By Erica T. and Gabriel E.

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

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

We don’t buy it.

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

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

What is a police “union” for?

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why the cops’ sudden interest in labor?

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

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

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

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

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

What’s next?

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

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

More than 10,000 people in dozens of towns across Maine turned out on April 5 to tell Trump and his billionaire pals, “Hands Off!” Portland City Councilmember Kate Sykes rallied the crowd and laid out a political perspective for building a long-term movement than can get stand up to Trump and get to the root of the multiple crises that predated him. — Photo credit @bradleirce

Let me hear you, Portland!

Thank you, Indivisible, for bringing us together. And thank you—every single one of you—for showing up today. How many of you are here attending a political action for the first time?

Let’s hear it for everyone who stepped outside their comfort zone today to be here. This is what we need to build this movement. Now, I know how a lot of us are feeling right now: afraid, angry, exhausted. Because the attacks are real. And they are relentless. We’re watching hard-won freedoms come under attack: civil rights, reproductive rights, voting rights. And what did we come here to say to that? Hands off!

[Read next: New England DSA protests ICE detention]

We have billionaires and bigots rewriting federal policy to enrich themselves, while families right here in Maine are losing jobs, losing homes, and getting priced out of the very neighborhoods they helped build. But here’s what we need to remember: this agenda didn’t start today. It didn’t start with this administration. It’s the latest chapter in a decades-long campaign of austerity against regular working people. Ever since the New Deal showed that government could be a force for public good, the right wing has been trying to tear it down.

They’ve spent generations eroding trust in government, de-funding public housing and handing power—and our future—to corporations and the ultra-rich. This current president didn’t start that. He’s just the loudest, most chaotic version of it. And now he’s proving they’ll go to any length—even attacking the foundations of democracy—to get their way. And yes—too many Democrats have gone along with it.

They traded bold vision for cautious compromise. They chased bipartisan agreements instead of standing firm with working people. They’ve been afraid to confront corporate power—and now we’re all paying the price. 

Over the last four years, critical programs introduced during COVID have just vanished.

Rental relief? Gone.

The child tax credit that kept families afloat? Gone.

Not stripped away by the far right—but quietly allowed to expire by people who should have known better. By people who promised to fight for us—and didn’t.

And here in Maine, we’re seeing the same thing: cuts to General Assistance. Cuts to shelter reimbursements. Cuts to childcare workers’ wages. This is what happens when government stops leading with values—and starts bargaining with bullies. And those cuts land right here, in Portland. Because we are the last line of defense. And so what are we here to say? Hands off! So what’s at stake when government stops investing in people? Everything we’ve built.

Here in Portland: We’re operating the only city-run homeless services center in the state—and we’re doing it without adequate support from Washington or Augusta. We’re fighting for higher wages—but wage justice means nothing if the price of healthcare, housing, and groceries keeps rising. We’re pushing for social housing, defending rent control, and helping tenants organize—but every cut to housing assistance chips away at our ability to protect each other.

Our public library is a lifeline—for kids, for elders, for job-seekers and unhoused neighbors—and yet we face staffing shortages and budget constraints year after year. Parents rely on before- and after-school programs so they can work—but those programs are stretched thin, and families are stuck on waitlists. This is what it looks like when higher levels of government cut funding, shift blame, and leave cities to clean up the mess. So what do we say to that? Hands off!

Here in Portland—and all over the country—we are not backing down. We are organizing. We are building. We are fighting—with solidarity, and love for one another. We didn’t get here overnight. No, it took steady work: ballot initiatives. Local campaigns. Council races. School board seats.

[Read next: The method to Trump’s Medicaid cut madness]

Not just when Republicans were in power—but when Democrats held the majority, too.

So what do we do now—when the punches are coming from every direction, and it all just feels like too much? What we’ve always done: we organize. 

Our opponents will try to distract us. And that’s exactly what’s happening now: Executive orders. Tariffs. Talk of annexing Canada and Greenland. Attacks on trans kids, immigrants, teachers, the arts, and reproductive care. It’s all designed to keep us confused, isolated, and running in circles—while the billionaires rob us blind.

But you know what the billionaires in power fear the most? This. Right here. A movement that’s grounded. Organized. Principled. And growing.

They like to call us “radicals”….so let’s remember what that word really means: it means rooted.

Rooted in history. Rooted in the sit-down strikes of the 1930s. In the Civil Rights Movement. In Stonewall. In the radical suffragists who fought across race and class. Rooted in community. Rooted in the fight for the common good. 

Rooted in the deep knowledge that if we want to solve the problems we face—we have to go to the root. Not patch the symptoms. Not tinker around the edges. But dig deep—and organize from there.

So let’s find our root—together. Wherever you are right now, feel your connection to the ground. Take a deep breath in… Let it go and drop your shoulders. Sink your weight into your root. Because that is where our power comes from. And while you’re there—ask yourself: who are you here for? Who gave you the courage to stand up today? Whose memory do you carry in your bones? Maybe it’s your mom—who worked double shifts to keep the lights on and still showed up to every school play.

Maybe it’s your neighbor—who learned a new language, drove a forklift to put both kids through college, and still brings extra food to the block party. Maybe it’s your own kid—who’s counting on us to leave them something better than this mess. That’s your root. That’s your why. Hold that feeling. Stay connected to it. Because when the distractions come—and they will—that’s how we stay steady. That’s how we remember what we’re fighting for. Not just in theory—but in action. Because solidarity isn’t just a word—it’s a practice.

And solidarity is how we win: One tenant meeting. One budget fight. One picket line. One door, one conversation, one act of courage at a time. Resistance isn’t a moment. It’s a practice. And we’re in this together.

I’m so proud of you, Portland. Let’s keep up the fight!

[Read next: We’ll need popular resistance to defend trans rights in Maine]

The post Thousands say Hands Off Maine! appeared first on Pine & Roses.

Thorn West: Issue No. 229

State Politics

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

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

City Politics

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

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

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

NOlympics

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

Transportation

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

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

Housing Rights

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

Environmental Justice

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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.

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

In the rolling hills and close-knit communities of Northeast Tennessee, there beats a heart that has long valued mutual support and a deep connection to place. These Appalachian values—so often misrepresented in national narratives—align more closely with democratic socialism than many might realize. As our region faces mounting challenges from corporate exploitation and political forces that seek to divide us, reclaiming our political voice means recognizing this natural alignment.

Long before corporate interests reshaped our economy, Appalachian communities thrived on principles of interdependence. Barn-raisings, seed-sharing, and care for neighbors in need weren’t just traditions—they were survival strategies that recognized our fundamental interconnectedness. When disaster struck, it wasn’t rugged individualism that saved lives—it was community solidarity.

These practices reflect the core of democratic socialism: the understanding that we prosper together or suffer alone, and that an economy should serve humanity rather than the other way around.
For generations, outside corporations have extracted Appalachia’s wealth—coal, timber, labor—while leaving behind environmental devastation and poverty. They promised jobs but delivered exploitation.
This experience mirrors the fundamental critique that democratic socialism makes of capitalism: that this profit-driven system inevitably values extraction over sustainability and shareholder returns over community wellbeing. The democratic socialist vision—where economic power is democratically controlled by communities—speaks directly to Appalachians who have seen the alternative fail them time and again.

Appalachian religious traditions have long emphasized care for the vulnerable and the moral imperative to create a more just society. The biblical instruction to “love thy neighbor” manifests in concrete acts of community support that reject the notion that our worth is determined by our productivity or wealth.
These values find natural expression in democratic socialism’s commitment to guaranteeing dignified lives for all through universal healthcare, living wages, and robust social programs—not as charity but as recognition of our shared humanity.

Many have forgotten that Appalachia has a proud history of labor militancy and economic radicalism. From the Mine Wars to wildcat strikes, our ancestors understood that economic justice required collective action against concentrated power.

Today, we have an opportunity to reclaim this heritage by organizing around issues that matter to rural communities: affordable healthcare, sustainable jobs, quality education for our children, and freedom from corporate domination.

The path forward isn’t about imposing urban political frameworks on rural communities. It’s about recognizing the democratic socialist values already embedded in Appalachian culture: mutual aid, community resilience, skepticism of concentrated power, and the belief that everyone deserves dignity.
The future of Appalachia depends not on submitting to exploitation in the name of “progress,” but on reclaiming our political voice based on our deepest values. Democratic socialism doesn’t ask us to abandon what makes our communities special—it invites us to fulfill their greatest promise.

This piece may be more than what some are able to hear today. I implore you to center yourself on our shared belief that a better world is on the horizon and we will not be oppressed forever. There is a path forward without capitalism and oppression, and we will destroy their systems in our venture forward. Our collective future relies on our ability to critically release our relationship to capitalism as it stands along with the nefarious tendrils it extends into what may seem to be our fond companions.

Our best chance of success in the face of facism today is looking to our revolutionary predecessors who left us detailed instructions; Malcolm X, a Muslim and Black revolutionary, worked personally on an addiction recovery program in his autobiography. In Malcolm’s youth he relied on the black market of drugs in Harlem and openly admitted to using multiple forms of addictive drugs. Later he identified that the same system he relied on in childhood was designed to keep him and his community under oppression. Malcolm developed a 6-step program for addiction using the following tenants: 

1. The addict has to admit that he is an addict
2. The addict is taught why he used narcotics and alcohol
3. The addict is taught that there is a way to stop their addiction
4. The addict’s self-image and ego are built up and anchored in self-power
5. The addict must voluntarily go through a cold-turkey to break with the drugs
6. The addict’s characteristics of hostility and suspicions are addressed

Full of empathy and understanding, Malcolm’s efforts to reduce addiction and abuse were honorable and full of hope.

Martin Luther King, Jr. was also no stranger to the perils of addiction. From an article by Hampton Sides in 2011, King himself struggled with alcohol use, increasing his consumption toward the end of his life to cope with the strain of fighting oppression. In a 1958 advice column King responds to a young man’s submission saying, “Alcoholism is a disease which needs the most expert medical care. A person whom he trusts can probably persuade him to seek this expert treatment… [If] you solve this [problem] each succeeding [problem] will be easier. You have youth, health and strength.”

Fred Hampton, leader of the Black Panthers, aptly referred to the same sickness of addiction as “chemical warfare” and encouraged members to be wary of the role of addiction in their lives and communities. As a party, they endorsed the formulation of Capitalism + Drugs = Genocide, an inflexible equation of the inevitable. In an interview with Rev. Julian DeShazier by the Huffington Post, he says King would hold a similarly wary stance on the war on drugs (before it truly began under the Nixon administration), “When we as a society make something illegal – in this case drug use – we should be very careful. We aren’t just telling people they shouldn’t do something. We are giving ourselves a mandate to arrest them, and very often to put them in jail or prison. The opposite of legalizing drug use is not some vague immediate stage of moral disapproval. It is incarceration.”

For revolutionaries in the U.S. particularly, our past leaders and great thinkers have clearly carved out consistent concerns of how the state relies on addiction to excuse their response of force. Addiction has taken many forms from the opium trade of Eastern Asia to Fentanyl use today, but the message remains the same: it will bring nothing but suffering for you and your community.

From the 2016 publication “Drug War Peace” by the Drug User Peace Initiative, “[Drug law] effectively criminalises people who use drugs themselves, and in some countries it is illegal to even have drugs in one’s bloodstream: it is illegal to be a drug user. People who use drugs are therefore inherently vulnerable to police interference and harassment, being publicly searched, being subjected to invasive strip and

cavity searches, being arrested, and being imprisoned.” In fact, drug related charges account for nearly half of incarcerated individuals at 43.8% representation (Federal Bureau of Prisons, 2025). These laws and disproportionate application affects our non-white, non-cis, and non-straight comrades primarily. Our society still struggles with its relationship to alcohol with a whopping 85% of people 18+ who have used the substance at some point – imagine getting 85% of Americans to agree to anything. Beyond who is willing to try it, just under 25% of people 18+ reported that they had participated in binge drinking in the last month (NIH, 2024) and nearly the same rate of people generally say alcohol has caused problems in their family (Gallup, 2024).

Alcohol has obviously been a struggle for the working class and has been a vector for abuse and control over the proletariat, but according to statistics by Dr. Kristen Fuller, MD, “Gen Z is the first generation to take a noticeable stance on abstaining from alcohol… they are known as the ‘sober curious’ generation.” It seems the state’s tool of incapacitation and violence is not as strong over the newest batch of revolutionaries, which begs the question: is alcohol the only front in the war for bodily autonomy in our revolution today? After all, we know that capitalists are nothing if not excellent parasites hoping to squeeze every last drop from us and move on to a new sales pitch easily. In the same way that cigarettes went largely out of style (and exposure to children declined significantly), alcohol may also have seen its heyday and the people may be waking up to the consequences of capitalistic “fun,” Without the ability to use addiction to alcohol, what ploys does Capitalism still have hidden?

One front could be our relationship to caffeine and processed foods. I know this is a deeply personal relationship to a lot of my comrades and many will feel resistant to the concept of forgoing our treats, particularly treats that represent the few ways we still can achieve a little serotonin boost during the day. For many of us food represents control or joy or consistency, and I do not wish to reduce anyone’s sense of control or joy or consistency in the world. But now is the time to consider being more uncomfortable for the good of humanity and free ourselves from anything we cannot produce ourselves. This fact rings true: we cannot rely on the current systems of production and vow to overthrow them. Revolution requires free thinking, uninhibited by our desires and addictions. It is our responsibility right now to take as much control over our selfhood as possible and rid ourselves of any footholds capitalism still has in us.

The first component to begin breaking down is high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). Because corn is heavily subsidized, HFCS became a popular use of the product due to overproduction, leading to the cheaper sugar swap in many American food products. In a NIH paper, Richard Atkinson, a professor of medicine and nutritional sciences at the University of Wisconsin-Madison says, “There are a lot of subsidies for the two things we should be limiting in our diet, which are sugar and fat, and there are not a lot of subsidies for broccoli and brussels sprouts.” For decades people have been warning each other of the seemingly addictive-parallel nature of excessively sweet and processed foods, based on their own experiences and little official scientific documentation. Similarly to the cigarette industry, food is difficult to research without the whims of powerful corporations affecting funding and release of information – what would Coke say and do to a study about how harmful it is to drink Coke? But brave researchers still tried to inform the public and HFCS has become a tumultuous topic, never to be addressed by the government who stayed staunchly invested in its production and use. According to the NIH, “We demonstrate that HFCS can impair dopamine function in the absence of weight gain or increased fat consumption. As reduced dopamine function has been implicated in compulsive behaviors and reduced energy expenditure.” In essence, HFCS’s effect on us is to make us want more and feel tired.

Feeling tired leads me to the more difficult aspect here: caffeine use and abuse. Capitalism uses exhaustion as a tool of oppression. By nurturing that problem they have offered the solution in the form of caffeine. In a 2014 study by the NIH, “at least 85% of the US population consumes at least one caffeinated beverage per day,” a statistic that seems to hold steady today, but I could not find a more recent official study. In addition to its constant use, caffeine comes with chemical dependency and therefore withdrawal symptoms, which can become severe. In a 2023 study researchers found “Withdrawal from caffeine causes mild to clinically significant distress and impairment of normal functioning. The severity of symptoms vary from individual to individual, and most commonly include a headache, fatigue, decreased energy/activeness, decreased alertness, drowsiness, decreased contentedness, depressed mood, difficulty concentrating, irritability, and feeling foggy/not clearheaded.” The study continues to note the rate of experiencing the most common withdrawal symptom (headaches) is about 50% and the rate of clinically significant distress sits at 13%.

In a Vox article from 2023, author Emily Stewart describes what we all feel to be true: drinking soda is normal and everywhere. It’s an acceptable alternative to alcohol, coffee, tea, even water. There is no environment where cracking open a bottle of Diet Coke wouldn’t be acceptable – even the Oval Office seems to have a high supply. But has anyone else noticed the price increase over the last several decades? From the article, “They’ve been pretty relentless in raising prices over the last few years, really ever since the pandemic. It’s not just Coca-Cola, but it’s PepsiCo and Keurig Dr. Pepper, too. They’ve just continued to raise prices with very little negative impact on their sales volume,” said Garrett Nelson, vice president and senior equity analyst at CFRA Research, a financial intelligence firm. Stewart goes on to explain that the increase in price has been inconsistent with the cost of production. “Shoppers are price sensitive, but they’re not very price aware, meaning most shoppers can’t name the price of more than 10 or a dozen different items that they buy regularly. Diet Coke is one where a regular purchaser of it will know what a good price is,” said Jon Hauptman, the founder and president of Price Dimensions, a retail consultancy.

I understand that the parallel I’m drawing between the alcohol addiction of yesterday’s civil right’s movement and today’s food and caffeine dependency might seem like evidence that I don’t understand true addiction and that we should not compare something so destructive like alcoholism to the mild effects of a missed afternoon pick-me-up, but to that response I would like to pose a question: if this addiction is somehow different, then why can’t we simply forego them? If we feel disruption inside ourselves at the suggestion of giving up a treat, do we really have control over our impulses concerning the treat? I would like to argue that capitalism has achieved something much more nefarious: an addiction so slight and ubiquitous that doesn’t affect our relationships because it is so socially accepted and therefore flies undetected, but remains an unactivated bomb in our hearts. In a scenario where we willingly remain squished under the thumb of caffeine and food reliance, we enslave ourselves to their form of production. It is in direct opposition to our struggle as a working class and has been a tool of colonizers that we must avoid in our communal future.

---

Sources

“Go after the black man in the mud”- Addiction, Malcolm X, and The Nation of Islam’s 6-Point Recovery Plan for Black People (2021)
https://medium.com/@sharrieff__/go-after-the-black-man-in-the-mud-addiction-malcolm-x-and-the-nation-of-islams-6-point-45d7cb5a4b0c

Revolutionary Discipline and Sobriety by Cliff Connolly (2020)
https://cosmonautmag.com/2020/08/revolutionary-discipline-and-sobriety-2/

Remembering Martin Luther King as a Man, not a Saint (2011)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/remembering-martin-luther-king-as-a-man-not-a-saint/2011/04/01/AFvQjTXC_story.html

Dr. King and the War on Drugs (2016)
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dr-king-and-the-war-on-dr_b_9045106

MLK Jr Dear Abby
https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/advice-living-12

Human Rights, Stigma, and Substance Use (2020)
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7348456/#:~:text=people%20who%20use%20drugs%20need,and%20the%20possession%2C%20purchase%20and

50 Years Since the Panthers Formed, Capitalism + Drugs Still = Genocide
https://www.liberationschool.org/50-years-since-the-panthers-formed-capitalism-drugs-still-genocide/

Drug War Peace, INPUD (2016)
https://www.unodc.org/documents/ungass2016/Contributions/Civil/INPUD/DUPI-Violations_of_the_Human_Rights_of_People_Who_Use_Drugs-Web.pdf

Offense Statistics – Federal Bureau of Prisons
https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_offenses.jsp

Alcohol Consumption in the US (2024)
https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/alcohols-effects-health/alcohol-topics-z/alcohol-facts-and-statistics/alcohol-use-united-states-age-groups-and-demographic-characteristics#:~:text=According%20to%20the%202023%20NSDUH%2C%20172.9%20million%20adults%20ages%2018,drank%20in%20the%20past%20year.&text=3%2C4-,This%20includes%3A,69.1%25%20in%20this%20age%20group)

Gallup Alcohol Consumption (2024)
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1582/alcohol-drinking.aspx#:~:text=The%20table%20presents%20data%20on,drinking%20and%2030%25%20not%20drinking.

Gen Z on Alcohol by Kristen Fuller, MD (2024)
https://www.alcoholhelp.com/blog/alcohol-consumption-generations/#:~:text=A%20World%20Finance%20report%20shows,drink%20less%20than%20older%20generations.

Beverage caffeine intakes in the U.S (2014)
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24189158/

Food Addiction Statistics
https://olympicbehavioralhealth.com/rehab-blog/food-addiction/#:~:text=Addictive%20eating%20behaviors%20are%20often,addiction%20to%20highly%20processed%20foods.

Caffeine Addiction Study (2023)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK430790/

High Fructose Corn Syrup’s Affect on Dopamine Levels (2017)
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5747444/#sec014

The Fat of the Land: Do Agricultural Subsidies Foster Poor Health? (2004)
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1247588/#abstract1

Diet Coke Getting Smaller & More Expensive (2023)
https://www.vox.com/money/23979340/diet-coke-price-coca-cola-pepsi-inflation-walmart-costco

The post Putting Treats on the Altar appeared first on Pine & Roses.