It is high time that workers are celebrated and as socialists we know that the working class is what truly built this city. However, this demonstration rings hollow as we continue to see daily evictions, a massively over-funded police department, and an administration that aligns itself with businesses and profits over workers and the general needs of our community. A statue of a rubber worker is nice but workers building power is better. Join DSA today to make sure we can build a world in which we can live and thrive!

Happy Halloween, Comrades! The Activist Editorial Board has compiled a guide to understanding the socialist theory on display in the monsters and spirits of Halloween!

The post Embracing the Red Scare: A Guide to a Socialist Halloween appeared first on YDSA.

DSA's budget and deficit have been front and center in conversations around the organization this year, especially at the 2023 YDSA and DSA conventions. The author spoke with Y/DSA leaders from across the country to discuss the issue.

The post DSA Leaders Look for Paths Through “Boom and Bust” Budget Cycle appeared first on YDSA.

Translated into Spanish below / Traducido al español a continuación

The DSA International Committee congratulates Luisa González and the Citizen’s Revolution party for running a strong campaign in the face of six years of slanderous propaganda by Ecuador’s right-wing controlled mass media, as well as many dubious lawfare prosecutions and convictions. While González’s 48 percent of the vote was not enough to win against the oligarch, Daniel Noboa, it shows that there remains strong opposition to a neoliberal economic agenda within Ecuador.

In the final days of the campaign, the government’s Attorney General, Diana Salazar, made an unsubstantiated accusation that one of the suspects “confessed” to acting under the direction of “the Correa government” in the assassination of Presidential candidate Fernando Villavicencio. Seven other prisoners held for the assassination were killed in prison in the past week. This allegation against Correa was never rooted in fact, but it may have successfully contributed to Citizen’s Revolution’s narrow defeat.

Daniel Noboa is the 35-year-old son of Alvaro Naboa, one of Ecuador’s richest men and a five-time presidential candidate. Noboa will continue the neoliberal policies of current President Guillermo Lasso as well as the previous President, Lenín Moreno which will favor his wealthy family and the entire ruling class. These policies will cut taxes for himself and his family at the expense of drastic cuts in all public services, including education and health care; and neglect for the poorest Ecuadorians. These neoliberal policies have devastated Ecuador and frayed its social fabric culminating in an unprecedented crime wave with a 500 percent increase in homicides. 

We congratulate Citizen’s Revolution for winning the most seats of any party in the National Assembly in this snap general election, ensuring they will continue to lead the opposition to neoliberalism in Ecuador. This past February, they also won the majority of Provincial Prefect offices and the majority of the mayor’s offices in large cities, including Quito and Guayaquil. 

Ecuador’s next general election will be in only a year and a half. Citizen’s Revolution along with indigenous organizations, labor unions, environmentalists, feminists and student groups represent the majority of Ecuadorians who oppose the neoliberal project. Their collective unity will be pivotal in future struggles and in creating the future that Ecuador deserves. We stand with all of them and pledge to lend our continued support.

La DSA condena la propaganda sucia en la segunda vuelta de las elecciones presidenciales de Ecuador

El Comité Internacional de la DSA felicita a Luisa González y al partido Revolución Ciudadana por haber llevado a cabo una sólida campaña y haber hecho frente a seis años de propaganda difamatoria por parte de los medios de comunicación controlados por la derecha ecuatoriana, así como a muchos procesos legales y condenas dudosas. Aunque el 48% de los votos que González alcanzó no fue suficiente para vencer al oligarca Daniel Noboa, se ha demostrado que sigue habiendo una fuerte oposición a la agenda económica neoliberal en Ecuador.

En los últimos días de la campaña, la fiscal general del gobierno, Diana Salazar, formuló una acusación sin fundamento concerniente a una “confesión” de uno los sospechosos, que dice haber actuado bajo la dirección del “gobierno de Correa” en el asesinato del candidato presidencial Fernando Villavicencio. Otros siete presos detenidos por el homicidio fueron asesinados en prisión a comienzos del mes de octubre. Esta acusación contra Correa nunca tuvo fundamento, pero puede haber contribuido con éxito a la estrecha derrota de la Revolución Ciudadana.

Noboa, de 35 años, es hijo de Álvaro Noboa, uno de los hombres más ricos de Ecuador y cinco veces candidato presidencial. Noboa continuará las políticas neoliberales del actual presidente Guillermo Lasso, así como del anterior, Lenín Moreno, que favorecerán a su acaudalada familia. Estas políticas harán reducir los impuestos para él y su familia a costa de drásticos recortes en todos los servicios públicos, incluyendo la educación y la salud; y a costa del abandono de los ecuatorianos más pobres. Estas políticas neoliberales han devastado Ecuador y han devastado su tejido social, culminando en una ola de delincuencia sin precedentes con un aumento de un 500 por ciento en la cantidad de homicidios.

La Revolución Ciudadana es el partido con más escaños en la Asamblea Nacional en estas elecciones generales anticipadas y seguirá liderando la oposición al neoliberalismo en Ecuador. El pasado mes de febrero, ganó la mayoría de las prefecturas provinciales y la mayoría de las alcaldías de las grandes ciudades, incluidas la de Quito y la de Guayaquil.

Las próximas elecciones generales en Ecuador serán dentro de año y medio. La Revolución Ciudadana, junto con organizaciones indígenas, sindicatos, ecologistas, feministas y grupos estudiantiles, representa a la mayoría de los ecuatorianos que se oponen al proyecto neoliberal. Su unidad colectiva será fundamental en las futuras luchas y en la creación del futuro que merece Ecuador. Estamos con todos ellos y nos comprometemos a seguir prestándoles nuestro apoyo.

The post In Condemnation of the Dirty Campaign Against Our Comrades in Ecuador appeared first on DSA International Committee.

by Jonathan Mukes

This article was republished from Jonathan Mukes’s blog on Medium. It was originally published on October 13th. Jonathan is a member of Detroit DSA.

The following article represents the opinion of the author and does not necessarily represent the views of the Detroit Socialist Editorial and Writers’ Collective or Detroit DSA as a whole.

Context and Disclaimer

On October 7, 2023, Hamas executed one of the most devastating terrorist attacks in recent memory within the ongoing Palestinian-Israeli conflict. This meticulously orchestrated assault, marked by its horrific number of victims, aimed to inflict mass casualties and secure hostages, adding to the litany of regrettable and unjustifiable acts of violence that have plagued the region for years. Tragically, the attack claimed the lives of over one thousand individuals, while dozens were abducted, forcibly separated from their families. In a coordinated effort, nearly a thousand Hamas militants surreptitiously infiltrated twenty locations, which included a music festival, leaving a trail of devastation in their wake.

The Israeli government responded with immediate force. Israel’s retaliation was marked by a series of relentless airstrikes, targeting 426 distinct locations within the Gaza Strip. Entire residential communities were reduced to rubble, and residential homes were obliterated, further compounding the humanitarian crisis. One airstrike reportedly claimed the lives of 19 members of the same family, none of whom were combatants, and who were not provided prior warnings. Palestinian hospitals were not spared, resulting in the loss of emergency personnel and an even more profound crisis in the already overstretched healthcare system. In light of these dire developments, Israel has established a war government. A total blockade has been imposed on the Gaza Strip, depriving the civilian population of critical resources such as fuel for generators, food for their families, and power for their basic necessities. The Israeli military has been strategically targeting locations, allegedly including the deployment of white phosphorus which is a particularly heinous war crime, with the aim of disrupting humanitarian aid efforts. The current Palestinian death toll has tragically surpassed two thousand people, with no immediate end to the violence in sight.

This essay is an analysis of the recent events involving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. As we look into these horrifying events and their repercussions, it’s vital to cement some ground rules. First and foremost, we must emphasize that the loss of innocent lives can never be justified, regardless of the circumstances. Condemning acts of terrorism and war crimes should come naturally to you and I. These atrocities, no matter the cause one supports, must cease. We need to recognize that the sanctity of human life and individual autonomy transcends any cause or belief we may hold.

Secondly, it’s crucial to acknowledge the violence we witness is not random; it’s an integral part of a conflict that has spanned over seventy years in this region. Understanding the complexities and historical context as well as analyzing the structures that exacerbate the conflict, is essential to making informed judgments. So, as I explore these events, I plan to do so with a mindful awareness of the depth and complexity of the situation at hand.

Familiar Rhetoric

I stumbled upon the news through social media. I made the unfortunate choice to explore various corners of the internet in search of public sentiment regarding the unfolding crisis. What I found was reminiscent of echoes from other conflicts, particularly the Russo-Ukrainian crisis. War drums were being beaten, and Israel had already begun participating in retaliatory war crimes, intensifying the cycle of violence and tragedy. The lines were swiftly drawn, and the online world mirrored the real one, as “Team Israel” and “Team Palestine” clashed. Reactionary voices and opinions appeared eager to support and empower the already near-infinitely funded military-industrial complex, with a two-billion-dollar supplementary funding package in the works by congress. This felt like the new norm — an era where even attempting to analyze the situation or utter the phrase “Free Palestine” could paint you as a “typical terrorist enjoyer,” who bathed in the blood of the innocent. Obviously a joke, and not at all representative of reality, but in certain online spaces, it’s not that far from the truth.

The rhetoric I encountered, advocating for Israeli violence, was oddly familiar. Familiar, not in the context of international conflict, but similar to rhetoric closer to home. Much closer than Ukraine. The reactionaries, true to form, entrenched themselves in unwavering positions, championing policies that would restore the status quo, regardless of the violence inflicted on innocent lives. The intriguing aspect of this wave of reactionary ideas is their striking resemblance to racial anti-Black “logic” that has long haunted our discourse. It’s a terrain many of us who delve into economic and social justice have encountered, especially when our skin lacks paleness and our hair refuses to straighten. Conversations about progressive race policies in America consistently descend into the familiar realm of discussing the 13/52 statistic, the “fatherless households” stereotype, or the portrayal of some Black communities as inherently violent and dangerous.

These arguments rarely seek to address the root causes of the issues facing Black Americans. Instead, they employ misleading statistics and supposed “evidence” to justify violence, both physical and structural. The obvious counterpoint is that the material conditions of Black communities are notably worse than others, a direct result of institutional and structural racism that eroded and continues to erode those conditions. To uplift these communities, we must confront historical injustices and dismantle the systems and hierarchies perpetuating inequality and exploitation. It’s a telling observation that when communities, regardless of race, enjoy affluence, cohesion, programs for their youth, parks, ample food, and resources, violence recedes. It clearly shows the idea that improving material conditions serves as a powerful antidote to violence.

The Crisis in Gaza

To truly analyze the violence in the region and seek meaningful solutions, we need to take a closer look at the conditions faced by the Palestinian people. The situation in the Gaza Strip, controlled by Hamas, offers an example of the extreme challenges and violence that have persisted in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. For the past sixteen years, Gaza has been subjected to an Israeli blockade. This blockade has had a devastating impact, severely restricting the movement of both people and goods in and out of the region. The economic hardships resulting from this isolation are rampant. High unemployment rates, limited access to clean water, and chronic electricity shortages have kept the population into a horrible economic situation. Poverty and food insecurity have become even more commonplace.

Even though Israel formally withdrew from Gaza in 2005, it still maintains strict control over the region’s borders, water, and airspace. This control effectively isolates Gaza, making it nearly impossible for the people there to have international trade, travel, and access essential services. The blockade has wreaked havoc on the region’s economy, leading to persistent unemployment and rendering a significant portion of the population dependent on humanitarian aid for their basic needs. Economic opportunities have been stifled, while import restrictions have halted further development. Along with the economic crisis, access to vital services has been negatively impacted. Healthcare facilities in Gaza are routinely plagued by shortages of medical supplies and essential equipment. Educational institutions face a scarcity of resources, resulting in overcrowded classrooms and limited to no opportunities for students. This directly affects the prospects and future opportunities of the youth in the region. The challenges related to clean water and proper sanitation in Gaza cannot be understated. Less than four percent of the water in Gaza is drinkable and the surrounding sea is heavily contaminated with sewage. The limited availability of water resources, combined with the ongoing conflict, has exacerbated these issues, further endangering public health. Keep in mind that the median age in the Gaza Strip is 18 years old.

The West Bank

The West Bank is a region segmented by a distinct division into three main areas: Area A, Area B, and Area C, each marked by varying degrees of authority and control. This division shapes the living conditions experienced by the local population. Area A falls under the full control of the Palestinian Authority (PA). Life in these areas is akin to that in self-governed Palestinian territories, with basic services being provided by the PA. Moving to Area B, the situation shifts; here, control is shared, between Palestinian civil authority and Israeli security. Living conditions in Area B can fluctuate, dependent on the level of cooperation between the PA and Israeli authorities. Finally, Area C is under complete Israeli control, presenting a range of challenges for its residents. Palestinians in this area often encounter restrictions on construction, land use, and movement, which, in turn, limit their access to basic services and opportunities for land development.

Adding to these challenges are the growing number of Israeli settlements in the West Bank. The presence of these settlements significantly impacts living conditions. These settlements are constructed on land that legally belongs to Palestinians but is claimed by Israelis. This ongoing dispute gives rise to evictions and limitations on Palestinian movement and development. Israeli military checkpoints and barriers have a dual role: enhancing security and introducing disruptions to daily life for Palestinians. Tensions frequently flare due to the continual expansion of Israeli settlements and the ongoing land disputes. Palestinians face the reality of land confiscations, demolitions, and displacement, directly impacting their living conditions and their access to essential resources. Even more distressing are the accounts of armed Israeli settlers engaging in violence and harassment against Palestinian civilians, often resulting in property damage and, at times, physical confrontations and violence. This hostile behavior fosters an atmosphere of insecurity and fear among Palestinian civilians. Remarkably, these settlers operate with little to no accountability, as the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) serve as the primary police and military force in the West Bank. The IDF’s alignment with Israeli settlers in nearly all situations only intensifies these tensions, leaving Palestinian residents to grapple with the repercussions of this fractured landscape.

Exploitation of Labor

Following the aftermath of the Six-Day War and the economic crisis, Palestinians turned to working illegally in Israel as a means to earn income. They soon became an invaluable source of cheap, readily available labor, filling the ranks of “unskilled” positions upon which the Israeli economy heavily relied. The sheer number of low-wage Palestinian laborers spanning various sectors inevitably led to a general decline in average wages. The implications of this economic crisis run deeper, as it indirectly allows a level of control over employment rates of Palestine, to Israel. The restrictions on the movement of Palestinian workers not only add to the influence Israel exerts over the employment landscape but also create a reservoir of labor that can be tapped into whenever the need for unskilled labor arises.

For Palestinians, the labor market within Israel is essentially a “managed market,” subject to political decisions originating in Israel, rather than aligning with the political, economic, or social directives of the Palestinian Authority. Israeli policy in this realm is shaped by a myriad of factors, encompassing economic, strategic, and security considerations, which shift according to changing circumstances and the specific region in focus. Orchestrating this labor dynamic, Israel effectively maintains control over the Palestinian territories, including the West Bank and Gaza Strip, by way of its grip on the Palestinian economy. At the heart of Israel’s approach lies a security and political imperative, aimed at preserving the status quo and mitigating the Palestinian struggle and their political demands through the avenue of employment. This intricate web of economic and political factors underscores the complex interplay between Israel and Palestinian labor, and sheds light on the consequences of these intertwined relationships. These relationships, which are not on even footing, are a symptom of a massive power imbalance between the two groups. Israel controls Palestinian’s economy, resources and borders.

Uneven Footing During the Conflict

The Palestinian people are undeniably facing oppression and genocide. Their economic autonomy is severely constrained, infrastructure issues persist, and are often exacerbated by the deliberate actions of the Israeli government. Food, water, and fuel shortages have become all too common, largely due to Israeli blockades that restrict access to these vital resources. The Palestinian population endures violence from Israeli settlers, who are gradually displacing them from homes that have been lived in for generations. This violence is not confined to settlers; the state of Israel itself also exerts force and violence against the Palestinian people. Hospitals and healthcare facilities in Palestine are frequently targeted without warning, placing an already beleaguered healthcare system under immense strain. Movement restrictions are so extreme that many Palestinians are hesitant to leave their homeland, as re-entry is often denied. These restrictions serve the interests of Israeli settlers who are supported by the IDF in their efforts to occupy Palestinian land. The Palestinian people grapple with a sense of political and economic isolation.

It’s important that this situation is named for what it is — an open-air prison, overseen by a fascist government that practices a form of apartheid and is sustained with the backing of the Western Imperial Core. This directly parallels historical structures of oppression, where African and African-descendant communities have often been subject to similar imperial designs, as well as political, sexual, and gender minorities who have faced various degrees of physical, economic, political, and structural violence. In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, this violence is often asymmetrical, each side entangled in a cycle of retaliation and suffering, while one side holds a vast power imbalance.

Structural Analysis

While delving into the historical causes of the conflict is essential for understanding its roots, our focus here is on the current structure — how it perpetuates a dire humanitarian crisis and deteriorating conditions, and its inherently violent nature. It is a complex and nuanced issue, with profound consequences for all those involved, and it warrants our attention and scrutiny.

Unjustifiable Hierarchies and Their Use in Exploitation

Unjustifiable hierarchies represent social, political, or economic structures where individuals or groups wield power over others without their explicit and voluntary consent. This power is often maintained through coercion, force, or systems that perpetuate inequality, inevitably leading to the oppression, exploitation, or deprivation of those subjected to it. Power in this context means the capacity to permit or resist change. Not all hierarchies are inherently unjustifiable, but those lacking consent and upheld through violence certainly are. Unjustifiable hierarchies are illegitimate unless they can be justified on the grounds of mutual agreement, equality, and freedom. In almost all cases they should be replaced with more equitable and decentralized forms of organization. These hierarchies essentially exist to serve the interests of the oppressors, and their preservation typically necessitates violence.

The various forms of unjustifiable hierarchies enforced upon minority communities are fundamentally rooted in a massive power imbalance. When these hierarchies emerge, they are frequently employed to exploit individuals or manipulate situations, granting the ruling class even more power. This, in turn, deepens the power imbalance, leading to further oppression of the already marginalized groups and reinforcing the hierarchy. Violence is both the catalyst for the establishment of these hierarchies and the means through which they are sustained. What this means is that the existence of an unjustifiable hierarchy is inherently violent, regardless of whether individuals are currently experiencing explicit suffering or if the structure is actively engaging in exploitation. These structures have often been exploited economically during colonialism or imperialism, siphoning valuable resources from weaker nations into the coffers and economies of the more powerful ones. This process, in turn, generates worsening material conditions, resulting in a population of impoverished, desperate workers, thereby facilitating easier exploitation.

It becomes a vicious cycle: from power to the unjustifiable hierarchy as a tool of exploitation, the deterioration of material conditions, and the creation of wealth and further power for the ruling class. For the oppressed, the only meaningful means to end unnecessary and unjustified violence is to address and improve their material conditions. Permanently addressing these conditions necessitates the removal of unjustifiable hierarchies that exploit and degrade them. Disentangling and dismantling systems of power is rarely a straightforward or nonviolent process. Such efforts typically demand a combination of methods and are intricate, multifaceted endeavors.

Top Down Dismantlement

Dismantling these hierarchies presents complex challenges, often involving a spectrum of strategies and outcomes. One approach is abnegation, wherein those in power voluntarily reject and dismantle structures that underpin their hierarchical authority. However, this path is relatively rare, as many of these structures incentivize the further exploitation of the oppressed. Nevertheless, instances of abnegation do occur, as seen when a top-down business willingly reorganizes itself into a worker-owned cooperative, shifting the position of power from the few to the many.

Conversely, the inverse of this process is domination, wherein the ruling class chooses to simply remove the marginalized group from the equation. However, this approach is also uncommon, as the existence of the marginalized often serves to benefit the ruling class. It’s essential to understand that a power balance does not exist in isolation. This lack of isolation hasn’t deterred certain colonial or fascist powers from engaging in genocide, employing rhetoric and violence in an attempt to obliterate the marginalized. Regrettably, this is often the “solution” proposed by some “apolitical” people when discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — a perspective that advocates bombing the Gaza Strip and forcibly removing Palestinians from the West Bank. However, this is not a valid solution and will inevitably result in more innocent civilians losing their lives, which is what we are seeing happen now.

Bottom Up Dismantlement

The responsibility for dismantling the source of unjustifiable hierarchical power should never rest on the shoulders of those who are its victims, yet, tragically, it often does. From the perspective of the marginalized, there appear to be two primary courses of action: revolution or revolt. A revolution is essentially a large-scale, coordinated, bottom-up transformation. It is typically a form of organized struggle, though it need not be inherently violent, though violence can certainly arise during it. Revolution requires time, planning, and a degree of solidarity among those involved. Revolts, on the other hand, take a different path. They tend to be more spontaneous and are often driven by the worsening conditions imposed by the hierarchy. Revolts demand immediate change and are frequently marked by more violent means. Violence becomes far more common in this form of struggle, reflecting the urgency and desperation that underlies it. The decision between these options is a complex and weighty one, with consequences that resonate far beyond the initial act of resistance.

In this case study of unjustifiable hierarchies, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict stands as an example of the challenges faced when striving for lasting peace. While the ideal resolution is simply revolution that leads to peaceful abnegation, one that concludes without violence, and instead with justice, and mutual respect, the current trajectory suggests otherwise. As the ruling class increasingly leans towards domination, violence and revolt become a distressingly natural consequence.

The Only Nonviolent Solution

It is crucial to acknowledge that violence, particularly against civilians and noncombatants, can never serve as a valid or morally justifiable solution. The suffering and loss that violence inflicts upon innocent lives are unacceptable and can only perpetuate further suffering, ultimately exacerbating the very issues we seek to address. It is crucial to denounce violence as a general solution, and just to be clear, the existence of the unjustifiable hierarchy is also violence. Our shared responsibility is to work toward a world where unjustifiable hierarchies are dismantled, leaving no room for oppression, exploitation, or deprivation.

In the midst of the heart-wrenching humanitarian crises that unfolds daily, I find myself grappling with a disconcerting reality. As onlookers, we sometimes hold on to the notion of a “perfect victim,” particularly when the oppressive force in question happens to be an ally. This romanticization permeates our media coverage, political discourse, and even our collective sentiment. It’s almost as though we expect the oppressed to win some PR battle before we grant them the slightest sliver of sympathy, even as their families are displaced, and they endure the harrowing weight of asymmetrical violence that often remains shrouded in obscurity.

Let it be clear that the rejection of Islamist fundamentalism and the unequivocal condemnation of the murder of innocent civilians stand as non-negotiable principles. No one should ever experience such unspeakable horrors. However, it is also important that an increasing number of people recognize that this violence will not cease if Israel continues to justify and perpetuate the worsening conditions endured by the Palestinian people — those who are not combatants but merely wish to lead lives free from fear. The sole pathway to lasting resolution in this enduring conflict is the dismantling of unjustifiable hierarchies that perpetuate the suffering, and deteriorating material conditions of an entire population.

The only way to achieve this objective is to liberate Palestine.

The Detroit Socialist is produced and run by members of Detroit DSA’s Newspaper Collective. Interested in becoming a member of Detroit DSA? Go to metrodetroitdsa.com/join to become a member. Send a copy of the dues receipt to: membership@metrodetroitdsa.com in order to get plugged in to our activities!

Viewpoint: The effects of unjustifiable hierarchies and asymmetrical violence was originally published in The Detroit Socialist on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Every day, billions of working people on Earth toil to maintain a capitalist economy they never asked for. While technological advances and general prosperity have spread beyond the borders of the most advanced countries, the “golden age” of capitalism is over. For the majority of people on the planet, including in the United States, life is getting harder. Capitalism is working overtime to preserve the power and profits of the wealthy at the expense of the rest of us.

In light of this, DSA’s goal is to fight for all working people’s ability to democratically control their own lives in all areas of society and the economy. To achieve that goal, we need two things: the involvement of millions to make a mass movement, and the leverage to win back power from the capitalist class. The only way DSA is going to get what we need to win is by organizing as workers and uniting with organized labor, so we can attack the source of capitalists’ power: their profits.

Labor unions represent the only organized force with the capacity and the leverage to win against capitalists outright. Millions of union members run a collective, dues-funded project to organize and fight for a better life for all working people. So this year, Atlanta DSA has prioritized building relationships with labor unions, educating our members and the public on the centrality of workplace organizing and the importance of determining our own path, independent of big-money donors and politicians.

Most excitingly, with the United States having just experienced its third “Hot Labor Summer” in a row, our chapter has prioritized strike support. Following our solidarity work last year with workers at Nabisco, John Deere, and Starbucks, this summer Atlanta DSA democratically voted to prioritize supporting UPS Teamsters fighting to win higher wages and respect on the job in the largest private-sector contract this country has seen in decades. Atlanta DSA worked for months, in coordination with the DSA National Labor Commission, to show up for the UPS Teamsters. The Teamsters we supported organized to build strong shop-floor support for the contract fight, while the whole of our chapter has met with rank-and-file leaders to learn how we can best provide key support. We hosted educational panels, talked with and interviewed rank-and-file Teamsters, showed up to practice pickets, and canvassed to build community support for the contract fight. In the end, 86% of voting Teamsters approved the new contract, which included raises, air conditioning in trucks, and an end to two-tier jobs.This was only won through a concerted strike campaign that scared UPS into concessions to avoid responsibility for a costly strike.

Our strike solidarity campaign provided an avenue for friends of labor from all across the Atlanta metro area to become involved, and we organized supporters across the community to understand the stakes of this fight. In a word, we’ve helped begin rebuilding the connections between labor unions and the communities they fight for in Atlanta. Now, with UAW Big 3 workers on strike across the country, we are also mobilizing to join workers picketing at the Chrysler parts distribution center in Morrow, GA.

As our members gained experience and our organization gained credibility for the material solidarity we showed to Teamsters, Atlanta DSA’s Labor Committee has worked hard to build positive relationships with other unions, both rank-and-file member-leaders and staff alike. While many unions are still struggling under the weight of repressive governments and hostile corporate management, it becomes a common refrain that “we need to organize our own members before we can devote resources to other groups”. However, as socialists know, an injury to one is an injury to all. A strong labor movement is one that moves together, in solidarity with workers everywhere, because it makes us stronger in the long run. Capitalists love to divide and conquer, so when we can pull a variety of groups together to go to bat for the Teamsters,  Starbucks Workers United, United Campus Workers, and the railroad unions, we can show we are stronger than them.

As we’ve helped lay the groundwork for stronger community-labor connections, and a more coherent labor movement, Atlanta DSA is also providing support for workers looking for help organizing at work, even before they are ready to approach a union. We plan to encourage more of our members to volunteer and receive training with the Emergency Workers Organizing Committee (EWOC) (a joint effort between DSA’s National Labor Commission and United Electrical Workers) and use those skills to support new organizing drives across Georgia, including food and retail service workers.

We also support our own members and allies through a monthly Workplace Organizing Roundtable. By providing a space for groups of workers from different industries to come together and talk shop, Atlanta DSA has deepened our institutional knowledge of the organizing terrains in various sectors of the economy. Education, tech, food service, manufacturing, and logistics workers share ideas and learn together, forming a nucleus of organizing knowledge so we can transform the struggle for workplace dignity and democracy. 

Through these roundtables, members have been able to discuss methods and techniques for organizing, the history of different kinds of labor struggles, and our plans for organizing in our respective industries. In the coming months, we will expand and deepen our efforts so we can bring in even more people from around the Atlanta area and fight to create a powerful, democratic labor movement.

Just this last month, Atlanta DSA led and organized a labor contingent to the Atlanta Pride Parade, alongside the Atlanta-North Georgia Labor Council, Starbucks Workers United,  United Campus Workers, the Teamsters LGTBQ Caucus, Unite Here, AFA-CWA, IAM, and more organizations. As workers in the South, who are subject to a right-wing and repressive state government, it’s important to not just build democratic and militant unions, but also progressive unions, willing to champion racial justice, trans rights, bodily autonomy, and more!

Atlanta DSA’s labor work this year has laid a lot of groundwork that we can use to strengthen the organization of working people into a working class, capable of fighting for itself. We’ve brought together groups that haven’t worked together in the past, beginning to heal the divides wrought by decades of neoliberal attacks on working people. DSA members have advocated for a more militant, democratic, and progressive labor movement in the Atlanta area – one that allows us all to fight for political and economic power, free from the influence of big money institutions that don’t have our best interests at heart. Through our work, Atlanta DSA is helping to once more cohere a working class movement that can fight for all of us. It’s exciting to be a part of, and you should be a part of it, too.

So what’s next? Get involved in our labor work by joining a weekly meeting, checking out a monthly workplace roundtable, get organized with Emergency Workplace Organizing Committee (EWOC), and learn more about what we do!

The post Building a Socialist Labor Movement appeared first on Red Clay Comrade.

For reference, see the 2023 SacDSA Local Convention packet - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DWZuXSlkLUfKhENPAq6e9DwhCfBt2w__JJxkl2seF1E/edit?usp=sharing

By Benjamin Arriaga

My friend and comrade Jimbo Jackson, and fellow Socialist Majority caucus affiliate, submitted three proposed bylaw amendments for the upcoming local convention. Although my comrade and I affiliate with the same national caucus in DSA, I write this to share my disagreement with his proposals for our local chapter. However, I do make an exception of what I would like to see amended at least in his third bylaw amendment, as detailed below. In the interest of transparency: at this time, we are both expected to step in as Convention Chair and Convention Parliamentarian. I have taken steps to enlist other comrades and receive assurances from them that they will accept these roles when his proposals and my proposals reach the floor. I spoke directly with Comrade Jackson about my position on his proposals and that I would be submitting my position statement for publication with a copy provided to him before its online publication. This autumn season I also began my first annual term as a State Council Delegate to California DSA for our chapter. (FYI: We are allotted four delegates and our chapter has yet to hold an election for the fourth seat.)

First, a word about our process: According to our chapter bylaws, our chapter’s membership is required to hold a local convention annually. Despite the fact that we technically have the ability per these same bylaws to amend the bylaws at any of our general membership meetings, I think that specifically holding an annual local convention encourages us to highlight for this type of meeting a chance to address long-term timescale questions. In comparison with a labor union federation it can serve the same function as a “leadership summit” or in a capitalist enterprise, the “company retreat.” In other words, this type of meeting is intended for asking questions about our structure, our capacity, our strategy, and ultimately for affirming our vision as a democratic socialist organization.

On Comrade Jackson’s Bylaw Amendment #1: Pertaining to CA-DSA delegate role, I urge to vote Nay. I plan to vote Nay due to my observation that this would confine the imagination necessary for nonsectarian representative democracy as a principle in our organization. Allowing for our elected delegates (myself included) to exercise initiative, to communicate well with others, or to find ways to collaborate is naturally an extension of the basic practice of representative democracy. We elect a person to do things. If we don’t like what they are doing, then we let them know, and if they don’t compromise, then we choose someone else by majority rule. Additionally, the original language would also confine the expression of dissenting opinions and the “pledge not to act unilaterally” is so broad as that it might discourage our delegation from adding to the discussion or the work of building the very new California DSA State Council without seeking endless, additional approval. Effective, nonsectarian, representative democracy does not require stipulated language of this type.

By contrast, I urge to vote Yay on the California DSA Delegate Term Activity Resolution I authored and submitted. I agree with Comrade Jackson that California DSA would indeed benefit from collaboration but I argue that this does not need to be stipulated through a bylaw amendment. Instead, my resolution would prompt myself and my fellow State Council Delegates from our chapter to use our heads and take lead on action items to help create a political program for our communities and lead by example at California DSA State Council.

On Comrade Jackson’s Bylaw Amendment #2: Pertaining to political priorities of the local chapter, I also urge to vote Nay. Although one or more of the concerns motivating this amendment are valid, such as “a need to improve communication and coordination as a chapter,” I do not think restricting ourselves through our bylaws to a specific number of priorities would actually improve our chapter’s operations. We cannot legislate or formally deliberate a shortcut around the work of organizing.

The question of our priorities is an organizing question, just as much as it is also a political one that faces every member regardless of holding an official leadership role. It requires setting aside ample time to meet and discuss and develop plans with other comrades to choose what we shall focus on achieving and by when. To assist with that effort, which involves political education, I submitted the Standard Spoken Introductions Resolution to emphasize a new general practice. We may call this a form of popular discipline, perhaps, for our members to take up if they agree with me about its necessity. I think when we practice saying a consistent hard brief pitch of what democratic socialism means, popularizing that kind of message discipline internally can take us on a path to resolve ourselves to be consistent in our messaging overall and the criteria by which we adopt future priorities that can matter to our communities.

Finally, regarding Comrade Jackson’s Bylaw Amendment #3: Pertaining to clarifying committee operations and the organizer role, I urge that someone move to amend its original language when it is on the floor. My recommendation may be best laid out in the following points: • Strike out all language that raises the needed participation threshold to 5 dues-paying members to form a committee and keep our status quo requirement of 3. • Strike out all proposed changes to the Committee Operations subsection of our bylaws. • Accept the proposed change to the Organizer subsection that strikes out the stanza with the “ultimate responsibility” and “liaison” clauses. • Accept the proposed addition of a Committee Membership subsection (while changing to 3 signatories instead of 5 signatories). • Insert after the sentence starting with “Only SacDSA members in good standing” and ending with “committee members,” the following language: • “Committee meeting attendees who are not SacDSA members may call themselves fellow-travelers so long as a member or members in good standing sponsors or takes lead in helping them learn about DSA and assume(s) a responsibility to the chapter for their fellow-traveler’s actions when participating in public-facing political activity.”

At any future general membership meeting, we can make two motions: any dues-paying member could move to introduce a bylaw amendment to expand our Steering Committee to include our Committee Chairs; any dues-paying member can also move to dismantle a committee that the majority agrees with dismantling, howsoever it may be justified during any debate if and only after someone seconds that motion.

I grant that Comrade Jackson is well-intended with his proposals. This does not change my worry that his proposals seem like attempts to reshape our structure to more strictly mimic a democratic centralist model. Democratic centralism, in simple terms, involves a periphery that reports to a center and a center that is elected from a periphery, etc., but that tends to fix and concentrate authority at the center once questions of debate are considered settled. This model has gained a nostalgic following in some groupings outside of DSA but also within whole national caucuses in DSA. Their various attempts to transform our organization, especially now, may exacerbate current trends of “procedural overhead” or “second-job professionalism.” These can burn people out. Nonetheless, the renewed appeal of democratic centralism across different caucuses and chapters in DSA may be a result of real frustration with where DSA is at now. The actual problem of internal organizing deserves its own theorization as well as the construction of an alternative for this historic moment.

The need for this theorization demands collaboration with other comrades to continue this conversation with Sacramento DSA in mind as our material, organizational anchor.

Tonight, we’re traveling to Arizona to learn from socialist organizers who are fighting on their home turf to make forming and maintaining strong unions easier for workers. We’re joined live by Bobby and Kaland of Arizona Works Together and Phoenix DSA to hear about their campaign to repeal so-called “Right to Work” laws in their state and what it means for union organizers in Arizona and nationwide. Plus, it’s ladies’ night once again here on RPM with Amy and Lee as hosts, so we’ll spend some time discussing why unions are great for women and feminists.

More info at: https://www.azworkstogether.com/

and in Spanish at https://aztrabajajuntos.com/

Hey! What’s better than being in the largest socialist organizaiton in the US? Being in an even largest-er socialist organization in the US! Join DSA-LA’s Growth and Development Committee for our 2023 Recommitment Drive! We’ll be phonebanking expiring and expired members to ask them to re-commit to help us build socialism and a better world.

Never phonebanked before? No problem! We’ll have a short training before we get started and people on the call to help with any problems that come up.

This is a great way to help grow DSA and we need your help to make it happen!

Sign up to take part in our phonebanks using the links below:

To reject a type of marital arrangement because of its supposed incompatibility with “the traditional definition of marriage” only calls attention to the speaker’s ignorance of well-known ethnographic and historic facts.

April 30, 2012 4:04 pm | Updated February 2, 2016

By Richard Feinberg

After years of argument a half-dozen states and the District of Columbia have legalized same-sex marriage. Several more, including my own, are considering it. Meanwhile, Republican presidential candidates, right-wing columnists and talk show hosts, evangelical pastors, and recently even Pope Benedict have called upon Americans to halt the spread of “immorality.” Family values, we are told, require us to defend marriage as “traditionally defined.” As an anthropologist I find this whole discussion rather odd.

Generations of my colleagues have agreed that marriage is a cross-cultural universal. Every known community, with one or two arguable exceptions, has had some marriage system. Common American assumptions about marriage, however, do not apply to large numbers of “traditional” communities.

Despite the claim that marriage is a bond between one man and one woman, polygamy (defined broadly as plural marriage) is extremely common and was even more so in the past. The most frequently encountered variant is polygyny, the marriage of one husband to multiple wives. Often, the co-wives are sisters, an arrangement known as sororal polygyny. Less common variants are polyandry (one wife, multiple husbands) and polygynandry (an arrangement that involves multiple spouses of both sexes). We even have reports from East Africa’s Nuer of “ghost marriage,” where a man marries a woman in the name of his deceased brother. The dead brother is regarded as the woman’s husband, and her children consider his ghost to be their father. They call the man who is cohabiting with their mother by a term that normally means “uncle.”

Among the world’s known cultures, most have accepted polygyny as legitimate. Many have actively preferred it. It is far from some quaint, exotic practice; indeed, it is well-established in the Bible. Ironically, however, even in communities that permit polygyny, people typically marry monogamously, not for moral reasons but for economic ones. Few men have the resources to support more than one wife and her children.

While people usually content themselves with just one spouse, monogamy has many variants. In the Roman Catholic tradition marriage is for life, and divorce is forbidden. Similarly, Polynesians of Anuta, a Pacific island I have studied now for close to 40 years, are affiliated with the Church of England and do not permit divorce. The fact that marriages are durable, however, does not mean they are always happy.

In most places divorce is possible, and it is often followed by remarriage. The result, known technically as serial monogamy, is familiar to Americans — as it is to many other peoples.

In much of the modern world, marriages are initiated by the couple on the basis of personal attraction. In a substantial number of communities, however, marriage partners are selected by the parents of the bride and groom. Sometimes the transaction is completed while the couple are still children. This makes sense in light of the anthropological finding that marriage is often a political and economic arrangement between groups rather than a personal arrangement between individuals. Such marriages are structured differently from ours, yet they are just as likely to be happy and long-lasting.

Seen in an anthropological light, gay marriage is one variant in a remarkably diverse set of practices. Same-sex marriages are not exactly commonplace in the mosaic of world cultures. Neither are they absent from “traditional” societies, however, despite the claims of those who argue for a legal ban on same-sex marriages.

Non-marital but regularized homosexual contact is well-known in certain regions of New Guinea, where boys are required to undergo ritualized homoerotic experiences as they grow into manhood. Same-sex marriage, more properly speaking, is reported from some parts of western Egypt. The Nuer, mentioned above, sometimes reclassify a barren woman as an honorary man. She then takes a wife and selects a suitable man to produce offspring on her behalf. Perhaps the best-known illustration of same-sex marriage, however, is the berdache, a character found among many American Indian tribes.

In most parts of Native North America, people made allowances for boys who wished to eschew stereotypical male sex roles. They dressed in girls’ clothes, kept company with girls while growing up, took on women’s roles around the camp or village, and upon reaching adulthood might take a husband. The berdache was a respected member of the community and was often thought to have extraordinary spiritual powers.

Anthropologists have found that all these arrangements “work” in the sense that people in communities that practice them are able to live happy, active, rewarding lives. So should they be encouraged in the 21st-century United States? Here, a bit of scholarly equivocation is called for. Each arrangement has both costs and benefits, and what works in one community may not perform as well in others.

However, to assess the value of such practices requires that we know what has been tried and how the salient customs have affected people’s lives. To reject a type of marital arrangement because of its supposed incompatibility with “the traditional definition of marriage” only calls attention to the speaker’s ignorance of well-known ethnographic and historic facts.

Richard Feinberg is a professor of anthropology at Kent State University, where he has taught since 1974. He earned his M.A. and Ph.D. at the University of Chicago and has conducted research with the Navajo in New Mexico as well as Polynesians in the Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea. Feinberg has published over a dozen books and monographs, and approximately 100 professional articles. He has served as chair of the Association for Social Anthropology in Oceania, president of the Central States Anthropological Society, and Chair of Kent State’s Faculty Senate.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/defending-traditional-marriage_b_1460026