by Jeremy Gong and Peter Lucas from DSA’s Bread and Roses caucus wrote an excellent article, “Socialists Should Fight the Corporate Democratic Party, Not Manage It” about 5 Nevada DSA members who won the elections in March to lead the Nevada state Democratic Party. Jeremy and Peter’s article warns of the powerful establishment forces that will begin pressuring the new DSA leaders to moderate and water down their ambitious goals. Jeremy and Peter argue that DSA should work toward forming a new party rather than trying to manage the corporate-dominated Democratic Party. The clear explanation of the need for a new party is a strong point in Jeremy and Peter’s article.
Philip Locker and Stephan Kimmerle from DSA’s Reform & Revolution caucus also wrote an excellent article, “The Road from Nevada,” which makes similar points as the Bread & Roses article, but the Reform & Revolution article focuses on the fact that, in order to get elected to leadership positions of the Nevada Democratic Party (which are unfortunately not that powerful in themselves), DSA had to build itself as a party-like organization to be able to have membership-driven decisions and campaigns. In practice, this was much less about taking over a party than beginning to build a new party in and through DSA.
Jeremy and Peter are absolutely right to warn that most elected left-wing activists who have taken positions within the Democratic Party structures will come under intense pressure to moderate what they are fighting for and bow to the demands of the pro-corporate political establishment. However, it is theoretically conceivable that DSA members in Nevada or other states could buck this all-too-common trend. Philip and Stephan argue that the Nevada DSA leaders should use their new positions as a platform to legitimize a socialist agenda, build DSA, and deepen relationships with unions and community organizations. These new positions should be used, Philip and Stephan argue, to build up DSA’s membership, independent finances, and organizational capacity as a stepping stone toward a future party, a mass left-wing break away from the Democratic Party.
We think Philip’s and Stephan’s article is stronger in providing concrete, practical ideas for how DSA could do this, especially now that the Nevada DSA activists have already won the positions and it is unlikely they will simply stop what they’re doing and resign their new positions. This is where we believe Jeremy and Peter’s article does not engage enough with the socialist movement where it is currently at. Nevada is not the only place where DSA members have sought to win leadership elections within Democratic Party structures; there is a battle taking place within the Democratic Party. We agree with Jeremy and Peter that running for leadership positions within the Democratic Party is not the most fruitful arena. However, the job of Marxists is not only to point this out but also to engage in the real struggles that the new socialist movement is waging. Winning the leadership positions of the Democratic Party in Nevada was not a very high priority on Reform & Revolution’s to-do list, but this battle still reveals a lot of interesting issues, and it allows DSA to build on this success, and we believe Marxists should engage in this process.
The strategy favored by Jeremy and Peter of building an “independent and oppositional socialist brand” is one we support, especially as one of our main bases of support is here in Seattle, where the local DSA is fighting against the effort to recall the independent socialist City Councilmember Kshama Sawant. Yet, we believe that even the battles fought within the Democratic Party show the real need for DSA to build independently as we prepare to form a mass democratic, socialist party with roots in the working class, in unions, and community struggles.
Check out both these excellent articles!
Share them on social media, and let us know what you think! Email us at info@ReformAndRevolution.org and subscribe to the Reform & Revolution magazine!
