Quick housekeeping: I’m not in DSA. I’ve been involved in other socialist organizations like Socialist Alternative in the past, and in this letter I speak about my own experiences, or when speaking as an outsider I try to make that clear and resist reductive claims. I simply think that analyzing developments within DSA is a helpful window into broader trends within the American Left.
I thank Comrade Alexander Gallus for opening up a dialogue via his article The Russian “Threat to Freedom and Democracy”. I thank Comrade RF for his Letter, “Comments on the Russian Threat”. And now, with a reply Letter from Comrade Gallus and another by Comrade SH, a real dialogue has been opened. I am grateful to Cosmonaut for fostering this.
Comradely preamble over
The Sharpest Point of the Debate
Comrade Gallus has reacted sharply, especially in part to a specific phrase of Comrade RF’s letter. I do think Comrade RF’s letter begins much stronger than it ends, but I am not certain I entirely endorse all the interpretations Comrade Gallus makes in his letter. Regardless, I do think these two comrades have pinpointed the exact challenge the American Left faces if it is to make a principled socialist-pacifist stance and begin to carve out space in American discourse (forgive me for having used that word) for elaborating revolutionary defeatist slogans and strategies.
Comrade RF’s assertion in part. Emphasis my own, calling to attention part of what Comrade Gallus hones in on:
“Then, we must outline our program. Basics must include a call for immediate peace, for the acceptance of refugees (not just those Ukranian of course, and a legalization of those already here) and an unconditional recognition that the main enemy is still at home despite the current war. The last point will be unpopular, and now is not our moment. But we must hold the line”
Comrade Gallus in his Letter:
“Renato’s assertion that now is not the time to fight our governments’ preposterously propagated lies and protracted aggression spanning decades is absolutely bankrupt of any political strategy for the international working class in the real situation”
Strong-Manning Comrade RF’s statement
I want to take what I believe is the most charitable view on what Comrade RF said in the above selection.
To oversimplify it:
It’s gonna be rough
To more fully paraphrase it:
Despite the current appalling military operations initiated by the Russian state / military apparatus, American socialists must maintain the position that the American working class’s main enemy is nonetheless American imperialism and all its agents. This position will be deeply unpopular, and disseminating agitation/propaganda on this issue will in large part be met with rejection by the American masses. Despite this, we cannot give way in our messaging and analysis.
I assert that the phrase ‘now is not our moment’ is a short attempt at warning would-be revolutionary defeatists in America (especially anyone 30ish or younger) that they will meet resistance like they have never seen before.
And I think he’s right.
A look at DSA’s National Priorities as a Case Study
On DSA’s website there is a footer that has four clearly-labeled priorities. They are as follows, in seemingly no particular order of emphasis:
- Democratic Socialist Labor Commission
- Medicare For All
- National Electoral Committee
- Ecosocialist Working Group
To translate, their four stated priorities are:
- Helping unions and organized labor more broadly
- Medicare For All is the most self-explanatory, but ok: healthcare for everyone, not letting companies profit off sickness and disease
- Getting DSAers, socialists, leftists, progressives elected
- Preventing climate change, saving the planet
I Know a Dunk When I See One
Let’s get real – these are easy arguments to win with the average person. All four are very popular. Implementing them is not a matter of convincing working class people it’s a good idea. It’s a matter of convincing people it’s achievable and harnessing that optimism to build the organizations with political power necessary to extract it from a recalcitrant capitalist state that will stall, kill bills in committee, or find pitiful excuses to block things which it can’t outright reject if it wants to maintain credibility.
Companies almost never say unions in general are bad. They emphasize why this one particular unionization drive isn’t necessary, we’re all a big family, etc. Nobody argues for profiting off sick people. Medicare For All is just not feasible, how are we going to pay for it, it sounds complicated, etc.
I want to make a generalization. I encourage people to correct me where I go astray. But I think it’s reasonable to make the educated guess that, allowing for regional variations due to the uneven development of both this country and DSA, it’s likely that the majority of somewhat-to-very active DSA members have spent some if not most of their organizing efforts under one of these four priorities for the time that they’ve been the national priorities. That means one thing: the majority of active DSA members have spent some if not most of their time working on ‘dunk’ campaigns recently.
Whether they’re tabling, door knocking, phonebanking, and so on, they have likely met mostly acceptance. Based on my own experience doing the above tactics for campaigns around these four priorities, depending on the issue at hand and other circumstances like neighborhood, the salesmanship of that particular comrade, and humdrum things like time of day or weather (I’m completely serious) these are the likely responses they encountered, from most common to least common:
- Apathy
- Support without engagement beyond a signature or a couple dollars
- Stated support in principle but disbelief that change is possible
- People looking to learn more and sharing enough info to enable a second touchpoint, possibly to get involved if that goes well too
- The catch-all of rightwing annoyances, bored or lonely contrarians, conspiracy theorists
Overall it’s a pretty warm petri dish for anyone who’s been out there more than once.
Here Comes the Hard Part
American imperialism drapes itself in the cloak of humanitarian intervention. It’s running toward the sounds of chaos. It’s the first to run towards the sounds of tyranny, injustice, and despair.
This game is as old as conquering itself. Long before NATO and Victoria Nuland were making Russians eat spinach, before the white man’s burden, the Greeks came together to save Helen of Sparta from the Trojans.
In America at the present time, a once-vibrant socialist and communist press has long since been violently suppressed and dismantled. Union density is at more or less historic lows. I will attempt to use terms in the Lars Lih sense of the words, from Lenin Rediscovered. Liberal pacifism is hegemonic among the American working class. The capitalist press’s hold on mass media, and decades-long campaigns painting the American empire and its military as benevolent, mean that the spontaneous response of the American working class to military conflict and/or humanitarian disaster is to call for American intervention. A socialist-pacifist perspective would clash against the ‘instincts’ of the American working class’s common sense at this time.
I have seen countless peers posting gofundme’s for Ukrainian militias, calling Russians fascists, talking about the evil Putin. An organizer from my 2020 neighborhood Bernie group, who was on the rightmost edge of its steering committee and half a Warren supporter, shared the Lviv Brewery’s molotov cocktail post enthusiastically.
Alligator Tears Over Real Tragedy
More prominent than anything else in the spontaneous reactions are genuine shock and revulsion over the loss of life. Ukrainians are being displaced and killed. People are being caught in the crossfire of the deadly game of geopolitics. And it’s no game when your apartment block is being shelled.
Everyone, including Dua Lipa, as of writing this letter the number four artist on Spotify, is pouring out their hearts to the suffering of Ukrainians. The Calvert Journal has ceased publication until further notice as they re-evaluate their mission covering the New East.
American Empire loves this. They lap it up. Nothing fans the flames of war more than thoughts and prayers. NATO will work to expand its influence and punish its enemies, to a roar of approval from the crowd. NATO’s alligator tears at the loss of Ukrainian life will be cleansed by the genuine tears offered up by the American (and broader Western) masses. It’s money laundering for tears.
Innocent Ukrainian lives are being extinguished by the invasion. And innocent Russian lives will be lost from the sanctions imposed by America and the West. The sanctions’ purpose is to cripple an economy and are wielded by forces like America as economic warfare. A local equivalent would be if in response to the horrifying and life-threatening anti-trans bills passing in Texas, the federal government took steps to try and cause a recession in Texas.
Collective punishment in the form of sanctions can have devastating effects on working class people’s lives. When banks are locked out of global exchange, the national currency’s exchange rate plummets and inflation skyrockets. Just like how covid has driven up food prices and thus reduced our own wages’ buying power, targeted sanctions mean Russian workers will effectively suffer huge pay cuts. And with liquid cash hard to come by, the wheels of investment will slow and economic growth grind to a halt. So in response to the Russian military killing innocent civilians in Ukraine, the West will cause poverty, starvation, and stagnation for innocent Russians despite anti-war protests across the country. Is causing economic devastation until the threat/reality of mass domestic suffering and unrest makes the regime’s policy untenable really justifiable? Perhaps not, but as seen below it’s highly popular among Americans.
A revolutionary defeatist position would declare unequivocally that the working class has no country and NATO alligator tears are little more than an excuse to extend their reach and bring Russia down a peg. Equally important when discussing innocent lives in Ukraine are the innocent lives which will be lost in ‘humanitarian interventions.’
Support By the Numbers
Overall, Americans want America to do more to stop Russia but think direct US military intervention is a bad idea. Economic sanctions, however, are quite popular.
Would you favor the United States committing to defend Ukraine from a possible Russian invasion?
45 / 37 Support vs Don’t Support
Do you think the United States should do more to stop Russian military actions in Ukraine, or has it already done enough?
62 / 38 Should Do More vs Done Enough
If economic sanctions do not stop Russian military actions in Ukraine, would you favor or oppose the US taking military action to stop them?
Sending financial aid to Ukraine
45 / 23 / 31 Good idea, Bad idea, Unsure
Sending soldiers to Ukraine to provide help, but not to fight Russian soldiers
31 / 37 / 32 Good idea, Bad idea, Unsure
Sending soldiers to Ukraine to fight Russian soldiers
16 / 55 / 29 Good idea, Bad idea, Unsure
This is versus some of the DSA Priorities:
Support Unions
68 / 32 Support, Don’t Support
Support Medicare For All
55 / 32 / 12 Support, Don’t Support, Unsure
Support Medicare For All
69 / 31 Support, Don’t Support
Support funding more research into renewable energy sources
82 / 18 Support, Don’t Support
Global warming should be a high or very high priority for the president and Congress
Developing sources of clean energy should be a high or very high priority for the president and Congress
Are We Ready?
DSA currently has over 90,000 members. And remember, most of the active ones have spent a good amount of their recent activity campaigning on extremely popular issues. Also, DSA can’t hold national representatives to abide by the platform it ratified at its national convention.
A past Cosmonaut article by Comrade Matthew Strupp outlined the Practical Policy of Revolutionary Defeatism:
“strike actions in strategic industries, dissemination of defeatist propaganda in the armed forces, and organizing enlisted soldiers against their officers”
I ask you: Is a broad-tent organization with less-than-more internal discipline able to both proclaim and follow through with mass agitation against an American ‘humanitarian’ intervention, military or otherwise? Are they prepared to provide their rank and file the analytical, emotional, and possibly physical safety support required to engage in a prolonged campaign which will be met with more resistance and vitriol from masses of American workers than any DSA campaign in years? Will they even be willing to divert resources from ‘more promising’ campaigns to make the attempt?
Is the American Left as a whole ready? If not – what would it take to be so? Because in politics can’t and won’t are functionally the same. Crises and wars will continue to come. If we stand by impotently and aren’t taking measures to steel ourselves for the struggles ahead then we truly are as “absolutely bankrupt of any political strategy for the international working class” as Comrade Gallus fears.
Comradely,
Sophia
