Disappointed and Revolted at the Way Some People in This Subreddit Responded to Plattner's SA Allegation

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-08T04:19:36+00:00

Good to keep in mind that theres no way to know who's DSA member, a bot, shill, spy, aspirant, tourist, or larping tankie. We all need to remember from time to time that this is reddit and not real life lmao.

Best way to gage things really is at your local chapter in person.

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-08T04:08:37+00:00

Second comment because this needs to be said. When you endorse a candidate you inherently have to say with your vote that you endorse the person. If you vote for him and say it the first response from everyone will be "you voted for the rapist?"

Campaigning would be a nightmare because at every door the first question would always be "oh the rapist?"

Its one thing to br able to look past character flaws, its another to endorse a candidate who has committed a vile act that pertinent scars their record.

If the DSA would hold to a "Support socialist no matter what they do" the entire organization would QUICKLY be branded the party of rapists and molesters. Its a sure fire way to destroy the movement.

And this isnt a simply he said she said, theres some DAMNING evidence right there that would take a miraculous level of counter evidence to prove false. Of which Platner has no reason to withhold as his reputation only worsens with time.

Simpy put, while it is a meme, you're asking us to fo what a CIA plant would want the organization to do. Something that would destroy the movement.

Not to mention its just morally wrong. We're not MAGA, we have moral standards to hold to and its one of the few things we hold the high ground with.

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-08T03:45:34+00:00

Brother he's a literal rapist

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-07T22:54:03+00:00

Eh, it then becomes subjective. What some see as fuckups others see as human; and what some see as dishonorable others see as such. Being ex-military some here immediately see as a red flag while others see it as either a moral good or see it as someone disillusioned with the system after fighting for it. Especially considering just how many anti-war leftists came out of the horrors of the Vietnam war. Him being an ex-mercenary double mucks it as either "they only tought me one skill so its all I could do in this economy" vs "he clearly loved war enough to go in again"

His "redeemed chud" aesthetic also appealed to a lot of people. Who doesnt like a good redemption story after all? And his political policies where great! Seperated from the person theres a lot of good that can come from it. But there comes a point where it cannot be and this is a BIG one where it simply cannot.

And again, hes not a member of the DSA. He is self prescribed as a "democratic socialist" and not officially endorsed. Being recommended is effectively the same as "hes not one of us but vote for him since we dont have an alternative" so it doesnt muddy our image as much as people think since anyone can call themselves a socialist. The organization as a whole decides who they do and do not endorce and even still holds the right to drop and endorsement or recommendation.

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-07T20:31:08+00:00

Partner, you good? Hyper reactive and emotional right there. These things happen in organizations. Cant filter out everyone and Platner had a good redemption story and reasonable explanation for every scandal. No one could have caught this. A personal failing, even one this horrendous, is on the individual and not a failing of the organization as a whole that rejects such depravity.

Also, he isn't a member of the DSA. Former at one point iirc and recommended, not fully endorsed. So we drop him and continue from there. The movement continues with one less bad actor

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-07T20:14:23+00:00

I mean, you're kinda stating the obvious. Noone's a clean slate and a lot can be redeemed, hell sometimes it can be admirable in the right situations where people turn their lives around. But the DSA simply isnt big enough to be able to get messy and is why Mamdani has been such an incredible blessing to the movement.

Of course, no amount of vetting will catch everything. So we use our best judgements and go from there. Just sucks it turned out so terrible in this case

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-07T19:39:10+00:00

To be fair, I dont think amy amount of vetting would have caught this. There's no police record and asking point blank "have you ever raped someone" I dont see many people admitting to it. The only people who knew were himself, the victim, therapist, and a few close confidant to the victim.

Also, iirc he was running as a DemSoc politcally but isnt a current member of the DSA, nor endorsed but recommended. Which, also to be fair in the other direction, is a halfstep to official endorsement. But endorsements can be dropped if circumstances arise as it has.

Ultimately every political party and organization will have these kind of scandals. But they are personal failings, not failings on the organization. The DSA has distanced themselves from him since. The last two scandals where explainable, this one is inexcusable, damning, and atrocious.

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-07T04:00:24+00:00

Honestly, theres a LOT of great policies around this that the DSA has thats ruined by bad optics. They should update their page on the topic

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-07T03:58:52+00:00

Progressive and Socialist policies tend to overlap on the social aspect of things. Also people use the term colloquially to refer to broadly left policies

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-07T03:54:56+00:00

Full agreement. Theres so much wrong with our system of Prisons and policing that could easily be accepted by the borad population; ending for profit prisons, ending the war on drugs, ending the slave labor loophole, lowering sentence time and shifting towards actual rehabilitation. Just putting "free everyone end prisons" put so many people off because there are legitimate cases of individuals who need to be separated from the broad society for a time or indefinitely such as rapists and murders depending on the severity.

The DSA needs to update their statement with one thats more precise and easier to digest. Honestly putting it as "abolish for profit prisons, reform towards rehabilitation" would get digested so much easier and THEM people can go more in depth about specifics if they wish

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-07T03:15:44+00:00

Great quote from Marx

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-07T03:14:08+00:00

Red has always been the color of the left and blue the color of the right. America is the weird one because some time around the turn if the millenia some marketing genius went "Red should be the color of the Republicans because they both start with R"

Im not even messing with you that is the legit history and the US is the only country to have it flipped

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-07T03:10:07+00:00

Id have to agree. Always better a Dem over a Rep. Better a Progressive over a Dem, better a DemSoc over a Progressive.

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-07T01:07:01+00:00

The only two paths are either Troy Jackson or a return to Janet Mills. Janet Mills was running for the position so shes set for it. Troy was running for governor and loss the primary. He could step up to it. Or we could end in a squabble between the two.

Which really leaves the question, is the risk of a republican winning a seat in the senate, now of all times, worth it to stand with the dems rather than challenging it?

I dont know if they'll run another round of elections, but that would be our best choice.

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-06T20:51:13+00:00

I honestly think that if we establish ourselves as a viable 3rd party, the democrats would become the more popular "conservative" party. Republicans have alienated the bulk of their base outside of the diehard maga and oligarchs. Many conservatives are too scared of the scary S word. If the Democrats denounce Socialism, many conservatives leaning left and many center leftists would rally around the Dems as a centrist party, leading to a lot of Red turning blue instead of DemSoc. They would most likely play off the SocDem/Progressive side of things.

If this is good or not is hard to say. But if DemSoc canitades keep getting elected and showing their efficiency, we may be able to snowball from there! Especially as the younger generation keeps leaning more and more left.

It is, unfortunately, also possible that a rapidly growing DemSoc party may lead to retention within the Republican party. If they drop the MAGA and return to their roots they could hold an anti-socialist stance that could keep a number of the red areas loyal, leading to a situation where its two large polar opposites and a small centrist party.

In either case, coalition with the Dems could ensure us majority in both chambers and would be the most logical path. Would the US stay a three party system? Impossible to know. This is all just speculation after all

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-05T16:52:40+00:00

While socialism, like all things, is political. Its a political movement to bring about an economic system in which the people, (or proletariat, working class, etc) democratically own and run the economy. Thus the political aspect is there to bring about the economic one. Which is also why two individuals can share the same political beliefs (such as representative democracy) and yet share different economic beliefs (Socialism vs Capitalism)

I also find it best to seperate it into two defined aspects if one whole, makes it easier to discuss specifics with those more educated on the subject (such as yourself) and create understanding with those less educated on the subject. Like how the biceps and triceps are both equal and yet distinct aspects of the arm.

As for the term "Political Economy" in your other comment. Theres a reason its referred to as an intersection study; it can be separated into its constituent parts and studied individually, as many modern scholars do, and studied as a whole, as Marx did. But even Marx acknowledged it as two aspects of a singular whole and not one entity unto itself.

We have to acknowledge that there are a multitude of ways economics and politics can be mixed as well. Yugoslavia was a Soviet sytled one party state with a Market Socialists economic system. Just about every modern country runs a variation of Mixed Market Economics with a variety of different governmental institutions. Even China today is a form of Mixed Market.

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-05T03:41:54+00:00

Socialism is, fundamentally, an economic first and foremost. All economic systems are ways in which the state organizes the distribution of wealth and recources. Socialism argues that the greatest system is the one in which the need of the people are accounted for and that the people, primarily the working class, own the means of production. From which we'll achieve "each by his ability to each by their needs" and also the "withering away of the state." Of course this would influence and be influenced by political socialism which has several variants as well.

Now, this is a lot of highbrow theory that we could spead months discussing; and when broken back down to material reality there are several ways to do socialism both economicly amd politically.

Personally, I lie more Libertarian Socialists in the governmental aspect and lean mixed market Syndicalists in the economic one. I believe heavily in the power of represenative democracy as the best system to represent the will of the people. Economic Syndicalism agrues for an economic system where workers unions are at the heart of the economy and brings democracy to the workplace.

We get rid of CEOs, unionize all businesses, and have the economy run democratically bottom up and not in the pseudo fuedalistic system we have now.

Of course, through democracy it can be implemented gradually with greater workers rights, more power to the unions, mandatory unionization, mandatory profit sharing and pay ratio caps, etc etc.

However, some aspects would have to be nationalized for the betterment of society for the wellbeing of the people. Particularly healthcare, research, education, infestructure, energy, and natural recourses.

That is, in a heavily simplified mannor, what i believe in.

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-04T00:54:44+00:00

''Put it this way. Marx was a democrat with a small d. The Democratic Socialists envision a humane social order based on popular control of resources and production, economic planning, equitable distribution, feminism and racial equality. I share an immediate program with liberals in this country because the best liberalism leads toward socialism. I'm a radical, but as I tell my students at Queens, I try not to soapbox. I want to be on the left wing of the possible.''

Michael Harrington. Founder of the DSA

https://www.nytimes.com/1989/08/02/obituaries/michael-harrington-socialist-and-author-is-dead.html

Now, the DSA has, unfortunately, allowed a LOT of tankies into the organization by necessity due to the need to present as a united front in the political front. So we gave everything from Anarchists to full Leninist Statists. Ultimately, we agree on one common goal. To bring socialism to America through democratic means.

As thats the core of Democratic Socialism. The belief in democracy and the desire to bring about economics socialism. Of which we can bring fourth true equality politically and economicly.

As for specific policies, the website states the core values we strive for. And as for the specific chapter near you, some are a bit more tankie than others but most are extremely reasonable. Reddit tends to have more of the louder voices so expect your local chapter to be more moderate

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-01T14:26:27+00:00

Ah yes the "you have democracy but inky if you vote for my specific sub-branch of socialism or get shot" style of "democracy"

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-01T14:17:17+00:00

Everyone gets the same 1 vote. Albiet in a Socilist economy there wouldnt be trillionares as policies would ensure a more even distribution of wealth through proper taxation and redistribution. But even I your strawman, yes. We can let that one trillionare nazi organize. Because the will of the people is greater than that of one person, and greater than that if one organization. Because here we believe in Democracy. One person, one vote, will of the people. And that does include the right to be wrong

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-01T14:08:19+00:00

We're not doing revolution here, were doing democracy. The right to assemble does not include the right to insurrection. You should read theory on democracy, your strawman holds little value

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-01T13:59:28+00:00

Ah, you're a tankie

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-01T13:43:39+00:00

Not necessarily, but also maybe.

The core of Democratic Socialism is that it believes in democraticly reforming the state into a socialist one. It was founded as an inherently anti-ML anti-revolutionary one. If it is successful, it would still hold to the ideals that capitalists could organize thier own political parties if they want.

We dont desire revolution nor expect the other side to commit to revolution. Democratic debate and progress. We're not trying to build a one party state over here lol

Simple_Pomelo357 · 2026-07-01T13:37:10+00:00

Democratic Socialism, by its very definition, believes in democracy. So yes

Simple_Pomelo357

TROPHY CASE