Find a running list of resolutions and bylaw/constitutional amendments here.

If you’d like to support our delegates getting to Chicago, please donate here!

Congratulations to our elected delegates and alternate!

• Brian Escobar
• Amber Ruther
• Jermaine Covington
• Eric Cortes-Kopp (alternate)

Candidates (Alphabetical by Last Name):

Hi! My name is Gabriel Bit-Babik (he/him), a student at Hamilton College and co-chair of Hamilton YDSA. I’ve been organizing in DSA since my first year, helping found my college’s chapter and working with students nationwide on key labor campaigns, including the Student Worker Alliance and Red Hot Summer. I’ve also been involved with housing activism in New York, collaborating with Housing Justice for All and the Met Council on Housing to fight for Good Cause and tenant protections. I am deeply passionate about the work Syracuse is doing with housing and labor and hope to represent it at convention!

Hi I’m Eric (he/they). I joined DSA back at the end of 2021 when I unionized my workplace and re-founded Hamilton College YDSA. I currently serve on YDSA Labor Committee and as Syracuse DSA Secretary. I also work at UFCW Local One. I’ve been involved in the local STOP! Coalition, starting the group newsletter, and frequent Mutual Aid meetings.

Although I am relatively new to DSA, I will continue to support the important work being undertaken by YDSA, and help build our labor solidarity & organizing capabilities.

Jermaine Covington has been a member of DSA since 2017 and of the Syracuse chapter since moving here from Tampa in 2021. He has previously served as Vice Chair of the DSA National Tech Committee and as president of the University of South Florida YDSA chapter. Most recently, he has been an active member of the unionization effort among graduate student employees at Syracuse University. In keeping with his tech background, Jermaine aims to further the use of technology within DSA in pursuing an unashamedly socialist political agenda. His favorite color is orange and he makes pretty good muffins.

Brian Escobar: I’ve been involved in leftwing politics since the Occupy Wall Street movement in 2011. Not seeing many ways to learn about socialism locally I started a local socialist reading group in 2014 and worked for and volunteered with the Syracuse Peace Council. I was involved in the local Sanders campaign in 2016, when DSA started to grow exponentially. I co-founded the Syracuse chapter of DSA in 2017. I’ve been a chapter co-chair all but 15 months in that time and since March have been taking a refreshing partial break (I’ve been able to focus more energy on the national organization).

Amber Ruther (they/she) I’ve been in DSA since 2016 – first in NYC-DSA, now in Syracuse DSA. I helped organize for and win the Build Public Renewables Act, which will ensure a just transition to renewable energy built with union labor. I’ve also canvassed for Mo Brown, canvassed with Families for Lead Freedom, and helped organize mutual aid free stores, member socials, and political education discussions around achieving peace in Ukraine and Palestine. As a delegate, I’d support resolutions that strengthen internal democracy and electoral accountability, reform the NPC and NHGO, and support all types of work in DSA – from labor to anti-imperialist organizing.

Image Caption: Amber Ruther (left) and Clayton Terry (right) canvassing for Maurice Brown, a DSA Candidate running for the Onondaga County 15th Legislative District

Syracuse DSA Delegate Election Timeline (Updated May 30, 2023)

• May 21st: Nominations Period Closes
• June 2nd: Deadline to Confirm Candidacy
• June 3rd to June 5th: Election Period Open using Rank Choice Voting
• By June 6th: Announcement of Results

What is the DSA Convention?

The DSA Convention is the highest decision making body in DSA. Every two years, chapters and at-large members elect Delegates to vote on resolutions, make changes to DSA’s national bylaws and constitution, and set the vision for the work that DSA will be doing for the following two years.  

The 2023 Convention will run from the morning of Friday, August 4 through the early afternoon of Sunday August 6. Delegates must arrive on Thursday, because Friday will be a full day starting at 9 am.

Why discuss the Convention?

In order to participate in the democratic processes of our organization, it is imperative that chapter leaders communicate to members about the Convention, its role in our work, how to participate, and what will be voted on at the Convention.

Chapter leadership should include information about Convention in general meeting agendas and in chapter communications in the lead up to Convention. 

All members in good standing should be afforded the opportunity to run as delegates and give feedback on Convention proposals. 

What happens at Convention?

In order to participate in the democratic processes of our organization, it is imperative that chapter leaders communicate to members about the Convention, its role in our work, how to participate, and what will be voted on at the Convention.

Chapter leadership should include information about Convention in general meeting agendas and in chapter communications in the lead up to Convention. 

All members in good standing should be afforded the opportunity to run as delegates and give feedback on Convention proposals. 

Who attends the Convention?

Delegates are elected to attend the convention. Most Delegates are elected by their chapter’s membership. Others are elected by the at-large membership to represent members who are not currently in a chapter. 

Chapters will also elect alternates in case their Delegates cannot make the Convention. Alternates have the opportunity to attend Convention, but they do not vote unless they are filling in for a Delegate from their chapter. 

For more detailed information on delegates here.

The post 2023 National Convention – Important Information appeared first on Syracuse DSA.

By Zoe Thomas

In 2023, over two decades after 9/11, the US military is facing a recruiting crisis. Without the fear of terrorism or threat of war to push young people into service, a strikingly low number of those eligible have expressed interest in joining the military. To combat this, the US Armed Forces have begun to make various appeals to the next generation of soldiers centered around the gamification of war. To do this, the military has employed video game style marketing tactics including commercials, military ESports teams, and their own privately-developed video game to minimize the violence of war, romanticize military action, and focus recruiting efforts on young men and boys.

The most prominent example of this are commercials that air both on TV and online platforms like Youtube. Video game imagery, both subtle and not, has become increasingly common in recruitment ads, most notably an ad from 2007 that opens with two men playing video games. More recent commercials are much more subtle in their video game integration, using bright colors and electronic-looking graphics to give war the appearance of a video game without explicitly making the comparison. Nevertheless, these advertisements depict an action-packed, gamified vision of war with none of the consequences. The real realities of war — violence, PTSD, death, destruction — are conveniently glossed over. Online and TV ads are the most easily recognizable forms of US military advertising, but they account for just a fraction of the military’s $400 million a year advertising budget.

Another way that the military markets to young men through video games is the emergence of ESports teams that now exist in every branch of the military. According to the Defense Department, these teams are highly publicized and used for recruitment; the almost comically transparent DOD website boasts that “​​for some of these service members, […]it’s actually their job to play video games.” In that same article, Navy Lt. Aaron Jones describes how the military runs tournaments in the high schools and colleges where they recruit. Not only does this further link war-like video games to actual combat, it also demonstrates how the US Army is directly using these programs to appeal to their youngest recruits.

Unfortunately, this kind of marketing is not new: a last case study of this tactic comes in the form of the game America’s Army, produced in 2002 by the United States military for the purpose of recruiting “tech-minded teenagers.” The game is a standard first-person shooter, similar to games like Call of Duty, although it claims to be extremely accurate to real military weapons and combat. A notable exception to this is a lack of blood and gore common in this style of game, allowing the America’s Army to be marketed to an even younger audience (rated T for teen). Released around the time of US intervention in the Middle East, the game is modeled after the war on terrorists in the fictional country of Czervenia; it was available for free online download for 20 years, with multiple iterations, before being shut down. Not only was the game created as a way to get young people interested in joining the military, but by making an account to play the game the US Army got access to the contact information of an estimated 13 million players. With the average cost of recruiting standing around $15,000 per soldier, the dissemination of America’s Army proved to be one of the most cost-effective ways to get into the homes and minds of young Americans.

All of these tactics, from traditional advertising to ESports to an entire video game, have one thing in common: their target audience. Marketing to children is a well documented issue, but it becomes even more dangerous when the product isn’t a Barbie or a Happy Meal, but a delusional, jingoistic military fantasy that has the opportunity to cost a parent not a few dollars, but the life of their child. Many kids, especially young boys, start playing video games as early as elementary school, some also gain unbridled access to the internet around this time. By using video games as a catalyst, the Army is purposefully reaching out to an audience at a time in their lives when they are most vulnerable and easily persuaded by thinly veiled military propaganda. Not only that, this new child-friendly, brightly colored, gamification of war masks the horrors and crimes that older Americans are more equipped to be aware of. The children and teens being fed this misinformation don’t have an understanding of war that involves death and exploitation and colonization — everything they know comes from these games. They are being taught that war is not bloody, that the enemy is a team wearing another color, that getting killed in battle just means you have to start the level again. These measures by the Army are not only desperate and immoral, but another example indicative of how the United States military complex will go to terrifying lengths to remain in control of our people, our country, and the world.

Commercials, ESports, and America’s Army: A Modern History of the US Military Marketing to Children was originally published in The Michigan Specter on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

As workers, tenants, and families settled down in the late hours of Thursday April 13th, after a long day of our labor being used to keep Florida running, Governor DeSantis signed a wholly unpopular bill into law that aims to escalate the unwanted exclusion of Floridians from access to abortions. This action has been decades in the making. As money from the evangelical elite poured into the Republican Party, and as the Democratic Party stood idly by on the sidelines while focusing their hate towards us as democratic socialists, the State of Florida has intensified its attacks against a person’s right to basic healthcare.

We are continuing our struggle as a chapter to force local policymakers and law enforcement to decriminalize abortion and protect citizens in the Tampa Bay Area from some of the most draconian laws in the country. We need to mobilize to apply pressure on these forces with popular public will. Join us to fight back.

SIGN THIS PETITION AND SIGN UP FOR DSA MEMBERSHIP

The post Tampa DSA’s Statement on the 6 Week Abortion Ban appeared first on Tampa DSA.

The US Labor Movement and the Socialist Role

A DSA National Political Education Committee Course

NPEC is excited to announce our newest course about socialist and our historical role in the Labor movement in the United States. In this packet, you will find everything you need to host this lesson with your chapter; the organizers’ guide for how to run the lesson, a handout for participants and the lesson’s slide show.

1. The vital role socialists of various kinds have played (and can still play) in the US labor movement. To thrive, labor needs a strong socialist movement.
2. The critical role powerful labor organization and strikes play in shifting the power balance between labor and capital to realize political and social objectives. A thriving socialist movement needs a powerful labor movement.

NPEC US Labor Movement and the Socialist Role Organizers’ Guide

NPEC US Labor Movement and the Socialist Role Handout

NPEC US Labor Movement and the Socialist Role Slides

The Tampa chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America has voted in favor of signing onto a resolution from the National DSA International Committee in support of Cuba. The resolution, among other things, insists that the obscene, deadly blockade of Cuba be lifted so that people on the island can have the same access to food, medical supplies, and other essential goods the United States cut off from the Cuban people. Read the resolution by the IC, below.

DSA International Committee: Chapter Call to Action

ince 1959, the United States has restricted trade, travel, remissions, and even the foreign relations of Cuba. Although opponents of U.S. imperialism refer to this hostile orientation as el bloqueo, or the blockade, the US restrictions are actually a patchwork of congressional acts and executive orders initiated during the Eisenhower administration and expanded by virtually every administration since. Despite a temporary thaw in relations during the Obama administration, Donald Trump reversed all progress and imposed even harsher restrictions on Cuba’s economy. Make no mistake: the blockade of Cuba is a multi-generational economic war. 

Today, the US blockade on Cuba touches every facet of the lives of the Cuban people. The threat of secondary US sanctions prevents international businesses and financial institutions from doing business with Cuba, cutting off not only credit and investment, but also crucial industrial and manufacturing equipment. The blockade prevents Cuba from purchasing life-saving medical equipment and basic goods, and even prevents Cubans in the US from sending remittances to family members. As a result of Trump’s escalation during the global pandemic, Cuba has been hindered in its plans to produce and share its locally-developed vaccines with the world. President Biden has failed to deliver on campaign promises to return to Obama’s Cuba policy and has instead continued the Trump policy of collective punishment.

At the 2019 convention, DSA adopted a resolution to support Cuba Solidarity work and to join the National Network on Cuba, of which we are a proud member today. In 2021 we further adopted a commitment in the DSA Political Platform to push for normalizing relations with Cuba and lifting sanctions. Our position has been to unite a broad front to oppose the blockade and to fight locally and nationally to dismantle its key components including the sanctions, travel ban, and the baseless designation of Cuba as a state sponsor of terror. Learn more about DSA’s fight against the blockade: https://international.dsausa.org/cuba-solidarity/ 

Now is the time for DSA and YDSA chapters across the country to get involved with this vital work to end the blockade! The Cuba Solidarity Working Group, working through the IC Americas Subcommittee, is calling on local DSA and YDSA chapters to commit to fighting to end the US Blockade on Cuba by supporting the following goals:

• Our chapter will select a liaison to contribute to national Cuba organizing and coordinate the sharing of information, resources, and calls to action back with our chapter. 

• Our chapter will promote and sign on to coordinated national statements and campaigns with other DSA chapters and partner organizations that seek to dismantle key elements of the blockade, including congressional pressure campaigns. 

• Our chapter will seek to support local, municipal, and state government resolutions for Cuba normalization.

• Our chapter will participate in national political education events about the blockade and seek to organize events for members locally.

• Our chapter will share and promote opportunities for members to travel to Cuba on trips coordinated by DSA and partner organizations.

DSA and YDSA chapter leaders, please fill out the form below to sign your chapter up to participate:

The post Tampa DSA Signs Resolution to End Cuba Blockade appeared first on Tampa DSA.

by Isaac Jiménez, New Jersey Monitor
April 14, 2023

As cities nationwide see staggering housing prices and tenants priced out of metro regions, workers are fighting back.

This week in Jersey City, residents spent five hours at a council meeting to demand that city officials give tenants a universal right to counsel to protect them from eviction, displacement, and neglect from landlords. This means if a tenant needs legal defense and can’t afford it, one will be afforded to them, like in criminal proceedings.

Much of the council struggles to understand the gravity of the housing crisis, even after a DSA-led coalition spelled it out for them. A media report on the council’s initial reaction to the plan suggests they do not understand how to protect tenants from eviction and hold all landlords accountable.

For residents in Jersey City — or any municipality in New Jersey — to see true housing justice, tenants’ rights need to be universal in theory and in practice. In New Jersey, you need good cause to evict a tenant. We’re now pushing for this to be universally administered.

This is not a fight seen in Jersey City alone; everyone is feeling the squeeze. This week, Rutgers University faculty members, who have worked nearly a year under an expired contract, began a strike to demand job security, equal pay for equal work, and a living wage. Some of the issues we’re hearing on the Rutgers picket lines are the same we’re experiencing in Jersey City: workers struggling to pay for basic necessities like rent in a state with an ever-increasing cost of living.

A version of the Jersey City right-to-counsel ordinance proposed by council members aligned with Mayor Steven Fulop — a newly announced candidate for governor in 2025 —would protect just those making under $64,000. But that would mean even some public school teachers struggling to have rent control enforced in their building wouldn’t qualify. For any right to be a right, it can’t bank on means tests that spend more energy on gatekeeping aid than administering it.

Some council members suggested that tenants’ right to counsel would harm landlords from “justifiably” evicting someone, or that we should provide guaranteed counsel for landlords. While we may disagree on the politics here — I and others say housing is a human right and there are no just evictions — the right to counsel is intended to change the existing power imbalance. The National Coalition for a Civil Right to Counsel found that, on average, 80% of landlords are represented in housing court, while only 3% of tenants are. When tenants get representation, they get more time and money, and can avoid an eviction record, as lawyers often successfully negotiate settlements with landlords.Jersey City residents lobby for a right to counsel at the city’s April 12 council meeting. (Photo by Nicolas Wolfgang Arango)

The legislation proposed by the Right to Counsel JC coalition — legislation that could see final approval next month if enough council members vote in favor — would defend tenants at Portside Towers, a building on Jersey City’s waterfront whose landlord wrongly claims is not rent-controlled. This version of the ordinance would be universal, for all tenants, and cover proceedings like taking a landlord to court for rent control violations. Many Portside tenants earn significant incomes, yes, but they are being failed by the current city’s tenant-landlord office. The reason council members would attempt to means test tenants’ right to counsel is becoming clear: They don’t want to target landlords of luxury rentals that are violating tenants’ rights. We should question whether this is because many of their donations are from the developers that build these rentals.

A right to counsel does not have to be cost-prohibitive. New Jersey towns and cities could use federal and state funds that have restrictions like means tests, fund the “unqualified” themselves, and still save money in the end. Universal programs administered by local governments can fund the portions that development fees can’t, and in the end, would save governments a lot of money in building shelters, health care, foster care, and other social safety net services. This sets New Jersey on a path to other important universal programs in the future, like statewide single-payer health care.

As workers across New Jersey demand higher wages, we here in Jersey City are demanding fair housing practices and, by extension, lower rent! When landlords know tenants have a right to counsel, eviction filings go down altogether. It’s as if many evictions aren’t justified after all. With a deep court backlog, tenants often call it quits and scatter. A right to counsel in every New Jersey municipality experiencing increases in both rent and luxury housing development should look to Jersey City at this moment. We are bargaining for the common good, as one working class, one union in one fight.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX SUBSCRIBE

New Jersey Monitor is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. New Jersey Monitor maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Terrence McDonald for questions: info@newjerseymonitor.com. Follow New Jersey Monitor on Facebook and Twitter.

The post From Trenton to city hall, workers are demanding more first appeared on North NJ DSA.

On Saturday, April 22nd, Chicago DSA’s Political Education & Policy committee will host a walking tour that will bring together speakers from across the labor movement to highlight important sites in Chicago’s rich labor history. Our path will illuminate the political forces that shaped, and were shaped by, the city of Chicago. It also tells a bigger story, tracing the arc of the labor movement over its 150+ year history in the United States: A history where socialists have been at the forefront, driving the movement forward, inspiring the ire —and often violent retaliation— of the capitalist class by demanding labor’s due.

The fates of the socialist movement and the labor movement are historically intertwined. The first American mass labor movement was born of class struggle in the immediate aftermath of the Civil War. Because of the city’s rivers, railroads, position on the Great Lakes, and access to raw materials, Chicago saw dramatic growth. Leveraging their wartime contracts, the capitalists, oligarchs and robber barons consolidated power and deployed world-changing industrial technology at scale, and the city swelled with immigrant labor. German, Irish, British, and Scandinavian working and peasant classes powered Chicago’s booming industry in the 1860s and 70s. Some were steeped in the international socialist movement that had emerged on the European continent.  And as the turbulent, brutal inequality of the Gilded Age advanced across a fractured nation, labor became ever more militant in its demands.

Some of the most iconic struggles occurred in Chicago’s meatpacking industry, where the mass production of livestock transformed America’s food system, as well as the conditions of labor for its workers. Socialist muckraker Upton Sinclair brought infamy to the industry with his 1906 novel The Jungle, describing the grim realities of Chicago’s Union Stockyards. The national campaign for the eight-hour workday took shape in the Stockyards, fueling socialist and anarchist agitators, and ultimately producing the bloody events of the Haymarket Affair in 1886.

People-powered movements require the exercise of solidarity; America’s first surging labor movements often broke themselves against the seawalls of exclusionary racism and xenophobia. Karl Marx himself understood that the racialized social hierarchy of America was an impediment to labor becoming organized, let alone amassing and exercising political power. “In the United States of America, every independent workers’ movement was paralyzed as long as slavery disfigured a part of the republic,” he wrote in Volume I of Capital. “However, a new life immediately arose from the death of slavery. The first fruit of the American Civil War was the eight hours agitation, which ran from the Atlantic to the Pacific, from New England to California, with the seven-league boots of a locomotive.” 

At the turn of the century, labor organizers grappled with these forces in Chicago. Campaigns in the stockyards were sundered as craft unions refused to admit Black workers, and the bosses hired Black and immigrant workers as strikebreakers. Efforts collapsed as racial antagonism and white supremacist violence roiled Chicago in the Red Summer of 1919. In the 1930s, Black worker-organizers took the lead, laying the foundations for intentional, multi-racial mass organizing drives. The Congress of Industrial Organizations, under the influence of the American Communist Party (CPUSA), successfully organized tens of thousands of Stockyard workers across racial and ethnic lines.

But the 20th century also saw waves of successful Red scares, pinning the blame for social upheaval squarely on the Left, and resulting in the expulsion of CPUSA organizers from their leading roles in organized labor. Mid-century developments in logistics opened the way for the meatpacking industry to decamp from the city to rural areas, bringing in yet another wave of non-unionized immigrant labor. In 1971 the Union Stockyards closed for good, and within a matter of years, deindustrialization began to sweep across the Midwest. America’s overall union density has declined dramatically since then for many reasons, including globalization & offshoring, business unionism & concessionary bargaining, anti-union legislation such as right-to-work, unchecked corporate monopoly power, the dominance of finance capital in the modern economy, and a political class largely untethered to the realities of working-class life.

Today, the vibrant heart of organized labor is in public sector unions. In particular, the Caucus of Rank-and-file Educators that gained control of the Chicago Teachers Union has led the way for educators across the country to wield their power through strategically withholding their essential labor. Through their strikes in 2012 and 2019, CTU flexed their power by bargaining for the common good, including strike demands like social workers and affordable housing for the 17,000+ homeless students in Chicago Public Schools. And in recent years, as runaway inequality leaves more and more people behind, service and logistics sector organizing has surged, driven by the rank-and-file. With victorious reform caucuses making waves in powerful unions like UAW and the Teamsters, labor power is on the rise again.

As Democratic Socialists, we envision socialism as Eugene Debs described it: “merely an extension of the ideal of democracy into the economic field.” The union is the working-class institution that allows working people some measure of control over the places where we spend a third or more of our precious time. We know the world does not function without the workers caring for our children, delivering our packages, preparing our food, and providing our healthcare.

Please RSVP to join us on Saturday, April 22nd at 1 pm to see where the world as we know it was made: in the streets, where the socialist movement and labor movement came together in militant action.

The post A Union Town: Walking Through Chicago’s Labor History appeared first on Midwest Socialist.

By Cameron Kaufman

“…Transgenderism must be eradicated from public life in its entirety.” At CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference), which occurred in March 2023, far-right commentator Michael Knowles announced this.

If that doesn’t scare you, I don’t know what will. No, Michael Knowles is not exactly a household name, but there has been an increasingly frightening amount of transphobic hate gaining traction in the past several years. In the UK alone, the number of transphobic hate crime reports has quadrupled over the last six years.

And yes, Knowles’ statement IS genocidal in nature. Expressing a belief in the eradication of “transgenderism” (i.e. being transgender) is, in fact, a call to eradicate all trans people. We should be concerned, especially when things seemed to be looking up for one of our most vulnerable populations, with increased acceptance and visibility of transgender people. So why now are we seeing such an increase in transphobia, especially in popular discourse?

A major contributor to this current hysteria about trans people, particularly trans youth, is the media. Both social media and the press have been massive factors to this wave of transphobia.

The effect of social media on trans youth is complicated. Social media can be a savior for many trans youth, who can use social media to receive validation, meet other transgender people, and find information and resources about coming out, accessing gender-affirming healthcare, or coping with transphobia that they may not have been able to otherwise. But it can also be a major source of antagonism towards this already marginalized population. There are a plethora of transphobic hate accounts on several different social media platforms, and they are dangerous. Although most of them do not outright physically harm trans people, they can be debilitating to their mental health, and can often influence people such as parents or teachers to dismiss their identity.

There has been a growing social media presence of transphobic accounts that exist solely to spew hatred under the guise of being “gender critical” or against “gender ideology.” Gender ideology, however, is not a “woke” movement or an organized campaign to make everyone trans, like many of these accounts claim, rather it is a term used in sociology to describe ideas and beliefs of the majority that define masculinity and femininity, identifies people in terms of sex and sexuality, and evaluates forms of sexual expression. Dominant gender ideology in the West believes that human beings are either biologically female or male, heterosexuality is the default orientation, and men are more naturally suited to possess power and assume leadership positions in public spheres of society.

Often, these people who antagonize trans youth on social media are considered TERFs, or trans exclusive radical “feminists,” even though many of their views are deeply misogynistic (claiming that in order to be a woman, one must be able to give birth, for example). Probably the best known of these is the author of Harry Potter and avowed transphobe J.K. Rowling. But there are many more, including organizations with sizable followings like 4thwavenow, which openly associates with TERFs and reposts transphobic tweets on the daily to its 19 thousand followers on Twitter.

But it’s not just social media where this transphobia is rampant. Many news outlets, including liberal and centrist publications, have increased publication of dehumanizing, critical, and often transphobic articles about trans youth that stir controversy. These articles often have an intensely skeptical and overly dramatic tone while generally privileging the voices of cisgender (not transgender) parents over those of their trans children.

This year, BBC has apologized (twice) to JK Rowling over calling her transphobic. The Atlantic published an article (accompanied by a photograph of a 22 year old model who uses he/him pronouns) entitled “Your Child Says She’s Trans. She Wants Hormones and Surgery. She’s 13.″ Recently, the New York Times published an article entitled “In Defense of J.K. Rowling.”

The New York Times, which has 100 million registered readers, has been particularly susceptible to publishing transphobic articles. There are numerous articles about trans women unfairly dominating sport, gender neutral language going too far, gender dysphoria, puberty blockers and other medical treatment being drastic measures, high rates of detransition (even though the data suggests otherwise), how difficult and confusing it is to deal with gender identity, the increase in people identifying as trans, and children using different names at school. These articles fearmonger, claiming that care and support for trans people, especially youth, is happening too fast and going too far.

But why now, why has there been such a push in the past few years to stir up a controversy about trans kids?

One factor is the increased visibility of trans people, and the increased amount of people coming out as trans. Often, this is because it is now safer for trans people to come out, and there are more resources available to help people better understand their identities. However, many people cannot comprehend this and believe that there’s been a massive explosion of trans youth due to a myriad of reasons: LGBTQ+ organizations, the internet, the media, misogyny (some people think that trans men decided to be men due to internalized misogyny and trans women are trying to take over women’s spaces), et cetera.

A lot of this controversy is also based in the societally ingrained fear of trans people. Much of mainstream society thinks trans people are sexually perverted, mentally disturbed, want to mutilate themselves, and have a tendency to commit sexual assault in public bathrooms. They also think that youth are being brainwashed into being trans and so we need to protect our children from this evil. Still others hide behind outdated religious beliefs to claim that being trans is sinful and wrong. This phenomenon is nothing new — people said and still say the same things about being gay.

Perhaps surprisingly, much of this transphobia comes from not only conservatives but even from some self-proclaimed liberals or leftists. Transphobia can come from cisgender lesbian, gay, and bisexual people, who feel that trans people don’t belong in the queer community. A prominent example of this is the LGB Alliance, which fights against homophobia while excluding transgender people from the community. Many cisgender queer people find trans people overly abnormal and use us as a scapegoat — trying to gain acceptance from the straight community by putting us down. Sometimes it’s just a case of internalized transphobia. Ultimately, of course, it doesn’t matter — bigots want to get rid of all of us in the LGBTQ community, whether we are trans or not. Transphobia and homophobia are two sides of the same shitty, hateful coin.

Many people who generally have liberal or leftist beliefs abandon such values as tolerance, bodily autonomy, and even feminism when it comes to trans people. For example, with trans care, many liberals simply don’t believe that we deserve bodily autonomy. Many people doubt if we are truly trans, or just faking it. Or maybe it’s just a phase. Just like the anti-gay craze of the past, conservatives are using the same exact phrases weaponized against gay people. Many liberals buy into them now, with trans people, despite knowing they are wrong when used against gay people.

Ultimately, the current trans hysteria that our media is trying to create is an effort to prevent people from fighting against actual societal problems like climate change, homelessness, imperialism, and systemic racism. Trans youth have become a scapegoat, a group of people to place the blame on instead of capitalism. By fueling this culture war, the mainstream media seeks to divide us even further.

This culture war on trans people has had far reaching, devastating impacts: increasing violence against trans people (particularly trans women of color), continuously high rates of suicide in the trans community due to harassment, lack of ability to transition, or lack of acceptance. Nationwide, over 350 explicitly transphobic (and homophobic) pieces of legislation, including bans on certain book titles, teaching about LGBTQ+ issues, trans youth participation in sports, trans healthcare for both adults and children, and drag performances (which are often so vaguely worded that they also ban trans people from existing in public and anyone from even wearing Halloween costumes).

In our political climate, with many states controlled by Republicans, a Republican majority in the House of Representatives, and an extreme conservative majority in the Supreme Court, the fight for trans rights often feels hopeless. But there are things we can do to fight for the trans community. We can support legislation that protects trans rights — including the rights to live without facing discrimination, easily access gender-affirming healthcare, and be able to change name and gender markers without excess hassle and cost. We also must vocally oppose the increasingly extreme legislation being proposed and passed. We can materially and socially support trans people, especially those most at risk who have the least support, as well as organizations that aid them like Affirmations, Trans Lifeline, or the Trevor Project. We can educate ourselves and those around us about trans people, trans issues, and how to support trans rights. We can refuse to tolerate transphobia from family or friends. And we can boycott transphobes — refuse to read their articles, buy their books, or play their video games. No matter what, we cannot lose hope, or we’re all fucked.

The Trans Hysteria was originally published in The Michigan Specter on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

By Nathaniel Ibrahim

Partisanship, it seems, is tearing America apart. President Joe Biden himself said the United States has “never been as divided as it is today since the Civil War.” Biden has taken it upon himself to mend this divide, while other political figures have promoted slightly more radical solutions. All the while, concerning numbers of Americans see civil war on the horizon.

A more literal fuel was thrown on this fire when a 150-car train derailed in East Palestine, Ohio in February, releasing poisonous and carcinogenic chemicals amongst the town’s 4,700 residents as well as the Ohio River Basin, home to millions of people. If authorities had not carried out a controlled burn of the hazardous cargo, an explosion powerful enough to send shrapnel flying over a mile away could have occurred, but the situation looks bad as it is. The soil in East Palestine shows dioxin levels hundreds of times greater than those considered potentially carcinogenic by Environmental Protection Agency scientists. Fish are dying in the tens of thousands while headaches, coughing, and other symptoms are being widely reported by East Palestine residents and CDC investigators.. There is also no way to be sure exactly what the effects of the toxic chemicals released into the atmosphere by the burn will be.

Soon after the disaster, partisan lines were immediately drawn, with both Republicans and Democrats using the derailment — and the potential poisoning of huge numbers of people — to “own” their political opponents. Former President Donald Trump wasted no time visiting East Palestine following the disaster, delivering bottles of “Trump Water” and other goods as he criticized the Biden administration and FEMA, claiming that “they would not send federal aid to East Palestine under any circumstance.” Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, facing heavy criticism, also visited the town and blamed President Trump, despite having control of the Department of Transportation for over two years by the time of the derailment. Political commentators, no matter which side they are on, seem to agree that their priority coming out of this derailment is to place the blame on their political rivals. The fact is, however, that there’s no individual answer for what caused this derailment, and the problem is systemic.

Train derailments are a big problem in the United States. Over the past decade, the US has seen roughly 1,300 train derailments per year, while its trains have traveled a total of approximately 800 million kilometers. Meanwhile, in the European Union, trains have traveled closer to 4.5 billion kilometers and have seen derailments in the low hundreds, and while these estimates do vary depending on the source, derailments simply do not occur as often in Europe. Japan, with some 2 billion train-kilometers in 2019, saw only nine derailments, with the number generally not rising above single digits per year.

Why is our train system so dangerous? Private ownership is one attribute that sets our trains apart. In the European Union, most countries’ train systems are controlled by their national governments(In the United Kingdom, privatization resulted in its rails being owned by the European Union’s national train companies). In Japan, local and national governments control a large part of their train network and their private train lines are highly regulated.

Perhaps this is not an entirely fair comparison, especially when looking at the United States and Japan, two countries with massively different population densities. However, a more straightforward comparison is available when we look at Norfolk Southern’s own actions and those of other railway companies. It is often assumed that endangering employees and bystanders will cause companies to suffer financially; this has not been true in Norfolk’s case.

Railway workers have been subjected to top-down pressure to avoid delays, even at the cost of public safety. Accidents have been steadily increasing over the last four years, with five significant incidents taking place since December 2021, killing three Norfolk employees. Meanwhile, profits have risen in recent years as Norfolk and other railroad companies continue to cut their workforce, skimp on inspections, and run longer and heavier trains, allowing them to pay out billions to their shareholders and beat the wider stock market.

Where was the government on this? For the most part, they were doing exactly what the railroads told them to do. In 2014, in response to a train crash involving some of the same chemicals spilled in East Palestine, the Obama Administration proposed improvements to safety regulations for trains carrying various hazardous materials. After industry pressure, however, the final version of the safety measure focused only on crude oil and exempted trains carrying many other combustible materials — including the chemicals involved in last month’s disaster. President Trump, his party backed by millions of dollars from the railroads, further gutted the rule, specifically removing a section that would make better braking systems more widespread. He also decreased EPA staffing and appointed people tied to the chemical industry to run it. Despite having plenty of time to improve train regulations, Biden has done practically nothing towards this end, not even to bring things back to where they were under Obama. In fact, the Federal Railroad Administration, under Biden and Pete Buttigieg’s Department of Transportation, has proposed a rule reducing the frequency of brake testing on certain freight cars, backed by the railroad lobby. Obama, Trump, Biden, and their subordinates have all had a hand in this lax regulatory framework, and they’ve used that fact to deflect criticism onto their partisan opponents, avoiding blame for the outcomes of rules they created and policies they enforce.

With the government failing to protect the workers who keep the trains running, those railroad workers prepared to take matters into their own hands. The share of railroad revenue going to labor has dropped over the past 20 years, and cost-cutting measures have left the remaining workers with longer hours and less time off. More than 100,000 railway workers get no paid sick days, facing punitive and convoluted attendance policies that leave many without weekends or much time off. At Warren Buffett’s BNSF, for example, workers start with a point balance and lose points if they’re unavailable to work, whether the reason is sickness, family emergency, or anything else. When they run out of points, they get an automatic suspension for over a week, and get fired if they reach zero points three times in two years. Railway workers have to be on call more or less around the clock, reporting for 80-hour shifts on less than 2 hours notice, with their work shift times constantly changing. Their pay, while better than most, can be heavily cut into by necessary expenses — one worker reported spending 190 days in hotels in a year. The main issue is not pay, however, but the ability to live some semblance of a normal life. As one railroad engineer put it, workers are “just fighting for the basic right to be able to be people outside of the railroad.” Social isolation, disruptive schedules, and a lack of sick days are wreaking havoc on railway workers’ physical and mental health, placing further stress on the system that completely relies on their labor.

Late last year, negotiations between railway unions and companies ground to a halt. Workers were seeking more pay for their dangerous and stressful jobs and, fundamentally, sick days to take care of themselves such that they could then perform their jobs safely. The rail companies refused to budge on the matter of sick days, leading workers to reject the offer and prepare for a strike. Joe Biden and congressional leaders, once again caving to the demands of organized capital, crushed the potential strike and imposed a contract with no sick days for the workers.

The struggle between railway workers and railroad companies — backed by a government ready to do their bidding — feels like a problem out of another time. As the US Chamber of Commerce said in their letter to the federal government, asking them to stop the strike, “Congress has intervened 18 times since 1926 in labor negotiations that threaten interstate commerce.” These are the same battles fought by the likes of Eugene Debs and his union comrades, facing death and imprisonment in their struggle to win better lives for themselves and their families.

We are fighting the same fights today because capitalism cannot change its basic incentive structures. Corporations exist to generate profits for their owners. Hiring less workers, cutting spending on safety, and lobbying to weaken regulations allows railroads to increase profits. If this results in an increased rate of derailments, worker deaths, and poisoned towns, it isn’t the railroad companies’ problem, so long as they cut costs more than they spent on lobbying and damage control. Investors and financial institutions, even further disconnected from the actual functioning of railroads, will direct investment to the companies with the highest profits, no matter how they got them. The incentives of capital are fundamentally opposed to our interests, not just as workers, but as human beings. The deaths, injuries, and ruined social lives that railroad workers face affect their families and communities. Lost jobs mean more competition in the labor market and subsequently downward pressure on wages. Derailments and crashes endanger people across the country and damage our already strained biosphere. In Michigan, we’ve already received shipments of toxic waste from East Palestine, and other waste has been sent around the country for processing, presenting more risks to public health and the environment.

Inadequate regulation and union-busting are just a few examples of the political agenda our government maintains regardless of which party is in charge. Whether the issue is foreign policy, the targeting of whistleblowers, or the state’s needless cruelty toward migrants, the fact is that certain outcomes are all but assured no matter who you vote for.

The current political situation surrounding our railroads lays bare the actual political conflicts that divide our society. Political parties are not entirely without their differences, but in many ways, partisan concerns are a distraction from the divergent material interests of capital and labor, of capital and human beings. To genuinely improve things, we cannot rely on either major political party to help us, but we must also reject the politics of bipartisan cooperation. We must go beyond this framework and pursue a politics that challenges the current economic and political order and recognizes our collective interests as workers and human beings.

The East Palestine Derailment: Proof That Bipartisanship Won’t Save Us was originally published in The Michigan Specter on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

By Aniket Dixit

There’s no shortage of classical nostalgia in the Western world today. The influence of the Ancient Greeks and Romans has been deeply embedded into modern political culture, often to the point of distorting historical reality. Articles such as “America Is Eerily Retracing Rome’s Steps to a Fall” and “No, Really, Are We Rome?” reveal how Ancient Rome has become a goldmine for armchair historians. This obsession tends to follow a similar trajectory, too: Rome was a great democracy — equal and just — until its excesses gave rise to wealth inequality and dangerous populist tyrants who tore it down. It is this vacuous perception of the Republic as some bastion of democracy that makes such comparisons so unfortunate. The Roman Republic, for all its apparent stability and fairness, was a society built on genocidal settler-colonialism, by slaves, for landed senators from the very beginning. In the end, the Republic’s collapse spoke to its enduring role as the bodyguard for landed classes. The Western attempt to recreate a “lost ideal” of the Roman Republic, requires remaking the very underlying conditions that allowed it to exist in the first place.

The Roman model of imperialism was very specific, one molded by the deeply rooted principles of Roman society. Violence was a tool used with discipline, as was punishment and intimidation. Rome was not resource-rich, of course; colonial powers rarely are. Their rise from an early agrarian city-state in a pocket of Italy to the most powerful empire in the world was a result of near constant warfare and resource plunder. The resource drain from the Roman colonies, particularly in Greece and Egypt, was great enough to tank local economies while enriching the governments of both. Early Roman wars, considered “necessary” defensive actions, were recognized even by many at the time to be the exact opposite. The conquest of Carthage and Hispania in particular have been frequently emulated and praised across the global military-industrial complex. Threats of Carthaginian economic expansion as well as the lure of resource-rich Spain did more to spur the Punic Wars than any notion of “self-defense”. The 146 B.C genocide of Carthage — encouraged by wholly unsupported rumors of brutality and cannibalism — was followed by the equally brutal razing of the Spanish town of Illurgia decades later. It was this strange discipline of violence that American military leaders later latched on to. David Petraeus’ 2006 counterinsurgency manual cites the subjugation of Hispania as a model for modern counterinsurgency. Even the growth of foreign military bases can be traced to Roman imperialism. It was the development of a “military community” abroad that gave Rome the power to keep rebellions in check. Again, the creation of a similar “community” in American foreign policy is necessary to uphold the government we’ve created.

The rampant subjugation of the Mediterranean world was only possible in conjunction with more of the same at home. The inequalities of the early Roman Republic were not an unfortunate side effect of growing corruption, as many contemporary columnists like to imagine. The movement to create the Republic and the eventual overthrow of the tyrant king Tarquinius Superbus were more a result of aristocratic frustration with his growing power than any genuinely popular interest. The comitia centuriata, the precursor to the Curia, was nothing more than an effort to gain popular ground. The same patrician clans (gentes) that had run Tarqiunius out of the city were now the ones in comfortable control. Over the nearly 5 centuries of the Roman Republic, these structures rarely changed. The creation of debt and property laws were geared towards allowing the landed aristocracy as much control over the fates of the farming classes as possible. When upward mobility became a possibility for Romans, forced conscriptions and land seizure took it back out. What’s more, when Tiberius Gracchus, as tribune of the plebs, proposed land reform to limit the property owned by the senatorial elites, they funded a mob to hunt him and his followers down, massacring them outside the Forum.

This was the vision of Rome that sustained its economic development. The relentless plunder from the periphery of the Republic — which ceased to be a true republic long ago — and the permanent fixture of a slave underclass was the heart that kept the Republic running. The collapse into empire and the steady rise of Julius Caesar in the late 1st century was an inevitable manifestation of popular anger and internal weakness. It was a government set up to benefit the few, thus destined to fail. It was this government that our so-called Founding Fathers idolized. As members of their own landed aristocracy, they recognized, much as the gentes of the early Republic did, that slavery and constant expansion were necessary to support their style of government. They were viscerally aware of the contradictions inherent in their moral and economic philosophies, but under early-stage capitalism, a working class of farmers and slaves leads to growth.

Thus, we cannot emulate a system of government without emulating the conditions that allowed it to thrive. The Roman Republic grew out of a slave society, dependent on foreign resources and constant war. The West has modeled many of its governments after this Republic, bringing everything else back with it.

The New Roman Republic was originally published in The Michigan Specter on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.