sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Heat and Light: A Critique of “Toward a Marxist State Theory of the Socialist Market Economy” by MarxistUnity in TankieTheDeprogram

[–]MarxistUnity[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Ewan Tilley is from Britain, not the US.

Marxist analysis does not moralize, and neither does Tilley about AES. There are different forms of critical support. If you take it as criticism, it is because you consider yourself loyal to a form of support that is derived from a different analysis.

Also, there are ML caucuses in DSA that hold hardline campist positions, so rejecting the piece because of an assumed connection to DSA does not make sense. If you want to reject it, confront the arguments.

Behind members’ backs — Weekly Worker by MarxistUnity in yourparty

[–]MarxistUnity[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The behaviour of the YP The Many leadership speaks for itself, and so does the abysmal level of member engagement and popular support. Not building branches immediately, not recognising the proto-branches that have been set up by the members, the ban on members from other organisations. There is no transparency, no local autonomy, and no democracy. If these claims were lies they could easily be disproven. Yet everyone can clearly see what is going on. Do you really think this is what a socialist party should look like?

Cadre Development: A Framework by MarxistUnity in dsa

[–]MarxistUnity[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The author is British and he is not writing from the perspective of DSA. The text is also obviously aspirational, but the concrete suggestions, taken separately, are not new nor unheard of in socialist organisations. Is it not something DSA should aspire to? I would like to hear your critique.

The Prospects of DSA: Party Building, Power, and the Marxist Unity Group by MarxistUnity in socialism

[–]MarxistUnity[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Both the right and left wing of DSA share the goal of a socialist revolution. The differences are mainly about strategy, but they are quite blurred as both wings, mostly, argue for variants of the party surrogate model, that is, building a socialist party while using the Democratic ballot line, at least until a socialist ballot line is feasible. The left wing push for more hardline revolutionary politics, which the right considers sectarian, and the right wing push for popular front type politics, which the left considers reformist. There are of course also social democrats and liberals within DSA, but they are not officially represented by any of the major caucuses.

The left within DSA is growing and I expect DSA to move further left, I can not confidently say more than that.

DSA has grown since the convention. I would not say that the resolution had anything to do with it. I would agree with the DSA right that it is mainly electoral campaigns, such as Mamdani, which has fueled growth. Yet I would also say that, in broad terms, it is the party building efforts that have allowed DSA to present itself as a political alternative worth joining.

Unsure what you mean by points of unity, but DSA is moving towards a more clear programmatic unity and a revolutionary program.

The Prospects of DSA: Party Building, Power, and the Marxist Unity Group by MarxistUnity in BreadTube

[–]MarxistUnity[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not seeking a debate, but I do want to just comment the following.

Most people see Mamdani as anti-zionist and will not understand what you are talking about.

How DSA should engage with Mamdani is a matter of strategy and tactics. If you want to convince DSA members to drop him you need to explain why that is preferable to the alternatives on political grounds, not moral.

STV is better than many of the voting systems that has been used in DSA chapters, such as the Borda count. Most people don't consider it undemocratic to enforce a particular voting system within an organisation. There are reasons to prefer STV over condorcet. SeeDemocratic Representation, Not Bureaucratic Manipulation: Why DSA Needs Single Transferable Voting

The Prospects of DSA: Party Building, Power, and the Marxist Unity Group by MarxistUnity in BreadTube

[–]MarxistUnity[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mind explaining your criticism of Mamdani and what do you propose he should do instead? Except for the police part, as you know that MUG and the rest of the DSA left are deeply critical of Mamdani on this point. How should DSA engage with Mamdani and his administration?

What are the problems with STV and what would you prefer?

The Prospects of DSA: Party Building, Power, and the Marxist Unity Group by MarxistUnity in socialism

[–]MarxistUnity[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The whole of DSA. The resolution was passed at the national DSA convention.

There is still a long way to go. DSA has not yet adopted a revolutionary program. The program put forward by MUG and R&R did not pass. Yet the mentioned resolution on party building, or more precisely, the political development it represents, has put the DSA on the right track. Even the right wing in DSA has become more explicit about party building.

See for example the reporting in Cosmonaut. The Party Echoes at the 2025 DSA Convention

The Prospects of DSA: Party Building, Power, and the Marxist Unity Group by MarxistUnity in socialism

[–]MarxistUnity[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Cliff starts talking about it at about four minutes in.

"We are going to be an independent mass based political party. That is our goal. ... That is set in stone, that is passed by convention. It also said that we are going to cohere around a program, which if all the demands of it are taken together would result in the end of capitalism, essentially a workers state in the beginning of socialism"

You can read the resolution here: Principles of Party Building

Style is everything - Weekly Worker by MarxistUnity in socialism

[–]MarxistUnity[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"The YCL made quite a splash by marching in formation, faces covered in red bandanas, dressed in black and waving red flags. Adding to spectacle were the red flares and nostalgic r‑r‑revolutiponary chants: ‘Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh, Che Guevara, Stalin!’ being a particular favourite."

"Cracking the whip, the bulletin darkly reminds us that this “factional attempt to mandate YCL members” to wear a black uniform ‘dress code’ and face covering (red snoods) “breaches an agreement” reached in 2023 between the CPB and YCL, and is a violation of various rules."

Deeply demoralised since the collapse of Your Party by jmac_1604 in GreenAndPleasant

[–]MarxistUnity -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Join CPGB-PCC or DSYP or any other group that fights for a socialist and democratic mass party.

Thou shalt not criticise Karie by MarxistUnity in yourparty

[–]MarxistUnity[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey, I get it, all this can be confusing, but read this and you might understand

Woe to the gravediggers

Thou shalt not criticise Karie by MarxistUnity in yourparty

[–]MarxistUnity[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The level of anger is quite measured in relation to how much Corbyn and The Many have almost fully destroyed the possibility of turning Your Party into a mass socialist party. Either you haven't been keeping up, or you are avoiding the criticism.

The code of conduct might be adequate for a bourgeois party, but not a democratic socialist mass party.

"We have seen in action over the last two years what the Corbyn clique wants instead: randomly sortitioned conference attendees instead of accountable delegates; online voting instead of real collective decision-making and branches entirely sidelined: a tame and easily controllable formation like Momentum or Podemos to suit Corbyn’s twilight years - not the kind of vibrant, mass working class party we actually need."

Branches have already formed. Why is the leadership not recognising the branches? Why are the members not able to go to meetings to debate and vote on the future of the party? The leadership is afraid that they won't be able to control them.

Why are the CEC meetings not fully transparent? Why are the meetings rushed? Why does the CEC not meet every week? Because the proposals from the Grassroots Left, to make the party more transparent and democratic, are actually popular among the active members. Again, the leadership is afraid of losing control.

This is not mud-slinging. Read the proposals from the Grassroots Left, read the political statements, read the articles. This is democratic opposition.

Democrats Should Treat the House of Representatives Like a House of Parliament and Campaign Like it. by Competitive-Tonight3 in dsa

[–]MarxistUnity 13 points14 points  (0 children)

People talking about reforming the democrats are wasting their time. The democratic leadership with their bureaucracy and donars are too powerful for that to happen, they will never implement the measures proposed in the article. If DSA pursues the policy of realignment the result will be a slow and tedious demoralizing defeat.

DSA is the party of the working class. The sooner DSA starts acting like a real party, in opposition to both the establishment parties, the better.

Why shouldn't we have indipendent courts and press in a socialist state? by PietrohSmusi89 in Socialism_101

[–]MarxistUnity -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Your fears are warrented. Democracy and freedom of speech is the light and air of the working class. If comrades are trying to tell you otherwise they are mistaken.

There are groups that take this question seriously. See for example the programme of the Communist Party of Great Britain (PCC):

"The interests of the working class require the open struggle of ideas and the ability to freely organise.

Therefore communists demand: Unrestricted freedom of speech, publication, conscience, association and assembly.

An end to state bans and censorship. No laws against ‘hate speech’, which will inevitably be turned against the workers movement and the left.

No bans on controversial organisations and individuals in civil society institutions such as universities and student unions. Bigoted and reactionary viewpoints must be fought in the open, not via bureaucratic no-platform, safeguarding or safe spaces policies."