende before embracing Pinochet. In each case, property proved more sacred than people.
The theatrics of political conflict mask this deeper unity. Congressional hearings produce sound bytes but rarely consequences. Speeches condemn excesses while budgets fund them–witness Biden’s expansion of prison facilities. Legal challenges drag through courts staffed by identical interests. Electoral campaigns promise transformation but deliver continuity.
Meanwhile, those proposing systemic change—democratizing the economy, redistributing power, prioritizing human needs over profit—are branded dangerous extremists. This framing serves a dual purpose: it distances the opposition from more forceful alternatives while positioning them as the reasonable middle ground in a fabricated spectrum.
The left is particularly threatening because it names the root causes that mainstream discourse obscures. It connects political authoritarianism to economic dominance. It reveals how “normal politics” laid the groundwork for fascist acceleration. It demonstrates that defending democracy requires extending it into workplaces, communities, and economic planning.
The liberal opposition’s vulnerability stems from its contradictions. It cannot mobilize popular energy without raising expectations it has no intention of fulfilling. It cannot articulate a compelling alternative while committed to the system generating the crisis. It cannot build effective solidarity while serving interests fundamentally opposed to collective power.
Most crucially, it cannot win by seeking the approval of institutions already compromised. Courts packed with ideologues, media owned by billionaires, electoral systems designed to diffuse popular will—these will not save us. Yet the opposition remains institutionally incapable of moving beyond these channels.
In this light, the demonization of the left serves a critical function. By positioning leftists as equally extreme as fascists, the opposition justifies its own inadequate middle path while delegitimizing the very forces most committed to substantive resistance.
The lesson is clear: we cannot outsource our defense to those who benefit from the same system as our opponents. True opposition must come from below—from organized communities unbound by the constraints of electoral calculation or donor appeasement.
The path forward demands independent organization, material solidarity, and the courage to envision a world beyond the false choices offered by those who would rather manage our descent than risk the emergence of genuine democracy.
The Anatomy of Fascism’s Rise: Why Early Intervention Matters
Fascism doesn’t emerge fully formed but follows a recognizable developmental trajectory. Understanding this progression is crucial for effective resistance
In its embryonic stage—where we find ourselves now—fascism begins with a crisis of legitimacy. Democratic institutions still function but are systematically delegitimized. The judiciary is branded as partisan. Electoral processes are declared corrupt. Media becomes “enemy of the people.” This manufactured crisis creates the justification for “extraordinary measures” to “restore order.”
The second phase—consolidation—occurs when the previously unthinkable becomes routine. Independent agencies are purged and restaffed with loyalists. Civil servants are replaced with partisans. Legislative powers shift to executive orders. Courts are packed or ignored. This phase relies on public exhaustion and normalization—each transgression generates less outrage than the last.
Next comes the targeting phase. Initially focused on politically vulnerable groups—immigrants, minorities, leftists—it creates a template for persecution that can be broadened. The legal framework established against “extremists” becomes applicable to progressively wider circles of opposition. This phase depends on divide-and-conquer tactics, assuring each group that they are safe while others are targeted.
The mature phase arrives when institutional capture is complete. Elections continue but without meaningful choice. Courts exist but rarely rule against power. Media operates but within narrowed boundaries. Dissent becomes criminalized rather than merely delegitimized. By this stage, resistance requires extraordinary courage as the costs become increasingly severe.
The final phase occurs when external constraint is removed entirely. Violence becomes state policy rather than rhetorical excess. Economic crisis or international conflict typically provides the pretext for this transition.
Socialist analysis reveals what liberal frameworks miss: fascism isn’t merely authoritarianism but a specific response to capitalism in crisis. When profit rates decline and class consciousness rises, sections of the capitalist class turn to fascism to suppress labor movements, eliminate social programs, and redirect class anger toward scapegoated minorities. The “traditionalism” of fascism serves to reinforce hierarchies necessary for capitalism’s continuation under increasingly unstable conditions.
This developmental understanding explains why early intervention is most effective. Each stage builds upon the previous one, creating conditions that make subsequent resistance more difficult. The window for relatively low-cost opposition narrows dramatically once the consolidation phase advances. Institutions designed to check power cease functioning when they become captured.
Today, we stand at a critical juncture. Democratic guardrails bend but haven’t yet broken. Public assembly remains legal. The press faces intimidation but not wholesale suppression. Elections face delegitimization but haven’t been suspended. This moment—when fascism remains vulnerable, when its developmental path can still be disrupted—is precisely when collective action carries maximum impact.
Solidarity across targeted groups, mass non-compliance with unjust directives, protection of vulnerable communities, defense of democratic institutions however imperfect—these actions can effectively halt fascism’s developmental momentum. History shows that fascism can be stopped, but rarely once its institutional capture is complete.
The time to disrupt this progression is now, while we retain the power to do so. n