Mark Solomon is a retired history professor who has also been active as a socialist. He has written this article in Political Affairs, suggesting that these four socialist groups should talk about merging: (1) the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism; (2) the Communist Party USA; (3) Democratic Socialists of America; (4) Freedom Road Socialist Organization.
None of these four groups has run candidates for public office under their own name in several decades, if ever. The Committees of Correspondence was formed in 1991 by Communist Party members who left the Communist Party that year. Democratic Socialists of America was formed half a century ago by former Socialist Party members who had decided to work within the Democratic Party (although in its first decade it was called the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee). The Communist Party last ran its own presidential nominee in 1984. Thanks to Jack Ross for the link.
It’d be more productive if the members of those groups left the Democratic Party and went Green. The Democrats neither want nor respect them and their positions are close enough to the Green Party that they’d be able to do well. However, do any of these organizations have any influence? What good would they do if they have given up running candidates and participating in elections?
The fourth group, Freedom Road Socialist Organization, came out of the Maoist movement of the 1970s. There are actually two groups using the name; the one being talked about in this article is almost assuredly this one: http://freedomroad.org/ One of the main things that probably links these four groups together from an elections perspective is that all four groups are generally supportive of Democrats rather than independent political action (with the CPUSA being the most strident on this point, and the others being somewhat more flexible to greater or lesser degrees.)
All these groups & various other socialist parties: Party for Socialism & Liberation, Socialist Party USA, Freedom Socialist Party, Peace & Freedom Party, Socialist Workers Party, Socialist Equality Party, Workers World Party, Socialist Action, Socialist Alternative, Revolutionary Communist Party, etc. would be better off combining and forming one united socialist party. Small differences keep all from growing and having any sort of influence.
Who needs any mere socialists since the Donkey communists in 1932 ???
@3 I absolutely agree. Splintering and dividing off has really hurt the $ociali$t leftist movement in America.
Not that I support socialism, mind you, but I’d rather beat them by being able to debate & defeat their ideology than beat them by having them splinter themselves into oblivion. The more voices that are at the table, the better.
Ha, it looks like those on the other end of the spectrum are trying to do what I’m currently working on.
Groups like these seem to exist largely as political clubs, not as entities seriously interested in affecting the surrounding political structure. They’re more interested in their narrow definitions of principles than they are in doing anything to enact such principles. Of course in turn they have this fascinating tendency to support bad Democratic candidates. So not only do they want to be principled, they also want to claim their guy wins sometimes. The sad part is that people who actually do want to affect real change keep acting like the people in the lefty political clubs are the natural allies who should be the first to flip. They’re not. When Green candidates have done relatively well in large elections, they’ve pulled centrist voters in areas which have leaned Republican as well as from traditional progressive pockets.
The upshot is, those groups lose their club identities if they merge. Same applies to the various Socialist party formations. They’re generally not serious about anything but protesting and being oppositional. So they’re going to stay splintered. It’s their prerogative and people on the left need to stop acting like any of it matters much and focus on the 99.99% of people who don’t care how many “parties” have the word Socialist in their names.
It’s a map, not a spectrum.
The Greens are a capitalist reform party and as demonstrated in Illinois view socialists as a threat to be kept off the ballot.
DSA and CPUSA are Democrats in all but name.
Socialists may only be political clubs, but what was the Green Party before 2000?
#10 The actions of the Cook County Green Party chair which kept other parties off the Illinois ballot was deplored by myself and many others in the Green Party. I spoke to him myself and asked him to withdraw the objection.
Unfortunately, so long as Illinois has this restrictive ballot access provision any individual can raise these objections. I do think you’ll see preemptive efforts to stop this coming from a Green Party official in the future.
Getting back to the article above, progressives and leftists need to work together more, particularly on local efforts and building institutions that counter the prevailing political orthodoxy.
I understand that the groups mentioned in the article above are looking to coordinate educative efforts and maybe electoral work. Good news, though there is a lot of ground to cover, particularly in the knee-jerk pro-DP politics of some.
1. There are so many different ways to run the lives of others, it is no surprise that there are so many different groups of folks who feel entitled to do so.
2. Statism is reactionary, so why do statists call themselves “progressives”?
Jeff Daiell
#12. Why do corporate feudalists call themselves “libertarians”?
I’m not saying this describes the poster at #12. I don’t know the person. We could sit here and trade insults all year, but it is not really the purpose of this site. It’s more for Independent Political Report.
#1, Please don’t wish them on the Greens. Many state Green Parties have been taken over by social democrats when the original inspiration for Green Parties come from a wholly different point of view. For the rest of you, it does appear that these groupings are ‘fellow travellers’ of the Democrats and this discussion and any action to follow won’t have any effect on independent politics. It might merely unite the social democratic ‘left wing’ of the Democratic Party, nothing more.
#12 – never any shortage of left wing and right wing control freaks (aka STATISTS) for 7,000 plus years.
See the millions of DEAD killed/enslaved by control freak statists in the recent 1900s — WW I, WW II, the various purges – Stalin 1930s, Mao 1940s, 1960s, Cambodia 1970s — Hitler / Franco 1930s, etc. etc.
@3 – That is never, ever going to happen. There are significant differences between Stalinism, Maoism, and Trotskyism, and between the organizations you mentioned in particular.
#3 #8 – I think the country is ready for a Socialist Revival. Unfortunately, the activists in these parties suffer from the Philospher’s Disease. Effectiveness through unity is less important to them than picky purity.
William J. Kelleher, Ph.D.
Email: Internetvoting@gmail.com
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/IV4All
Twitter: wjkno1
Author of Internet Voting Now!