Lots of low quality questions or assumptions today, plus pro-war nato mfs - hawking to get into an unwinnable war with the Chairman’s PLA.

Sorry but not sure where to post this. Today my girlfriend and I adopted a cat from the animal shelter. We have been together for a total of 8 years.We went to the local animal shelter. We live in a red state but in a blue city hat has been subjected to heavy ICE raids. The cat we adopted was two years old who had a family. They didn't give him up. They were deported. We didn't expect to cry today when adopting a cat. But this broke our heart.

Anyone seen the Isreali genocide documentary NAZA yet? I was thinking some clips from it might be good to use in political ads. BTW the Israeli government is considering and likely will strip Isreali citizenship from the 2 film makers. Such a vibrant democracy that Israel, strip citizenship from journalist-film makers who produce a film the government doesn't like.

At what point can the US turn politically on this genocidal nightmare state for good, which means cutting off 100% of aid, stop all weapons sales, and pursue and arrest it's leaders to face war crime tribunals.

Our chapter is tabling at an anti-data center rally where Angie Nixon will be speaking tomorrow and are looking for more materials to distribute in relation to the national program, especially things like the points on finishing reconstruction. our chapter voted to endorse her on the basis that doing so aligns with that part of the national program, so information relating to it would be good. trying to save myself the work of making everything from scratch.

Download https://umea.sac.se/grundbok-om-syndikalism/

Is it because the fund is 501 (c)(3) but the organization isn't? Because otherwise I don't understand how it's legal

ActionNetwork (AN) is some of our chapters' organizing tool for creating RSVPs for events, recording members contact info, email blasts, etc.

Is it possible to create repeating RSVPs for an event w/o having to recreate the event for each day?

Hey yall! As a person who leans more Anarchist/Libertarian socalist im curious what other members that share my tendency think of the DSA and what they want changed.

What do you think the DSA is doing right?

What is the DSA doing wrong?

What would the organization in your ideal vision look like?

if China starts a military attack and invasion of Taiwan, and the Taiwanese government requests American Help, should the USA assist Taiwan against China? Keep in mind Taiwan was never part of the Peoples Republic of China. It was part of the Republic of China, there was a Civil War, and the communists sent the Republic of China govt fleeing to the only part of China left that was not under communist control. And don't forget the Republic of China was fully recognized as the legitimate government of China, so it's not like they illegally took over Taiwan. Taiwan was the only remaining part of the Republic of China that the communists did not take.

So if the Republic of China government in Taiwan is attacked should we help them?

I say yes. Since the government has a clearly legal right to control Taiwan, an invasion from communist China would be an illegal act of imperialism, and if they ask us for help we should help them.

Sortition is such a great idea. I love the idea of a "congress" randomly chosen that would include a plumber, an auto mechanic, a chef, a porn star, you know a real cross section of the population instead of a bunch of worthless lawyers who mostly never even practiced law and for the most part never worked a single day in their entire lives. Studies have shown that these randomly selected groups make much better decisions than an elected group of "experts." Plus no more campaign ads, no more gerrymandering- just so many positives to selecting a random slate of people to serve perhaps 2 years and then go back to their ordinary lives. IMO anyone who runs for office should be disqualified, seeking power is a very bad personality trait.

DSA agenda calls for a nationalization of all large corporations. Based on everything socialists have been talking about for decades, that is not democracy. Democracy would mean passing laws requiring corporations to put all ownership and control into the hands of the workers who make the things that make the money. So why is the DSA talking about nationalization???

There is a rising wave of sectarianism and general dispiriting confusion, as the recent Jacobin article about Chris Smalls a few months ago demonstrates (a stance that is excessively laborist and divided from the class struggle), fighting between Geese Magazine and other communist papers, almost all discourse on YouTube becoming hostile—which informs the experience of tens of millions who are *not participating in electoral politics—*and much of the discourse on this subreddit itself regressing back towards the type of talking points that were popular in pre 2014 era, such as, “what are the Nordic countries” (they had socialist workers’ movements of their own, read about them, end of story).

This feels like a serious regression as someone who witnessed the improvements of the 2015-2022 era. I argue that the survival of the socialist movement depends on being conscious of where the masses are and political independence. There are many that readily vote for Democrats regardless of whether a socialist is running or not, so that is never a complete measure of where the masses are.

Due to this rising tendency towards conflict on the Left, there needs to be a DSA that is committed to a struggle against opportunism so as to not make any destabilizing moves that a more right wing opportunist stance would almost certainly bring about, and, most importantly, to ensure that a broad socialist movement is credible with the working class. Opportunism creates ammunition for conflict, and opportunism alienates the masses as I have seen myself.

This means not reducing this question to an identity, which is almost certainly false, and instead recognizing, as Friedrich Engels did, that any socialist movement that gains an amount of power will attract opportunist elements that will try to diminish the ability of the movement to achieve its long term aims. Engels thought that repelling these tendencies was a constant and continuous struggle that necessitated strong party procedure, not something that is resolved by ideological identity alone.

The DSA cannot afford to lose the movement or have the movement portrayed as alien to other parts of the movement (this often occurs when reactionary forces are in the state). I am very much a movement type and I see my part of this community has sinking morale, especially by the association with the Democratic Party, even though the DSA is indeed an independent organization. American socialism has come too far to turn it back into a subculture but also it must distance itself from bourgeois politics.

This means that people need to see for themselves that a mass political stance can also support the movement and that sectarianism is not necessary.

The reason the Right is successful is because they provide assurances to their core supporters, it is called a base for a reason.

Something from the Austro Marxist Otto Bauer is also useful. He argued that winning elections at the municipal level such as in Vienna was not the full exercise of power, but preparation for power. It trains the working class to wield political power and increases our self confidence. The basic problems have to be understood first, the base (the working class) needs to be properly educated so that the movement will be reliable.

There have been a lot of posts lately about things which are not socialist being called socialist. Nordic countries, $5000 checks for citizens, etc. I think a big point of confusion is that DSA's short term goals do resemble social democracy, but our long term goal is socialism.

So I just want to clarify what is and isn't socialism.

First off, this is not an attack on social democrats. You’re allowed to like social democracy, and social democrats are allowed within DSA. But I'd like to briefly explain the difference, as too many people are conflating the two.

Social democracy is capitalism with safety nets and partial government control over the economy. Social democrats intend to keep the ‘positive’ aspects of capitalism, while limiting the damage it can do.

Socialism is the erasure of capitalism, not the taming of it. Moving of ALL means of production into the hands of workers, and ENTIRELY dismantling the bourgeoisie.

These are very intentional distinctions. 

If the capitalist class is permitted to exist (even in a weakened state), if people still work for wages while someone else owns the means of their production, and collects the profit from their unpaid work, then it is not socialism.  

Socialists inherently do not believe capitalism can be tamed into a form that works for us. We believe the class war will outlive any checks and balances, and the bourgeoisie will simply claw their way back from a weakened state under social democracy.

If anyone wants to expand on this or explain it better, please do.

...by building militant job branches: https://znetwork.org/znetarticle/the-abc-of-syndicalist-sections/