"The Democratic Socialists of America Convention: A marketing gimmick for the Democratic Party" by Joseph Kishore
The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) held its biannual
convention from August 2 to August 4 in Atlanta, Georgia. The convention,
organized by an ostensibly “socialist” organization, was in fact nothing more
than a marketing gimmick for the Democratic Party and its right-wing politics.
The DSA is riven by factional conflicts over the
distribution of money, the relative prioritization of national election
campaigns versus local political operations and other tactical issues. The
DSA-affiliated Jacobin magazine commented that the level of tension was so high
prior to the convention that “many DSA members felt anxious about whether the
organization would still exist once the weekend was over.”
The internal conflicts are bound up with the fact that the
DSA has become a catch-all group for a broad range of organizations that orbit
in and around the Democratic Party, including most recently the International
Socialist Organization, which dissolved itself earlier this year. There are
intense battles over who gets what. There are, however, no fundamental
political differences over the basic orientation and function of the DSA.
What was most striking about the three-day event was the
abysmally low level of discussion and the complacency that prevailed. There was
no serious analysis of the political situation in the United States and
internationally and no presentation of a political platform or program for the
DSA itself. Indeed, earlier this year, the DSA’s leadership voted to postpone
the development of a political platform, and the convention in August voted to
consider such a platform for the next convention—in 2021.
The opening remarks from National Organizer Maria Svart
consisted of back-slapping and self-congratulations over the DSA’s
organizational and electoral gains, including the election of DSA members
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib to the US Congress. Svart said
nothing about the political circumstances within which the convention was being
held—including the rise of far-right and fascistic movements throughout the
world, the significance and character of the Trump administration, the danger
of world war, the persecution of Julian Assange and the attack on democratic
rights, or the growing struggles of the working class internationally.
The actual role of the Democratic Party as the political
enablers of the Trump administration was, of course, not mentioned, nor was it
the subject of discussion at any point during the convention.
The three days were devoted to reviewing dozens of
resolutions submitted by the various factions. The most significant resolutions
adopted related to how the DSA is developing its political relationships inside
the Democratic Party. In particular, the strategy that prevailed was that
supported by the Bread & Roses faction of the DSA, which is associated with
Jacobin magazine (published by Bhaskar Sunkara).
Bread & Roses’ “class-struggle elections” resolution
calls for the endorsement of candidates (in the Democratic Party) who “openly
identify as socialists.” It states that the DSA “is committed to building
political organization independent of the Democratic Party and their capitalist
donors,” which, however, “does not rule out DSA-endorsed candidates running
tactically on the Democratic Party ballot line.” An independent party will be
necessary, but this will only happen at some point in the distant future.
Jacobin and Sunkara have christened this political fraud
with an appropriately banal term, the “dirty break.” The purpose is to try to
maintain the political credibility of the DSA among young people who are
disillusioned with the Democratic Party while at the same time directing them
into the Democratic Party.
In fact, the DSA has no intention of breaking with the
Democratic Party, in a dirty manner or otherwise. Indeed, the same resolution
calls for “building a strong DSA for Bernie [Sanders’] campaign,” and Jacobin
magazine has largely transformed itself into a Sanders election journal.
Sanders’ explicit purpose, as he has stated many times, is
to encourage workers and young people to support the Democratic Party. He had
the following to say in April:
Let’s set the record straight. I am a member of the
Democratic leadership of the United States Senate. I’ve been a member of the
Democratic caucus in the Senate for the last 13 years and in the House for 16
years before that and won the Democratic nomination in my state. But in Vermont
I have chosen to run as an independent, which goes way, way back. …
[T]he truth is that more and more people are disenchanted
with both the Republican and Democratic plank. And especially young people.
They are registering as Independents, or not affiliated folks. And I think as
somebody who was an Independent, we can bring them into the Democratic Party.
Sanders is a key element of the Democratic Party leadership,
which for the past three years has worked to divert mass opposition to Donald
Trump behind its right-wing, militarist agenda. The DSA’s full-fledged support
for Sanders—including three full-time positions dedicated to electoral work—is
merely a rearguard effort to assist Sanders in this political operation.
A related resolution pledges that the DSA will not
officially endorse another Democratic Party candidate other than Sanders, who
it already endorsed earlier this year. This is politically meaningless,
however. Sunkara himself said in May that in the event that Sanders loses in
the primary, “the mentality has to be to call for people to vote for Joe Biden,
especially in swing states” and “avoid a third-party candidate.”
A third resolution along the same lines calls for a petition
to urge Sanders to adopt a “People’s Foreign Policy Platform,” which will have
no effect on Sanders’ positions on anything. The most significant aspect of the
resolution is that it says nothing about the Democratic Party’s anti-Russia
campaign or the trade war measures by the Trump administration against China,
both of which Sanders supports. Nor does it mention ending the wars in Iraq or
Afghanistan or stopping the regime-change operation in Syria, which the
Democrats have spearheaded.
War and foreign policy were almost completely excluded from
discussion throughout the three days, which helped avoid any unpleasant
references to the fact that DSA members Ocasio-Cortez and Tlaib recently voted
for a $738 billion military budget.
Even in comparison to other political organizations that have
served to direct opposition behind the Democratic Party, the DSA is
characterized by its unabashed role as a booster of this bourgeois, capitalist
party.
The second category of resolutions related to the DSA’s
operations within and in support of the trade unions. The “rank-and-file
strategy” supported the Bread & Roses caucus again won out, though by a
narrow minority. There were no significant differences between any of the
resolutions, however, as all of them are premised on buttressing the trade
unions, which have been instrumental in the suppression of the class struggle
for decades.
The resolution affiliates the DSA with a strategy long
promoted by Labor Notes, which is comprised of low-level union functionaries associated
“dissident” factions within the unions, such as the Teamsters for a Democratic
Union (TDU). TDU founder Dan La Botz, a long-time member of Solidarity, is now
a member of the DSA.
The “rank-and-file” strategy calls on members of the DSA to
take up jobs in industries with unions and develop themselves as union
officials and organizers, or to help establish affiliates of the existing trade
unions where there are none.
Under the cover of “transforming the labor movement” and
building an “organized working class,” the role of the strategy is to expand
the financial base for the corrupt, anti-working-class executives who control
the unions, or to elevate members of the DSA into executive positions.
Among the featured speakers at the DSA convention was Sara
Nelson, the president of the Association of Flight Attendants union (annual
salary: $164,00 a year). Nelson, a prominent backer of Hillary Clinton in 2016,
has been floated as a contender to take over from Richard Trumka as the
president of the AFL-CIO. Her speech consisted of an extended call for everyone
there to “join unions, run unions.”
The primary focus of the DSA and Jacobin has been on the
struggles of teachers, where DSA is promoting the Caucus of Rank-and-File
Educators (CORE), which includes the present leadership of the Chicago Teachers
Union (CTU). The CTU president is Jesse Sharkey, formerly a member of the
now-dissolved ISO. In 2012, the CTU and the ISO were instrumental in shutting
down the Chicago teachers strike on the basis of an agreement supported by
then-Mayor Rahm Emanuel, which was quickly followed by the closure of dozens of
schools.
Over the past year, the DSA has played an increasingly
prominent role in assisting the unions in shutting down working-class
opposition, particularly among teachers. In West Virginia, when teachers
rebelled against the union and initiated a wildcat strike last fall, the DSA
and Jacobin rushed in to reinflate the credibility of the West Virginia
Teachers Association. In January, the United Teachers Los Angeles, headed by a
faction that is supported by the DSA, rammed through a sellout agreement
crafted by leading state Democrats, giving teachers only a few hours to read
the contract before forcing the vote.
No mention was made at the conference of the corruption
scandal engulfing the United Auto Workers (UAW), which in the weeks since has
reached to the very top of the organization, UAW President Gary Jones.
A word must be added in conclusion on the form of the
convention, which was infused with identity politics. This aspect of the
convention has become the focus of much of the media coverage of it, as it has
been attacked by the right wing, which sees the absurdities involved as a good
opportunity for denouncing socialism.
The adamant opposition to the use of the word “guys” and
other “gendered language,” the objections to a man calling the question on a
motion related to the abuse of sex workers, the requirement that every speaker
provide the pronouns with which they would prefer to be identified, etc.—this
is all reflective of a middle-class milieu in which everything revolves around
race and gender.
Such politics is itself now an instrumental component of the
politics of the Democratic Party. This has nothing to do with opposing the
Trump administration, or for that matter fighting racism and other forms of
inequality. It is, rather, an instrument for suppressing the basic class issues
involved, dividing workers against each other, and developing a base within the
upper-middle class for right-wing and militarist policies.
This is the basic function of the DSA. To the extent that
there are workers or youth who are attracted to the organization in the
mistaken belief that it has anything to do with socialism, its role is to turn
them into either vote-getters for the Democratic Party or unpaid organizers for
the trade union executives. In the process, the leaders of the DSA hope to
leverage themselves into positions of power and privilege.
It is as far from socialism as the man on the moon.
Comments
Post a Comment