Statement from the Madison Area DSA Executive Committee on the Detention and Deportation of Pro-Palestinian Students, Faculty, and Staff

As scholars, faculty, staff, students, and members of the University of Wisconsin-Madison community, we members of Madison Area DSA condemn the immoral and unlawful kidnappings of our colleagues and neighbors from universities across the U.S. Our colleagues and peers have been targeted for opposing Israel’s genocide in Palestine in yet another display of the United States’ escalating fascism. These targeted detentions and disappearances are part of efforts to destroy scholarship in the United States, to force alignment with Zionist foreign policy, and to punish those who dare step out of the carceral, white supremacist, Zionist line.

Since March 1, 2025, at least four students have been arrested by ICE in scenes akin to kidnappings or Schutzstaffel-style disappearances: on video, masked ICE officers whisk Rumeysa Ozturk away, as a bystander asks, “Is this a kidnapping?”

On March 8, ICE arrested Mahmoud Khalil, a leader in the Columbia University student protests against Israel’s genocide in Palestine, from his family’s apartment in Columbia student housing without being charged for any crime. Khalil is being held in the Central Louisiana ICE Processing Center.

On March 9, ICE searched the home of Yunseo Chung’s parents in an attempt to find her. Chung is a Columbia student and was present in Barnard College sit-ins. Chung has since filed a lawsuit alleging that “the administration is demonstrating a ‘pattern and practice of targeting individuals associated with protests for Palestinian rights for immigration enforcement.’”

On March 17, Badar Khan Suri, a postdoctoral scholar and instructor at Georgetown University, was detained by ICE. Suri was “approached by masked men outside his home.” Like other students targeted by ICE, Suri is accused of supporting Hamas–Suri’s lawyer argues that Suri is “being punished because of the Palestinian heritage of his wife–who is a U.S. citizen–and because the government suspects that he and his wife oppose U.S. foreign policy toward Israel.”

On March 25, plainclothes ICE agents arrested Rümeysa Öztürk, a scholar at Tufts, off the street without providing any identification–the encounter, which was captured on video, looks like a kidnapping. Although Öztürk was granted a petition to be held in Massachusetts, ICE transferred her to Louisiana. A DHS spokesperson accuses Öztürk of “supporting Hamas,” without providing evidence.

These incidents are not isolated. Students continue to be detained by ICE, including one University of Minnesota Twin Cities student on March 27, 2025. By the time this statement is published, it will surely be woefully out of date as our peers, neighbors, and colleagues continue to be targeted and kidnapped. As we wrote this letter, unjust arrests were made on UW-Madison’s campus at a protest against former US Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield. Just days later, UW announced that students and staff in our community are victims of visa termination.

It is clear that this anti-immigrant, white supremacist, Zionist tendency seeks to punish scholars for taking the moral stance. Many targeted academics, including Mahmoud Khalil, are being held in the Central Louisiana ICE Processing Center. This prison is owned by a private corporation, and is known for its unsafe and inhumane conditions. Accusations of mistreatment are many: “In 2016 alone, three immigrants died within six months. Following a fourth death in 2017, the Department of Homeland Security’s Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties concluded that inadequate medical care contributed to “multiple deaths; sexual assault allegations have “plagued” the facility; prisoners are served unlabeled and expired foods.

As abolitionists, we extend solidarity with targeted scholars held in Jena, Louisiana, and elsewhere: imprisonment and cages are the violent arm of these efforts to silence activists and scholars, punish the poor, and exploit labor from the oppressed. 

As scholars, we understand that detentions are an attack not only on individuals, but on the pursuit of knowledge itself. There is no neutral scholarship, and we extend solidarity to our colleagues and neighbors who have been and continue to be targeted for challenging carceral, white supremacist, Zionist structures and motivations.

As socialists, anarchists, communists, and moral human beings, we believe the right of free speech should never be infringed. We believe that no-one should ever be imprisoned for acts of speech and peaceful protest. We believe that anyone who speaks out against genocide and hate should be lifted up, not denigrated as supposed terrorists.

The true cause of terror in American communities right now is this expanding fascist wave we see: this intentionally illegal abduction of citizens and scholars by masked agents must end. We demand: Hands off our colleagues, and hands off our communities!

See and share how federal workers can fight back against Trump's cuts regardless of their status with the FLRA.

The post How federal workers without a union can still act like a union appeared first on EWOC.

by Rob Switzer

Over 10,000 grocery workers from 77 stores struck King Soopers in Colorado last month*; it’s a division of stores owned by Kroger. Like me, they are members of the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW).

A rank-and-file reform caucus called Essential Workers for Democracy (EW4D), which is working to make UFCW more democratic, was in Denver walking the picket lines and delivering daily bulletins to keep workers up-to-date. They flew in several UFCW members from different locals around the country to support their fellow grocery workers. This is how I became one of them!

The story starts with the election in November. Like many people who identify with the Left, I was very deeply invested in seeing Donald Trump lose. Despite how terrible Biden and Harris were on some of the issues — and their membership in a party that props up the system that I believe to be the root of most of our problems — I preferred their victory over a fascist-friendly administration bent on vengeance. So I held my nose and voted for Harris, and advocated that others should as well.

When the unthinkable happened and Trump won, I watched many of my liberal and progressive friends erupt in anger at Trump voters, with disgust for what their country had become. I can sympathize with that to a degree, but my reaction was more one of shame. And anger, yes, but not so much toward Trump voters, but more toward the Democratic establishment. They were running to the right on every issue in order to win. To see them do that and still lose was beyond maddening.

I was fed up. On social media I saw something about a general meeting of “Democratic Socialists of America” just a few days after the election. I immediately identified with their goals and values. I resolved to make it to the next one, and I did. I couldn’t believe what I was seeing: A room of over 100 people not afraid to proudly represent their values and call themselves socialists. And they seemed happy to be there, rather than despondent. I got the sense that it didn’t matter who had just won the election: they’d still be fighting the same fight regardless. There was just a little more work to do now.

I am a union member, and I got involved in the Labor Working Group. I have attended every meeting since. I’ve met many great people, and I’ve been involved in actions supporting striking Starbucks workers, graduate workers, and others. After hearing stories of organizing and activism from others, I started to think about how I could change my own workplace.

I work as a butcher in a UFCW shop. I am very proud to be a union worker and I’m known at work as being very politically conscious and pro-union. Many people at my workplace are critical of the union, and for valid reasons. Yet I sometimes find myself defending the union, or at least the workplace benefits that it has clearly brought us. I have a fair amount of seniority there and am generally respected.

So some time last March, after we lost our shop steward, I was encouraged by several people to sign up for consideration as the next one. Nobody signed up to challenge me. Months passed and I heard nothing from our union officials. On this issue and on our union representation in general, most of my coworkers felt lost and confused. And I did too. I didn’t feel empowered to do anything.

But several months down the line, now a DSA member, I started to think about what I could do to change the situation. I started talking to coworkers. I read the Labor Notes book Secrets of a Successful Organizer. I attended a Labor Notes workshop called “What to Do When Your Union Breaks Your Heart.” I even surveyed my coworkers about whether they supported me becoming steward, and circulated a petition which almost all of them signed without hesitation.

I found my way to getting in touch with Essential Workers for Democracy. I held several Zoom calls with EW4D, and they helped me consider ways to deal with the steward issue and others. I met other disaffected pro-union UFCW workers. Eventually I was invited onto a Zoom call with EW4D leader Steve Williamson. He wanted to hear my story. And afterwards he told me that they were all holed up in Denver, supporting the UFCW workers out there who were on strike. He asked if I wanted to come out.

I did. I arrived on a Monday morning and met with Steve. In the snowy, foggy, below-freezing weather, we drove from picket line to picket line. He would introduce himself, hand out that day’s issue of their bulletin, and just talk to the strikers. He would introduce me. They were always thrilled to hear that a union brother had come all the way from Detroit to support them. We would walk the lines with them, chant with them. Share stories with them.

I learned about the conditions the workers endured over those two weeks on strike: not just the weather but manipulative tactics by Kroger. For example, Kroger unsuccessfully sued to essentially shut down the strike, challenging who strikers could talk to and what they could do, and insisting that they not be allowed to use heaters or heat lamps on the lines. Just the day before I arrived, Kroger had reportedly agreed to the local’s demands, but ultimately reneging on the deal and instead circulating misleading statements blaming the union. I learned firsthand that most of the workers were not buying it. And although many were tired, the overwhelming majority seemed to support fighting on if need be. Their resilience was simply inspiring.

After a full day of visiting the lines, I was brought to the house I would be sharing with other activists. Three of them were members of DSA from around the country, and even knew some of my local comrades! We had lively discussions. I was supposed to stay for several days. But the following morning, we received word that a “Return-to-Work Agreement” had been finally reached, and that the strike was ending immediately.

That day we held a debriefing conference, in which everyone was encouraged to speak. I told them that although it was unfortunate that I came so late, it definitely wasn’t a waste of time for me. I explained that I honestly feel that with every minute I participate in activism — whether it be direct action or even just discussions — I learn something new. And this was a unique and exceptional experience in which I learned an incredible amount in a short time. And I would take those lessons and those skills with me and they could potentially change lives.

I carry those lessons today in my on-going campaign to become shop steward and to otherwise organize my coworkers. I have already seen some of them become more outspoken and encouraged. I will carry those lessons into the labor work I am involved in right now, and even beyond it. I’m even helping with the current campaign to bring rail transit to Corktown in Detroit, which could have a direct impact on my neighborhood.

Activism has become a driving purpose of my life, rather than a side hobby. None of this — my Denver trip and otherwise — would have happened without DSA, and I thank every member of that organization and every activist, everywhere, for leading by example and reminding people like me of the power that we each hold. Solidarity forever!

*Note: this article was written in March 2025.

How I Found Myself on a Picket Line in Denver after 2 Months in DSA was originally published in The Detroit Socialist on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

“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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

• 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The “Momentum Model” was Made for Grant Cycles

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Work is Important but Needs Meaning 

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

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

The post Break the Cycle appeared first on Midwest Socialist.