by An Initial Take on the 2023 DSA Convention: A Left-Leaning Majority on the NPC, Support for a Trans and Reproductive Rights Campaign as well as Class-Struggle Unionism, and a Certain Shift Toward Political Independence
By Stephan Kimmerle
Nearly 1,000 delegates representing DSA’s chapters convened in Chicago from August 4 to 6. The convention elected a new NPC with a left-leaning majority, a shift from the previously dominant moderate wing of DSA represented by the Socialist Majority Caucus and Groundwork slate. (Terms like “left” and “moderate” are used in this article in relation to the political spectrum within DSA, not society as a whole.)
The new left majority relies on a fragile alliance of different forces. The three decisive questions facing this new NPC majority will be whether they are prepared to shift the organization toward 1) political independence from the Democratic Party, 2) stronger internal democracy, and 3) becoming a visible campaigning organization, starting with labor and the trans and reproductive rights campaign.
The new “multi-tendency national committee to prepare for the 2024 national election” (passed by 64 percent) is another key tool to develop a profile for DSA and our electeds of fighting against the Republican right on the basis of independent working class policies as opposed to than trailing behind the Wall Street Democrats.
The new left-leaning NPC majority marks the beginning of a new phase for DSA.
Following the substantial leftward shift that took place during the 2017 convention – under the impact of DSA’s explosive growth – and its continuation in 2019, followed by a period of relative political stagnation since 2021, this convention in 2023 serves as another step in the evolution of an organization searching for a path to win fundamental socialist change in society.
The delegates endorsed a shift to the left on labor, further formalizing a strategic focus on labor within DSA and on building a base among rank-and-file workers. The convention also moved DSA’s electoral strategy leftward, passing by a huge margin an amendment (compendium with adopted agenda, page 92) that laid out some modest goals for “acting like an independent party,” although it fell short of a clearer, more accountable approach concerning DSA’s elected officials. On international politics, the status quo remained entrenched. In a glaring failure, there was no discussion of all the DSA members in Congress supporting Biden’s Ukraine war policy, funding for the massive US weapon transfer to the right-wing Ukrainian government, and expanding NATO, much less a demand for change.
Overall, the Convention stood out in comparison with previous DSA conventions for its level of maturity. Delegates left energized and determined to build DSA, especially in terms of the new income-based solidarity dues. However, the road ahead is still rocky; major challenges have not been addressed – like how to approach the 2024 elections – and the organization is now led by a left, but very politically diverse and fragile majority that will urgently need to find its course.
After Intense Days a Lot Remains Open
Despite three days of intense deliberation, DSA’s stances on critical issues remain uncertain.
- DSA’s position concerning the presidential election, a topic of debate among NPC candidates prior to the convention, poses questions such as: Should DSA’s elected representatives endorse Biden, or should DSA throw its support behind DSA member Cornel West, especially in the solidly blue or solidly red “safe states”?
- How should conflicts with elected officials be resolved in the future, such as when DSA Congressmembers voted to fund the Israeli military or ban a railway workers’ strike?
- Should DSA’s most prominent members – our elected officials – continue aligning themselves with Biden’s militaristic imperialist intervention in the Ukraine war?
- The decline in DSA’s level of activism and the loss of 20 percent of the membership was hardly discussed at the convention. The moderate caucuses suggested that we just need to improve our organizational methods to solve these problems. However, we believe DSA’s decline stems from the underlying political strategy that guides its work. Since Biden took office, DSA has been under increased pressure to trail the Democrats. DSA electeds have moved away from representing DSA and become more incorporated into the Democratic Party. We have also seen a concerning drift toward a more staff-driven NGO-style organization. Instead, we need to move toward more open debate among our members, becoming a fighting organization that seeks to build mass struggle outside the electoral arena, with a bold oppositional electoral profile against the ruling Democrats and the right-wing Republicans.
- Nationally, DSA lacks an ambitious approach to fight for eco-socialism. The Green New Deal Committee downgraded its work over the last years from a school-focused campaign to electoral work, resulting in proposals at this Convention to run for school boards to fight the far right. We have nothing against running candidates. However, DSA and its national eco-socialist work should look more like radical movements like Extinction Rebellion, Fridays For Future, or Letzte Generation (Last Generation, a movement in Germany), but combined with a Green New Deal to link youth movements with a strategy of winning over the working class to a just transition to clean energy. Were these pressing issues discussed at this convention? Not really.
The selection of resolutions and amendments for discussion resulted in the omission of crucial and contentious matters from the agenda.
Consequently, the initial battle of the Convention revolved around a vote to modify the agenda. Maria Franzblau, a member of Reform & Revolution (R&R) from Florida, motioned to refer a few non-controversial items to the “consent agenda” and replace them with discussions on a national campaign for trans and reproductive rights, the development of a party-like electoral strategy, and DSA’s stance on anti-Zionism. A coalition of caucuses and members united, not necessarily to endorse all these motions, but to ensure that democratic debates could at least take place on these subjects. This proposal was approved, marking an initial step toward a more democratic and inclusive debate.
Photo: Sarah Milner speaking in favor of the change in the agenda
Democratizing DSA
Unfortunately, the most significant proposals to democratize DSA failed. The resolution from Reform & Revolution and Marxist Unity Group to create a National Delegates Council did not make it onto the agenda. A proposal to expand the NPC (compendium with adopted agenda, page 50) to 51 members in an amended form (for a 35 member NPC) garnered 62 percent support of the convention delegates but fell narrowly short of the two-thirds majority required to amend the Constitution.
Many on the left disagreed with Reform & Revolution’s support of the expansion of the NPC. We believed that – no matter which majority would be established on the NPC at this Convention – expanding the NPC would help foster democratic debate and transparency by making debates on the highest decision-making body between Conventions far more open and transparent, instead of continuing to allow debates to be bottled up on a small NPC. We also believed it would help allow the NPC to be better connected with DSA chapters.
Many delegates were upset that, after failing to get two-thirds of the vote with only 62 percent, a delegate moved a “motion to reconsider,” that means a call for a new vote. Contrary to the allegations, this was not a Socialist Majority caucus member pulling some dark maneuver; it was a comrade from the left of DSA who had voted against the NPC expansion. They had said in advance that while they would be voting against the proposal itself, if it narrowly failed to reach the two-thirds required they would move a motion to reconsider and vote Yes in a second vote.
However, after they motioned to reconsider, a leader of SMC motivated the motion. It appeared then as a preplanned plot by SMC to try to overturn the outcome of the initial vote. This was not what we believe happened, but we understand the anger about it as comrades are rightfully annoyed with backroom deals and shady procedural tricks.
Further, the SMC comrade who motivated the motion to reconsider emphasized that the two-thirds requirement was too high. In our view, that was not a good argument for the convention to vote again. Instead, the case should have been made by delegates who had voted No that they were now willing to vote Yes, given how much support there was for expanding the NPC.
Since these conversations about potentially reconsidering a vote were held before the vote even started, they should have been made transparently informing all delegates for example on the delegates’ Slack in advance, to avoid surprising anybody and to make sure to avoid the appearance of a maneuver to bypass a democratic decision by the convention.
In the end, three other resolutions to democratize DSA did pass.
The convention agreed to establish two elected, paid co-chairs who will engage in public-facing work (compendium with adopted agenda, page 125). This is an important step towards a more effective and functional national DSA that will also increase the power of DSA’s elected leadership in comparison to unelected staff.
The Convention agreed to restart the biannual educational DSA National Activist Conference each year in alternating years between biannual decision-making conventions (compendium with adopted agenda, page 33) as part of the consent agenda (which means it passed in a general package, voted on at the beginning of the convention, without individual deliberations and votes on each of those resolutions).
Another resolution passed (compendium with adopted agenda, page 136) to set up a multi-tendency commission to develop proposals to improve democracy in DSA at the next convention in 2025.
We look forward to working with all comrades to implement a change toward a bold, campaigning organization starting with the labor and trans and reproductive rights campaign, toward political independence, class-struggle unionism, and toward what Red Star called “good governance” in DSA: an increased democracy and accountability within DSA.
A Shift Toward Independence from Democrats
The overwhelming vote of 79 percent of delegates for the amendment to “Act Like an Independent Party” (compendium with adopted agenda, page 92) marked a shift to the left, toward independence from the Democratic Party. Put forward by the Bread & Roses Caucus, it outlines the need to run candidates openly as “democratic socialists,” form Socialists in Office committees, and develop a much closer relationship of support and accountability for our elected officials.
This amendment calls for presenting “DSA as an independent political project from the Democratic and Republican Parties that working-class people can identify with and think of as an alternative to the two parties.”
Unfortunately, the amendment put forward by Marxist Unity Group (MUG) and Reform & Revolution, “Toward a Party-like Electoral Strategy” (compendium with adopted agenda, page 101) failed with 41 percent. It aimed to establish clear red lines that are a minimum requirement for any DSA elected not to cross. It also laid out a process for how DSA would address violations of these principles and set additional concrete expectations for candidates and electeds who commit to represent DSA.
Despite the overall shift toward political independence from the Democratic Party, the majority of the Convention was still not prepared to take concrete steps towards democratic accountability and control over DSA electeds. In the debate over the Bread & Roses resolution “Defend Democracy through Political Independence” (compendium with adopted agenda, page 117) an amendment (from Socialist Majority) to strike language that pointed in the direction of accountability over DSA electeds was narrowly passed with 51 percent support. The rejected sentence said: “The NPC shall publicly communicate disapproval to endorsed candidates and elected DSA members who reject this strategy [of political independence from the Democratic Party] in order to explicitly or tacitly support centrist leaders of the Democratic Party (for example, by attending rallies on behalf of centrists, political communications, or explicit endorsement of centrist Democrats).”
An Incoherent Left Majority on the NPC
The elections to the NPC, DSA’s elected leadership between Conventions, expressed a significant shift to the left. The moderate caucuses, Socialist Majority Caucus (SMC) and Groundwork, are now in a minority. A left majority is now in charge.
Unfortunately, our R&R candidates, Philip Locker and Jesse Dreyer, were not elected to the NPC.
From left caucuses 8 comrades were elected: from MUG (2: Amy and Rashad), Bread & Roses (3: Alex P, Kristin S, Laura W), and Red Star (3: John L, Megan R, Sam HF). One independent (Luisa M) and one representative of the anti-Zionist slate (Ahmed H) are also from the left of DSA. The moderate wing of DSA (6) is represented by Groundwork (4: Ashik S, Cara T, Frances G, Rose D) and SMC (2: Colleen J, Renée P).
The newly elected NPC elected an interim Steering Committee (in place until the NPC meeting in October) of Renée (SMC), Ashik (Groundwork), John (Red Star), Alex (B&R), and Amy (MUG).
We look forward to working with all comrades to implement a change toward a bold, campaigning organization, starting with the trans and reproductive rights campaign, political independence from the Democratic Party, class struggle unionism, and what Red Star called “good governance” in DSA – increased democracy and accountability within DSA.
Immediate tasks facing the new NPC in ensuring significant change in the direction of DSA is appointing a new National Director and establishing a different approach to political oversight of DSA’s valuable staff.
After DSA’s slide toward a more staff-driven, NGO-style form of functioning, the first test of this new NPC will be whether it appoints a new National Director and establishes a different approach to political oversight of DSA’s valuable staff. Maria Svart, the current National Director, has played a valuable role to build DSA over many years. She deserves a lot of respect and gratitude for her hard work. However, politically, she has overseen the organization and the staff in line with the political approach of the moderate wing of DSA.
Graphic from Twitter, shane, @thespecialbean
The Convention elected a NPC with a new majority. The new NPC needs to now move ahead in implementing a new direction for DSA, starting with increased control over DSA’s senior staff and using DSA’s national resources to further their commitments towards increased independence from the Democrats and internal democracy. Given the experience of opposition to these policies from the current National Director, the new NPC needs to exercise its democratic ability to appoint a new National Director who is politically committed to carrying out the new direction represented by the new NPC .
The test of the new left NPC majority is not in its labels or political affiliations of its members, but if it actually carries out in practice a shift to the left in DSA’s work in terms of political independence from the Democrats, democracy within DSA, and an effective campaigning national organization.
For a Trans and Reproductive Rights Campaign
R&R argued that DSA needs to set campaigning priorities to have the maximum impact on society. We proposed that DSA prepare and launch a fighting nationally coordinated campaign for reproductive rights and trans liberation that all chapters and working groups can participate in, so we can throw our weight into this ongoing struggle together.
Delegates voted first on allowing the resolution for a national campaign on trans and reproductive rights onto the agenda. After approving the agenda change with 476 to 415 votes (and 28 abstentions), the campaign resolution itself passed by 62 percent (527 votes).
A key priority now is to follow through on this mandate and develop a vibrant campaign over the next weeks and months. The resolution outlines that “preparation for this campaign will start in Fall 2023, with a campaign launch in January 2024 and a national day of action in Spring 2024.” We look forward to “the NPC [reaching] out to DSA elected officials to formally ask them to endorse and commit to using their platforms to aggressively promote this campaign and its actions,” as the resolution requires. Our elected officials are the most prominent representatives of DSA; we need to develop a norm of asking them to publicly promote our message and campaigns, starting with this reproductive and trans rights campaign.
This campaign can and should be a key tool for DSA to be visible in 2024, to fight for trans and reproductive rights, and to build the socialist movement.
The campaign for trans and reproductive rights should be a key tool for DSA to be visible in 2024.
This same campaign proposal was also adopted by the YDSA Convention three days earlier by 88 percent (92 delegates) and offers a great opportunity to build active YDSA chapters, especially in the South.
Toward Class-Struggle Unionism
The proposed resolution on DSA’s work in the reviving labor movement marked a shift toward class-struggle unionism (compendium with adopted agenda, page 74). The resolution emphasized socialists engaging in labor struggles with language on prioritizing building the rank-and-file over good relations with the union establishment.
Two amendments from DSA’s moderate wing, in this case from Groundwork, helped clarify the discussions.
Groundwork proposed to remove language in the consensus resolution, that by supporting the rank-and-file strategy, DSA “rejects a strategy that prioritizes building relationships within the union establishment.” In the same amendment (compendium with adopted agenda, page 86), Groundwork wanted to replace a clear focus on building networks of militant labor activists around Labor Notes, with a proposal to put Labor Notes on the same level of collaboration as the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation and “trainings for union activists hosted by unions and local labor.”
This amendment was rejected by 69 to 31 percent.
Groundwork also proposed (compendium with adopted agenda, page 82) removing the commitment to having two full-time chairs as leaders of DSA’s National Labor Committee. Fiscal arguments were put forward against the prioritization of labor that the left wing of the Convention was promoting. The amendment was rejected with 54 against and 46 percent in favor, and the Convention voted to offer the chairs of the NLC full-time paid positions.
The finalized labor resolution – without these modifications – was adopted almost unanimously with 96 percent.
DSA and Palestinian Solidarity Work
Only two weeks before the Convention the NPC released a recommendation (compendium with adopted agenda, page 172) proposing to dissolve the current BDS Working Group and absorb it into the International Committee (IC). After attempting to do this during the Bowman affair – when the NPC rather than censure Bowman for his support for the Israeli military focused instead on silencing the BDS Working Group which was the most vocal group opposing Bowman and the NPC – anyone on the NPC voting for this should have known that this would be understood as another attempt to silence the BDS Working Group.
We would have welcomed a recommitment of DSA to the Palestinian struggle and a full debate on how to support the struggle for Palestinian liberation. For example, it would have been good to discuss why the tweets by the BDS Working Group before the Convention were mistaken to equate Israeli Jewish civilians with Israeli soldiers, which would make ordinary Jewish workers a legitimate target of Palestinian armed resistance. R&R fully supports the right of oppressed peoples, such as the Palestinians, to defend themselves, including with arms. However, we believe the Palestinian struggle needs a left and working-class-based strategy to be able to defeat the Israeli state for example by driving a wedge between this right-wing, Zionist regime and the workers in Israel.
While the NPC appeared to be responding to these tweets and other similar political actions by the BDS Working Group, the NPC recommendation is absolutely silent on these questions and did not make any political argument against the approach of the BDS Working Group. Instead, it pretends to be a simple administrative change to reduce work supposedly duplicated by the BDS Working Group and the IC.
This is why the debate at the Convention started on the worst possible terms – instead of clarifying our political strategy for building solidarity with Palestine, the discussion was focused on whether to take administrative measures to seemingly silence the BDS working group.
Since the NPC is democratically elected by the Convention, R&R believes it is the right of the NPC to organize the work of national working groups, which are self-selecting bodies. However, it is also the duty of the NPC to strive to find agreement or explore if it is possible to find a joint path forward with comrades where disagreements are well documented. The NPC must go out of its way to foster a democratic culture of debate that welcomes criticism and political opposition. While the NPC has the right to direct DSA’s political work, it must not appear to silence debate and opposition.
Most of all, the question of who oversees DSA’s Palestine work needs to be decided on the basis of clearly putting the real political differences about the message of the working group on the table for an open debate. The convention would have been precisely the place to air out the different strategies for Palestinian liberation and clarify which political approach the majority of DSA supports. Once these political issues are settled, the convention would have been better equipped to sort out if DSA’s Palestinian solidarity would be better served by one body or another.
A narrow vote of 52 percent in favor and 48 percent against the administrative decision to dissolve the BDS Working Group into the International Committee, without a clarifying political debate, is not a good basis to develop DSA’s work on solidarity with Palestine. (If you take the abstentions into account, it was 472 votes or 50 percent in favor, 439 votes or 47 percent against, and 3 percent abstention)
When a super-majority of the outgoing NPC proposed this recommendation that violated their own deadline for resolutions, they did a disservice to the democratic culture in DSA and made it harder to discuss the political disagreements around Palestine solidarity.
The debate was so polarized that it was quite difficult to differentiate between defending a democratic culture and discussing the best strategy for Palestinian liberation. The position advocated to the convention by Reform & Revolution delegate Ramy Khalil – to defend a democratic process and culture in DSA without agreeing to the political strategy of the BDS Working Group – landed in the middle of two polarized blocs and did not fully satisfy either side. However, we believe this approach was precisely what DSA needed – defense of a democratic process without glossing over significant political differences we have with the dominant politics of the BDS Working Group.
Internationalism
In general, the discussions on international questions were inadequate.
The only real debate on international questions beyond the Palestine solidarity work was on an amendment from Bread & Roses for a Class-Struggle Internationalism (compendium with adopted agenda, page 71), that proposed that DSA oppose “campism” (the idea that our main enemy is at home, US imperialism – which R&R agrees with; but then concludes that the enemy of our enemy is necessarily our friend – which R&R does not agree with).
The amendment also added language about “meeting and building relationships with a diverse array of left parties and movements in other countries, not just leading or ruling parties.”
The amendment argued that, “as consistent anti-imperialists and internationalists, our starting point for establishing solidarity is the rights of workers and peoples and not the balance of geopolitical power or the nominal political identities of different governments.”
The amendment rejects “imperialist interventions that claim to support democracy or workersʼ movements through broad-based economic sanctions and military intervention, intelligence operations, or state funding of opposition groups.”
This was unfortunately the only time the war in Ukraine – the most significant conflict in international relations – was brought into the discussions.
The amendment was opposed by comrades on the moderate side of DSA as well as comrades who consider themselves on the left, but support the International Committee’s general approach that leans toward campism.
Unfortunately, this amendment failed with 36 percent in favor and 64 percent opposed.
Reform & Revolution
Our caucus was able to present our Marxist politics to DSA members across the country this year more than we’ve ever been able to before. From a “No Endorsement for Joe Biden” to our stance for socialist anti-militarism regarding the Ukraine war, from our support for class-struggle unionism and union democracy to the need for a national campaign for trans and reproductive rights. Over the last months in the run-up to this Convention and at this Convention, we had very valuable exchanges, discussions, and debates with comrades.
We believe R&R stood out in the pre-convention discussions and at the Convention with a campaign that highlighted the political differences between the left and the moderate forces in DSA, where we promoted political clarity while being comradely and respectful. We called for a significant change in DSA’s policies and electing a left majority on the NPC, endorsing ten candidates from the broader left in DSA to make this happen, aiming to unify the Marxist left where possible.
Our candidates made it clear in the debates before the Convention that we stood for a clear alternative to SMC and Groundwork and did not hesitate to engage – in a comradely manner – in the various exchanges. For example, we argued against DSA elected officials endorsing Joe Biden in contrast with SMC as you can watch here. We advocated that DSA needs to support our elected officials, hold them accountable, and build toward independence from the Democratic Party. We also spoke frankly about the slow-motion crisis DSA is facing with a 20 percent decline in membership, and we proposed an alternative vision of a boldly anti-capitalist, campaigning organization to overcome the crisis.
At the same time we were absolutely willing to work with everybody in DSA – including the comrades in and around SMC/Groundwork who we see as responsible for a mistaken course over the last years – whenever there was some common ground such as expanding the size of the NPC. We defended democracy for comrades we don’t agree with politically, like the BDS Working Group. This is a solid political foundation to continue our efforts to build a Marxist wing of DSA. If you want to discuss more with us, or if you want to join Reform & Revolution, contact us today! Subscribe to our magazine or email list too!
Stephan Kimmerle is a Seattle DSA activist and a Co-convener of its District 2 group. He's been involved in the labor and socialist movement internationally—from being a shop steward in the public sector in Germany to organizing Marxists on an international level. He visited and wrote about the revolutions in East Germany and Serbia, the struggles in Palestine/Israel, as well as Turkey and Kurdistan. Now, he is working part-time jobs while being a stay-at-home dad of two wonderful children.
