by The Challenges Facing DSA in the Biden Era
We continue here with the third and final part of our political review of the 2021 National Convention of Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). Part One gave a general overview of the convention and commented on the new political platform that was adopted. Part Two reviewed the debates on electoral strategy and internationalism. This final section analyzes DSA’s stalled growth under Biden so far, assesses DSA’s democracy, and draws some overall conclusions about the state of DSA.
DSA exploded from 6,000 members in 2016 to 55,000 members at the time of its 2019 convention. In 2020 DSA surged to 95,000 members as a result of the Bernie Sanders campaign, the COVID-19 radicalization, the mass BLM protests, and DSA’s 100K recruitment drive.
Around 10-15,000 members are active in their chapters. While the majority of members are largely inactive in DSA, 65% of members have stepped up to pay monthly dues (whereas the norm a few years ago was paying annually). DSA’s yearly income rose from $2 million in 2017, to $3 million in 2019, to a projected $6.5 million for 2021. From 2020 to 2021 DSA’s full-time staff grew by 60% from 20 to 32.
The typical DSA member is in their twenties or thirties and college educated. Around 10,000 DSA members belong to a union, with a concentration in education and public sector unions. A large majority of DSA’s membership is white, although comrades of color have established caucuses, spearheaded critical initiatives, and taken up key leadership positions.
Despite DSA’s rise in recent years, so far in 2021 its membership growth has stalled. Delegates from different chapters at the convention also expressed frustration with a feeling of low energy within DSA.
While there is no doubt that organizing under the pandemic is challenging, this does not explain DSA’s recent stagnation. In fact, DSA’s dramatic growth began in March 2020 (when pandemic lockdowns started) and continued through the end of the year. It was Biden taking office, not the pandemic, that coincided with DSA’s stalled growth, which suggests the cause is political.
DSA grew from 2016 to 2020 within a political context revolving around pro-Bernie and anti-Trump axes. Now we have entered a new period with Biden and the Democrats advocating New Deal-esque measures that break with the past four decades of neoliberalism. In this new and complicated situation, DSA — and the entire left — is grappling with finding its role and how to be most effective.
So far we have not seen huge mobilizations or protests under Biden’s administration. The current lull in movements is a product of a number of factors. First, there is a mood of relief among progressive workers that Trump was defeated. Second, these layers are hoping Biden and the Democrats will deliver reforms. Third, union and progressive leaders have not made a clear call for mass mobilizations or a determined struggle from below. But this is likely to change, with left-wing struggles erupting at some point during Biden’s term.
Amid all the convention debates about process, resolutions, and leadership elections, conscious discussion about these major shifts in the US political terrain was unfortunately absent. DSA needs to prioritize political discussion if we hope to reorient our membership to new political realities. This will require a break from the current culture of “proceduralism” — a depoliticized and overly formalistic conception of how to run the organization.
It would have been far better to have had a discussion — at the pre-convention conferences and at the beginning of the convention — about the crucial question of how the socialist left should assess the new political situation and relate to Biden. Future conventions should start with an overall political discussion on a draft political resolution from the outgoing National Political Committee (and amendments or alternative resolutions from members), coherently laying out perspectives and priority tasks for the socialist movement.
The Missing Discussion: Socialist Resistance under Biden
A crucial question was not discussed at DSA’s convention: What are the tasks of socialists under the Biden administration?
Right-wing Democrats like Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin are trying to block or significantly whittle down Biden´s $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation package. Their priority is passing the more limited bipartisan infrastructure bill which is supported by corporate America.
The budget reconciliation bill would be the largest expansion of social welfare in the US in decades. It includes important environmental programs, monthly child support payments, universal preschool, free community college, paid family leave, expansion of Medicare, and much more — all paid for by taxing the rich. It would significantly benefit tens of millions of working people and is the best chance of stopping the Republicans from taking back the House and/or Senate in 2022.
Biden, and the wing of the ruling class he leads, has decided that for now the interests of the capitalist system would be best served by reforms that try to rehabilitate their tattered legitimacy. Alarmed by the growth of left and right-wing populism in the form of Sanders and Trump, they hope to alleviate the huge discontent in US society by trying to reduce economic and racial inequality. Alongside this is the need to address the economic crisis unleashed by COVID-19 as well as a growing geo-political rivalry with China. While promoting changes that would temporarily improve conditions for working people in the US, their overriding priority is to entrench the underlying capitalist social system.
On the basis of clearly recognizing Biden’s pro-capitalist strategy, socialists should support every progressive proposal from Biden while calling out Biden and the Democrats without hesitation for refusing to do whatever it takes to overcome Republican and right-wing Democrats´ obstruction. We also need to explain how these measures fail to go far enough and make the case for fundamental socialist change.
But most of all we should emphasize the need for working people to take our fate into our own hands through mass action and building our own independent organizations. The obstacles put in our way by Republicans and the Democratic Party establishment beholden to Wall Street will not be overcome without a fight. The strategic task of the radical left should be to promote the demands and tactics that help bring workers and oppressed people into active struggle and that raise their level of consciousness and organization.
Mobilize and Force the Vote
A promising example of the way forward was shown in early August when Congresswoman Cori Bush led an encampment on the Capitol steps demanding an extension of the eviction moratorium. Cori rejected claims by Biden and Pelosi that nothing could be done. Within days more members of the Squad joined her protest. Quickly, the Biden administration was forced to extend the eviction moratorium in 90 percent of the country (though it was later struck down by the Supreme Court).
At the beginning of the year there was a debate on the left about whether AOC and the Squad should “force the vote.” This meant the Squad would refuse to support Pelosi’s reelection as Speaker of the House unless she made concessions to the left, such as allowing a floor vote on Medicare for All. AOC and others argued against this, saying they would use their leverage at a better time. What better time would there be than now with the battle over human and physical infrastructure?
But Congressional maneuvers by themselves will not be enough. To win lasting, fundamental change we need a massive mobilization from below — and DSA’s role is to help organize and lead efforts along these lines. Let’s fight for a bold Green New Deal, putting maximum pressure on the Democrats. This should include the threat of running left-wing challengers in 2022 against all those Democrats who fail to deliver. This needs to be linked together with building fighting mass movements of the multiracial working class in our communities and workplaces.
The unfolding infrastructure battle is the time to force a vote, to mobilize from below, and build toward a movement-oriented democratic socialist party.
Democracy in DSA
Despite weaknesses, the convention demonstrated that DSA is a member-driven democratic organization. This is a huge strength in contrast with most other progressive organizations, such as Our Revolution, which operate in an NGO style that lacks avenues for people to join as real members who can actively participate in collectively determining the organization’s direction. While unions have the strength of being membership organizations, most unfortunately have a bureaucratized internal life.
Building genuinely democratic organizations is not just a luxury; it is a vital prerequisite for any project of working-class self-emancipation. History shows that there is a real danger of a bureaucracy developing in socialist and working-class organizations, which leads to splits, demoralization, and undermines working peoples’ capacity for mass collective struggle. But this convention showed that there is currently no powerful bureaucracy stifling democracy in DSA. At this early stage the bigger problems are DSA’s chaotic internal processes and the lack of political leadership.
This organizational weakness, however, does lead to a serious democratic problem. DSA’s elected officials — the most prominent spokespeople for the movement — are not accountable to the organization. But it also has important political consequences.
There is a built-in structural reality that elected representatives face more direct pressure from the ruling class than the socialist movement as a whole. Early indications of this reformist pressure were shown when three DSA members of Congress (AOC, Jamaal Bowman, and Rashida Tlaib) voted to allow an increase in funding for the Capitol Police, and when Jamaal Bowman voted for unconditional US aid to Israel — both positions which clearly contradict DSA’s agreed policies.
However, at the level of internal functioning, DSA has a robust democratic culture. The convention set an important democratic precedent when 91% of delegates voted to censure and revoke the delegate status of leaders of the Portland (OR) chapter for their role in removing three candidates from the chapter’s delegate election. One member was barred based on his political views (membership in the Class Unity caucus) and two others based on allegations of sexism (a claim that has been refuted by one of the alleged victims and a later official grievance process). The overwhelming decision of the convention sent a clear message about the importance of upholding all DSA members’ democratic rights, including the right to advocate for minority political views and for allegations of unacceptable conduct to be taken very seriously and be investigated by a fair grievance process.
DSA’s democracy was also tested in the early part of the convention, which was dominated by allegations of abuse by three members running for the National Political Committee (NPC). Reform & Revolution commented on this during the convention. The outgoing NPC attempted to resolve this intensifying conflict by barring any comrade facing a grievance investigation from running for the NPC. But 78% of the delegates voted to overturn this decision of the NPC. This proved to be a turning point, and the convention began to function more productively. The willingness of the delegates to overrule the national leadership of DSA — unfortunately rare in left and workers’ organizations — was a positive sign of DSA’s democratic culture.
Unfortunately, the NPC election was not very competitive. Originally there were 24 candidates running for the 16 seats. However, during the convention several candidates withdrew from the race, leaving only 20 candidates. By comparison 33 people ran for the NPC in 2019.
To become more effective, and to allow for its democratic decisions to be consequential, DSA needs a more political leadership and stronger structures. In this regard the convention agreed to some positive measures, including stipends for NPC members, matching funds for chapters to open offices and hire local staff, and plans to create state-level organizational structures.
At the same time, a strengthened leadership must be kept under vigorous democratic checks to guarantee the organization serves the needs of the workers’ movement. Some proposals that would have enhanced DSA’s democracy failed by large margins, like establishing rights for the membership to elect the National Director, recall NPC members and replace NPC vacancies by national election, and set policy through national referendums. Arguments that these democratic measures “require too much work” and benefit caucuses’ “factional agendas” unfortunately carried the day.
Shifting Political Balance
There was a strong conservative sentiment at the convention in the sense of not wanting to change strategies that worked well in recent years. While a strategy can work in one context, we should be aware that sudden major events will often require DSA to be flexible with our tactics and change course.
For example, over the past few years the new left has had success running on the Democratic ballot line. But the current tenuous coexistence between the growing left and the entrenched Democratic establishment will break down at a certain point, sharply posing the need for an independent workers party. If we don’t use the favorable situation today to prepare for that coming crisis, we allow the right wing to choose the timing and framing of this inevitable showdown that is most advantageous for them.
The politics of the convention were naturally representative of the more active DSA members. This layer of core DSA activists is more class-conscious than the average DSA member. These activists also have a more political, outward-facing orientation that seeks to organize the working class to fight for structural changes in society.
In contrast, the broad DSA membership tends to be more influenced by anarchistic “prefigurative politics” — a focus on changing DSA members’ interpersonal behavior and methods of organizing to embody socialist values. This can sometimes take the form of attempts to create islands of socialism amid the vast ocean of capitalism through mutual aid projects (although politicized mutual aid can be valuable).
Anarchist and privilege politics had less support at the 2021 convention compared to the previous two conventions. This reflects the political evolution of DSA activists and the weakening of the caucuses which had previously provided a leadership for these politics. Build was influential at the 2019 convention but has since ceased to function. The Libertarian Socialist Caucus (LSC) also appeared to have fewer delegates than at the last convention, and only one LSC member was elected to the new NPC.
While many supporters of these trends have anarchistic anti-leadership sentiments, their reduced influence as a result of the weakening of their caucuses actually confirms the Marxist argument that a well organized leadership is a decisive factor in determining the effectiveness of political movements.
While the influence of anarchistic and privilege politics was weaker at this convention, it would be a mistake to underestimate the support for similar politics among the broad membership of DSA. These politics are often regarded as “common sense” on much of the new left, and they are particularly strong in smaller DSA chapters where the socialist movement is more marginal and less experienced in mass campaigns.
In fact, these political moods ended up finding a partial expression at the convention around an informal grouping led by LSC, the Collective Power Network (CPN), and the Renewal slate (a split from CPN). This was surprising given that CPN argues for a working-class orientation, a mass struggle strategy, and a more centralized organizational model (as opposed to the horizontalist norm in DSA). Yet CPN’s factional disputes with Bread & Roses and pragmatic organizational outlook resulted in them giving a lead in a number of instances at the convention to a broader mood that Build had previously expressed.
Strengthening DSA for the Challenges Ahead
DSA is still a very new organization (since its de facto refounding in 2016) largely composed of a new generation of activists who are rebuilding the socialist movement practically from scratch. Most socialist organizations collapsed or swung to the right when the Soviet Union and its satellite states imploded from 1989-91. Socialist and Marxist ideas suffered a huge setback, and the historical continuity of the socialist movement was largely broken. Since then, populism, postmodernism, and privilege politics have filled much of the ideological void on the left. The new socialist movement is having to rediscover socialism and Marxism, which necessarily entails growing pains.
This setback can be seen on an organizational level in the loss of basic traditions of collective organization and democratic decision-making. The rise of DSA represents a promising step toward relearning these crucial aspects of working-class politics, but it also shows the inexperience of the newly emerging left.
These underlying political and organizational challenges were visible in the sharp tensions at the 2021 convention, which were reminiscent of similar crises that took place at DSA’s previous two conventions.
In a highly favorable political situation where the socialist movement is growing, DSA’s weaknesses can recede into the background. However, politics and class struggle do not simply unfold in an ever rising curve. Inevitably, there will be sharp turns and major events that can create a difficult political environment for the left for a time. This could include, for example, major terrorist atrocities, a frenzied wave of nationalism, or a temporary shift in popular moods that results in socialists losing important electoral positions.
Under such conditions, if DSA has not made a qualitative step forward politically and organizationally, there is a danger that the organization could be thrown into crisis, resulting in demoralization, heightened political divisions, and splits.
This would be a serious setback for the socialist movement. It is therefore vital that DSA activists make full use of the currently favorable situation to strengthen DSA to be able to withstand the challenges ahead. This primarily requires DSA to sink roots in the multiracial working class, develop a more experienced layer of organizers, and build a much stronger Marxist wing that can help lead DSA along principled socialist lines.
Philip Locker and Ramy Khalil were elected delegates to DSA’s National Convention, and they are members of DSA’s Reform & Revolution caucus. They were central leaders of 15 Now and Kshama Sawant’s initial election and re-election campaigns to Seattle City Council.
