******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
I am in East Bay DSA, which as far as I can understand it is one of the more influential branches. Here's how it works here: The branch leadership was dominated by union staffers and non-profiteers. We do not have regular monthly branch meetings and what membership meetings we have are strictly scripted from start to finish so there is really no space to raise new ideas. Nearly a year and a half ago, a small group of us went to the leadership body and suggested that they open up a discussion on DSA running its own candidate or candidates for local office. The discussion would focus on running candidate(s) would run as socialists and working class representatives and opposed to both parties. The leadership refused to open up such a discussion on the specious grounds that they can't make such decisions (run candidates) for the branch. But really all we were proposing is to have a discussion. Instead, the only activities that branch members could get involved in was canvassing for the state single payer bill. The plan all along was for that bill to be killed one way or another. I even suggested that on the EBDSA Facebook page, but I was told I was being too pessimistic. As it turned out, I was right, but there never was the slightest hint of that by the DSA leadership here either during the campaign or afterwards. As a result, it did serve to simply mobilize the membership to campaign for a Democratic-led and organized campaign, one that was planned to fail from the start. Then the wheels were greased for EBDSA to support Jovanka Beckles, Democratic Party candidate for state legislature. Meanwhile, there was canvassing for repeal of a state law prohibiting local rent control ordinances. There was and is zero explanation that regulating the free market is well and good, but what's really needed is public housing (under the control and management of the workers and tenants). Again, this rent control issue, like single payer, is one being led by the state DP "progressives". There is another issue: In Oakland (which is the main city in the East Bay), even though it's been gentrified a lot, we are not going to build a real working class socialist movement if we're all white. But that is more or less the case with EBDSA. Not that there is blame, but we have to be aware of that and take steps to remedy it. So, here's another issue: Laney Community College is kind of the icon for Oakland's working class/people of color youth. Last year, its existence was threatened by the plan of the Oakland A's to build a stadium right across the street from Laney. There started to be a considerable campaign at Laney (and also in the nearby Chinatown community) to oppose this. That would have been a great opportunity for EBDSA to reach out beyond its existing demographics. Plus, as socialists, EBDSA could have made a real contribution. It remained entirely uninvolved. The only explanation I can find is that that issue did not fit into the strategy of the Democratic Party liberals. And the reason for that is that Oakland is controlled by the real estate developers through several of the major players in the Democratic party who administer the city (from the mayor on down). And these liberals are precisely the ones linked with the real estate industry. (See this article for the background and the details: https://oaklandsocialist.com/2017/10/18/oakland-as-stadium-proposal-save-laney-college-stop-gentrification/ ) One last point: At the annual membership "convention" of EBDSA, the chair commented that he was so excited because this is the first political debate we've had in EBDSA. Can you imagine that? He was saying (accurately) that there never has been a political debate within EBDSA before then. I don't think the reason is that the people running EBDSA are simply bureaucrats. I think it's simply that they are committed to a strategy - support for the liberal wing of the Democrats - that they know they cannot defend. And I think the events I cited above show that. I am still in DSA and as active as I can be, but these are real issues. John Reimann -- *“In politics, abstract terms conceal treachery.” *from "The Black Jacobins" by C. L. R. James Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
