Delving into Chicago Municipal Politics

English:

After three months of election campaigning for the AFL-CIO-backed community organization Working America, I am now beginning research of progressive politics at the municipal level. City politics are influenced by various political, economic, cultural, and social interests (like all politics in capitalist society), but in the U.S., unlike other avenues of involvement with the state, municipal politics is an avenue for ideologies and movements outside of mainstream politics to create spaces of resistance against unregulated market forces and one which allows for new visions of political and economic governance to come into the mainstream. Whether it is the "Sewer Socialists" of Wisconsin who dominated Milwaukee politics during the early 20th century or recent victories of socialists and left-activists like Kshama Sawant in Seattle or Chokwe Lumumba in Jackson, Mississippi municipal socialism and progressivism remains a valid and vital avenue for political and economic change that the socialist left must study and engage with.

The difficulty with this engagement of municipal politics for many on the socialist left is the engagement with mainstream progressive movements that continue to play major roles in city politics. Many large cities are governed by administrations that claim to be ideologically progressive but in reality implement pro-business austerity policies that benefit market forces more than citizens, as has been the case under Rahm Emanuel's administration in Chicago selling off public schools to private companies and closing down mental health clinics. The key for the socialist left in engaging with mainstream progressives at the city level is finding those who share more egalitarian economic visions, not simply the labor movement but (in the case of Chicago) cultural organizations like the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Humboldt Park or Enlace Chicago in Little Village that engage in political battles against market forces that encourage gentrification.

With the Chicago city elections coming in February it is important for local socialists to start engaging with these groups as soon as possible. While it is encouraging to see labor and progressive-backed rallies that want to take on Rahm's pro-business administration such as Take Back Chicago's rally on Nov. 11th, the divisions amongst progressives lie under the surface of these actions. The most apparent divisions are between potential mayoral candidates, already we have two major progressive players in 2nd Ward Alderman Bob Fioretti and Cook County Commissioner Jesus "Chuy"Garcia, the latter of which has gained the support of the Chicago Teachers Union and its former head Karen Lewis. Beyond the mayor's race the Teachers Union has endorsed three aldermanic candidates: Sue Sadlowski Garza in the 10th Ward, Tim Meegan in the 33rd Ward and Tara Stamps in the 37th Ward, all of whom are Teachers Union members. Meanwhile Jorge Mujica, a labor and immigrant rights activist in Pilsen, is running as an independent socialist to unseat Alderman Danny Solis in the 25th Ward (full disclosure, I have worked on this campaign); the campaign has garnered some community support in the Ward but it has not gained any support from mainstream progressive or labor organizations. The Mujica campaign symbolizes the desire of many on the left to see an alternative form of governance at the muncipal level, but for it to succeed it needs to make the appeals to labor and cultural groups to gain some electoral legitimacy while simultaneously doing so without compromising its socialist goals. While the process of municipal political organizing may be difficult, the socialist left needs to be engaged in these fights for local power in order to show people that there is a left alternative out there and ready to make a more egalitarian society starting at the local level. 

Français: 

Après trois mois de campagne électorale pour l'organisation de la communauté AFL-CIO soutenu par l'Amérique de travail, je commence maintenant la recherche de politiques progressistes au niveau municipal. La politique de la ville sont influencés par divers intérêts politiques, économiques, culturels et sociaux (comme toute politique dans la société capitaliste), mais aux États-Unis, contrairement à d'autres avenues de participation avec l'Etat, la politique municipale est une avenue pour les idéologies et les mouvements à l'extérieur du grand public politique de créer des espaces de résistance contre les forces du marché non réglementé et qui permet de nouvelles visions de la gouvernance politique et économique à venir dans le courant dominant. Que ce soit les «égouts socialistes» de Wisconsin qui a dominé la politique de Milwaukee au début du 20e siècle ou récentes victoires des socialistes et de gauche militants comme Kshama Sawant à Seattle ou Chokwe Lumumba à Jackson, Mississippi socialisme municipal et progressisme reste une avenue valable et vital pour le changement politique et économique que la gauche socialiste doit étudier et engager.

La difficulté avec cet engagement de la politique municipale pour beaucoup sur la gauche socialiste est l'engagement avec les mouvements progressistes traditionnels qui continuent à jouer un rôle majeur dans la politique de la ville. Beaucoup de grandes villes sont régies par les administrations qui prétendent être idéologiquement progressiste, mais en réalité, mettre en œuvre des politiques d'austérité pro-commerciales qui profitent les forces du marché plus que les citoyens, comme cela a été le cas sous l'administration de Rahm Emanuel à Chicago vendant les écoles publiques à des entreprises privées et fermeture bas cliniques de santé mentale. La clé pour la gauche socialiste dans le dialogue avec les progressistes traditionnels au niveau de la ville est de trouver ceux qui partagent les visions économiques plus égalitaires, non seulement le mouvement ouvrier mais (dans le cas de Chicago) organismes culturels comme le Centre culturel de Porto Rico dans Humboldt Park ou Enlace Chicago dans Little Village qui se livrent à des batailles politiques contre les forces du marché qui encouragent la gentrification.

Avec les élections de la ville de Chicago à venir en Février, il est important pour les socialistes locaux pour commencer engager avec ces groupes dès que possible. Bien qu'il soit encourageant de voir le travail par des  progressistes rassemblements qui veulent battre contre de l'administration pro-business de Rahm (comme le rallye Take Back Chicago en nov. 11th) il y a les divisions entre progressistes se trouvent sous la surface de ces actions. Les divisions les plus apparentes sont entre candidats à la mairie potentiels, nous avons déjà deux grands acteurs progressistes dans la 2e conseiller municipal Bob Fioretti et Cook commissaire du comté de Jésus "Chuy" Garcia, dont le dernier a obtenu le soutien de l'Union des enseignants de Chicago et son ancien chef Karen Lewis. Au-delà de la course du maire du syndicat des enseignants a approuvé trois candidats pour alderman: Sue Sadlowski Garza dans le 10e Ward, Tim Meegan dans la paroisse et Tara Timbres 33e à la 37e Ward, qui sont tous membres du Syndicat des enseignants. Pendant ce temps Jorge Mujica, un activiste du travail et droits des immigrants à Pilsen, fonctionne comme un socialiste indépendant de renverser Alderman Danny Solis dans la 25e Ward (divulgation complète, je travaille sur cette campagne); la campagne a recueilli un certain soutien de la communauté dans le quartier, mais il n'a pas obtenu tout le soutien d'organisations progressistes ou travail ordinaire. La campagne Mujica symbolise le désir de beaucoup sur la gauche pour voir une autre forme de gouvernance au niveau municipale, mais pour qu'elle réussisse, il doit faire des appels à des groupes de travail et culturelles à acquérir une certaine légitimité électorale tout en faisant simultanément sans compromettre ses objectifs socialistes. Alors que le processus de l'organisation politique municipale peut être difficile, la gauche socialiste doit être engagés dans ces luttes pour le pouvoir local afin de montrer qu'il existe une alternative de gauche là-bas et prêt à faire une société plus égalitaire départ au niveau local .  

The Louisville Labor Bait-and-Switch

From In These Times: http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/16929/louisville_labor_greg_fischer

Angelina Justice has been working as a youth services librarian assistant at the Free Public Library (LFPL) in Louisville, Kentucky since 2004. Though she says she loves helping the children who visit the library, she and other unionized city workers have faced a series of cutbacks and declining work conditions since Mayor Greg Fischer took office in 2011.

Like her co-workers at LFPL, Justice is a member of AFSCME Local 3425—and she says the Fischer administration’s current contract with the union makes it almost impossible for her and her family to survive.

“If my household didn't have a second income, we wouldn't make it as a family of five,” she tells In These Times.

When Mayor Fischer ran in 2010, he had the city’s many public-sector unions on his side. His first campaign promised a plan for an “open, honest and transparent metro government,” which called upon local businesses to ally with labor to create jobs for Louisville residents. Though Fischer’s pro-labor rhetoric was often vague, workers viewed his statements as a heartening sign for the largest city in Kentucky, one of the last states in the South with no notorious “right-to-work” laws.

“It was labor that got him elected,” says John Stovall, president of Teamsters Local 783, which represents around 1,000 public workers, including Emergency Medical Services responders, mechanics, carpenters and street cleaners. “It wasn’t the [mostly white and affluent] East End, it wasn’t the rich people; it was labor. All of labor came behind him, supported him and endorsed him.”

Now, as Fischer makes his bid for reelection, that support may be waning. Rather than uniting labor and local businesses, workers say Fischer’s administration has been unresponsive to the needs of city employees around Louisville. They claim that the mayor failed to give unions their promised input on his choice of a labor liaison; they also note the administration’s refusal to use binding arbitration, which has severely slowed down many contract negotiations.

Because the local public unions have a total of 29 different contracts with the city government, the effect of the now-shaky relationship between Fischer and labor has varied among industries. First responders, for example, say that although management has been slow to hire new personnel to fill vacated positions, their department has been relatively untouched by cutbacks overall.

Others, however, haven’t been so lucky.

Stephanie Croft, president of AFSCME Local 3425, says the nearly 230 Louisville Free Public Library employees her union represents have been continually shunted aside by the city during contract negotiations.

“We’re currently in mediation—and may possibly take court action in the bargaining agreement—for the loss of full-time workers and their replacement with part-time workers,” she says.

In addition to the reductions in available full-time positions, Croft says, the city is also trying to gut benefits for any new hires.

“They’re trying to bring in the two-tier system, where those who are [already working] will keep the benefits that they have, but then newer people coming in will get less benefits,” she says.

Mayor Fischer, whose office did not wish to comment on the matter further, claimed in a column for Louisville’s progressive alt-weekly, the Louisville Eccentric Observer, that the metropolitan government “has to make changes that affect the employees’ jobs when those changes are considered in the best qualitative or economic interest of our citizens.”

He also argued that the city had the right to hire subcontractors and freeze wages under the existing contracts—which union leaders “negotiated and agreed to.”

Wesley Stover is the president of AFSCME Local 2629, which represents 800 employees of city parks, technology services and the Louisville Zoo. In another LEO guest column, he countered that Fischer’s claims are false; though the contracts do allow the hiring of subcontractors, Stover pointed out that the ones with his particular local don’t “allow for subcontracting to reduce or replace members.”

Overall, Stover tells In These Times, the city has been too willing to manipulate the system to undercut the rights of workers. In one particular instance, he points out, the Air Pollution Control District altered the job descriptions of unionized employees in their new contracts, increasing the education requirements for the positions beyond the workers’ qualifications.

These changes were made in response to state and federal audits of the department, which highlighted “multiple deficiencies”. Stover thinks that these shortcomings, which included improper safety training and out-of-date policy materials, should have been the management’s responsibility to fix. Instead, he says, the department made it harder for workers to keep their jobs, regardless of their years of experience.

“[The plan] seemed like a way to cut the budget by getting rid of higher-paid, older workers and use the workforce as a scapegoat,” he hypothesizes.

For Stover, this single incident is reflective of a growing trend among city administrators of allowing public employees to suffer the brunt of economic hardship, rather than trying to attain solutions that will benefit Louisville as a whole, workers included.

Ultimately, the strain of the last few years may hurt Fischer’s chances in the upcoming election. The Greater Louisville Central Labor Council (GLCLC), an AFL-CIO-affiliated coalition of local unions both in the public and private sectors, has refused to endorse him this November. In an interview with LEO, GLCLC President Ken Koch argued that the decision was justified, claiming that Fischer “has not kept any promises.”

Fischer’s labor liaison O’Dell Henderson, who is directly involved in contracts with city workers’ unions, is “about as far from labor as I am from a Wall Street banker,” Koch continued.

The GLCLC’s decision was fueled in part by lobbying from unions like AFSCME, whose members continue to suspect that their efforts on the job go unappreciated by local leaders. While many major cities have faced budget constraints, workers point out, not all of those administrations slash public services without regard to the people being affected.

“It is business, but it’s also personal,” says Croft. “Because you have [workers] who have to make car payments, house payments, and they have to take care of their children and they need money to do that.”

Justice, too, acknowledges that the economy has squeezed the job market as a whole; she argues that the city’s cuts help neither workers nor the public.

“In hard times, the public doesn't use government services less, it uses them more,” she points out. “Unfortunately, libraries have less staff than ever, while the need for services like resume instruction, technology assistance, homework help, public outreach, ELL programs and individual assistance has grown exponentially. When an adequate level of service is not provided because there are not enough employees, how does that problem correct itself via supply and demand?”

In the long term, municipal employees say, this affair is making them question just how much their hard work matters to Louisville’s elected officials.

“This city is run off of the backs of workers in these different departments,” says Croft. “If you say that you value those people and what they bring, then [you should] show it. … How can you turn around and take benefits away if you say that you care about somebody? You know, we have to live too.” 

Marx's Capital: Intro

My advisor Dr. Christopher Paskewich and I have decided to use this, my last undergraduate semester, to read Karl Marx's Capital and use Dr. David Harvey's online course to analyze the work and relate it to our modern world. As daunting as it, we want to try and get at the heart of Marx's understanding of the nature of the market system and see how his model fares up today. We have started on the Ernest Mandel introduction, and all I can say is that it does a decent job packing Marx's argument into an entire intro. It's dense, but he manages to get across the key divisions of the text and defend the historical materialist argument. What makes this intro interesting to me was that it was referred to me specifically early-on when I started looking into leftist politics as a teenager, when I was talking to a small orthodox Trotskyist sect called the International Bolshevik Tendency around 2006. In my conversations with the group, they mentioned the Mandel intro because of Mandel's Trotskyist background and thus viewed his intro as an appropiate starting point for the understanding of Capital. But to look at Capital simply from an orthodox Marxist viewpoint would be to miss many of the cultural and literary qualities of the text that Mandel does not always eloquently depict. Thus, the Mandel intro seems to me to be useful only insofar as it shows the orthodox view of Capital, beyond that it isn't very insightful. But next, I shall get into the meat of the text.

Violence as an alienating tactic/La Violence comme une tactique aliénant

English:

The Left has a precarious position regarding violence as a tool for social change, there are those who totally reject any sort of violence in favor of committed, non-violent action to enact change while many on the anarchist and Marxist Left still favor armed insurrection. For my part I do not reject all forms of political violence in the right context, there are instances where an uncompromising state can only be met with brute force to protect oppressed or marginalized people. However, I keep on thinking back to a conversation I had with a friend of mine here in Kentucky; she told me essentially that violence is in itself an alienating action, and she made a good case. Violent action requires people who are physically and mentally capable of engaging in armed combat, sabotage, and espionage, thus it excludes many people who are incapable of such action. The elderly, the mentally and terminally ill, children, pregnant women, and many others can't be expected by a democratic and anti-capitalist Left to partake in such actions. Further, in a scenario of  violent insurrection, there is further increase of this division between the "combat-ready" and those who can't participate, a division I fear would result in a militaristic division of idolizing those who are capable of engaging in violence and putting them ahead socially of those incapable of violence. Thus, if the Left is to seriously consider tactics that are broadly inclusive such that all people can participate in social change violence cannot be the primary tactic. We already live in a neoliberal capitalist society that idolizes militarism and coercion to get its way, so if we want to make a society of collective liberation where people live their lives free from market and state coercion we have to make a revolution that all can be a part of, and violence cannot give us that.

Français:

La gauche a une position précaire en ce qui concerne la violence comme un outil de changement social, il y a ceux qui rejettent totalement toute sorte de violence en faveur de l'action engagée, non-violente à adopter des changements alors que beaucoup sur l'anarchiste et gauche marxiste favorisent encore l'insurrection armée. Pour ma part je ne rejette pas toutes les formes de violence politique dans le bon contexte, il y a des cas où un Etat sans compromis ne peut être atteint par la force brute pour protéger les gens opprimés ou marginalisés. Cependant, je continue à penser revenir à une conversation que j'ai eue avec un de mes amis ici, dans le Kentucky, elle m'a dit essentiellement que la violence est en soi une action aliénante, et elle a fait une bonne affaire. L'action violente exige que les gens qui sont physiquement et mentalement capables de s'engager dans la lutte armée, le sabotage, et d'espionnage, ainsi qu'il exclut de nombreuses personnes qui sont incapables d'une telle action. Les personnes âgées, les malades mentaux, les malades en phase terminale, les enfants, les femmes enceintes, et bien d'autres ne peut pas s'attendre à une société démocratique et anti-capitaliste de gauche à participer à de telles actions. En outre, dans un scénario de l'insurrection violente, il existe une majoration de cette division entre le « prêt au combat » et ceux qui ne peuvent pas participer, une division je crains entraînerait une division militariste de l'idolâtrie de ceux qui sont capables de s'engager dans la violence et les mettre de l'avant le plan social de ceux qui sont incapables de violence. Ainsi, si la gauche est à envisager sérieusement des tactiques qui sont largement inclusive de sorte que toutes les personnes peuvent participer au changement social violence ne peuvent pas être la tactique primaire. Nous vivons déjà dans une société capitaliste néolibérale qui idolâtre le militarisme et la coercition pour arriver à ses fins, si nous voulons faire une société de libération collective où les gens vivent leur vie sans marché et coercition de l'État, nous devons faire une révolution que tout le monde peut être une partie de, et la violence ne peuvent pas nous donner cela.

Existentialism and Science/L'Existentialisme et La Science

English:

After a renewed interest in existentialist philosophy as a field of exploring liberation on the individual scale, I have been contemplating the contradictions of following existentialism, which rejects the existence of god and order in human society, while also accepting modern notions of science. From the discoveries of neurobiology/neuropsychology that have major implications as to the biological origins of human action and choice to the discoveries of physics that have similarly major implications as to the structure of the universe, modern science almost leaves no room for choice or freedom as the power of human discovery is beginning to answer questions that previously seemed impossible. And yet the beauty of existentialism, particularly that of Sartre's, is its sole focus on society, it is not an ontological philosophy in the sense that it has answers for all questions about existence including natural phenomena, rather it is, as the title of Sartre's famous lecture states, a humanism. It is a philosophy that is not nihilistic or deterministic, it challenges humans to look at the freedom that they are "condemned" to and make with that freedom what they choose, and because of this it must only be seen as a humanism. The flip side to this is the beauty of science, which is that no matter how many brilliant physical or biological discoveries may be achieved the scientific method will always produce more questions. Like the Hegelian dialectic, science must always search for and analyze contradictions to established orthodoxy and must always be open to criticism that is supported by evidence. This inherent skepticism and openness to new interpretations means that science cannot and will not have all of the answers to the origins of all things, our universe is too vast and too complicated for a species on a single planet to know its entire foundations by itself. Science has complex and valid theories as to the physical origins of the universe, but it still has not answered the question of the origins of sentient life. Further, and most importantly, science does not deal with questions of meaning of existence, as such questions only philosophy can debate since it is a field that does not deal with concrete facts or figures and since the question of existence is one that cannot be dealt with in scientific analysis. This lack of ability of science to answer all questions means that humanity is free to choose how to construct its society, its culture, its values, and its actions. Existentialism remains a valid interpretation of human existence because of this freedom, science can continue to answer complex questions about the physical makeup of the natural world, but it can never tell humans why we exist.

Français:

Après un regain d'intérêt pour la philosophie existentialiste comme un champ d'exploration libération à l'échelle individuelle, j'ai contemplé les contradictions de l'existentialisme qui suit, qui rejette l'existence de Dieu et de l'ordre dans la société humaine, tout en acceptant les notions modernes de la science. Depuis les découvertes de la neurobiologie/neuropsychologie qui ont des implications importantes quant aux origines biologiques de l'action humaine et le choix pour les découvertes de la physique qui ont des implications majeures de même que la structure de l'univers, la science moderne ne laisse quasiment aucune place au choix ou liberté la puissance de la découverte humaine commence à répondre à des questions qui semblaient auparavant impossibles. Et pourtant, la beauté de l'existentialisme, en particulier celle de Sartre, est son seul objectif sur la société, ce n'est pas une philosophie ontologique dans le sens où il a des réponses à toutes les questions sur l'existence, y compris les phénomènes naturels, il s'agit plutôt, comme le titre de Sartre célèbres états de conférence, un humanisme. C'est une philosophie qui n'est pas nihiliste ou déterministe, elle conteste l'homme à regarder la liberté qu'ils sont «condamnés» à faire et avec cette liberté ce qu'ils choisissent, et de ce fait il ne doit être considéré comme un humanisme. Le revers de la médaille est la beauté de la science, qui est que peu importe combien de découvertes physiques ou biologiques brillants peuvent être obtenus de la méthode scientifique sera toujours produire plus de questions. Comme la dialectique hégélienne, la science doit toujours rechercher et analyser les contradictions à l'orthodoxie établie et doit toujours être ouvert à la critique qui est étayée par des preuves. Ce scepticisme inhérent et l'ouverture à de nouvelles interprétations des moyens que la science ne peut pas et ne sera pas encore toutes les réponses sur les origines de toutes choses, notre univers est trop vaste et trop complexe pour une espèce sur une seule planète de connaître l'ensemble de ses fondations par lui-même. La science a des théories complexes et valides que pour les origines physiques de l'univers, mais il n'a toujours pas répondu à la question des origines de la vie sensible. En outre, et surtout, la science ne traite pas des questions de sens de l'existence, comme des questions telles que la philosophie peut débattre car il est un domaine qui ne traite pas des faits ou des chiffres concrets et puisque la question de l'existence est celui qui ne peut pas être traitée avec une analyse scientifique. Ce manque de capacité de la science à répondre à toutes les questions qui signifie que l'humanité est libre de choisir la façon de construire sa société, sa culture, ses valeurs et ses actions. Existentialisme reste une interprétation valable de l'existence humaine à cause de cette liberté, la science peut continuer à répondre à des questions complexes sur la composition physique du monde naturel, mais il ne peut jamais dire pourquoi les êtres humains que nous existons.

Certain American Tourists/Les certains touristes américains

English:

A few times on my journies throughout Europe I have encountered other Americans traveling in a similar capacity. Most of them were students and most of them were polite and reasonable people who wanted to experience Europe in their own way. But I also encountered Americans who practiced a blatant, and very American, form of ignorance by refusing to act like guests in another country and proudly trumpeting their heritage like a 5-year-old boy waving his penis around like he has to prove he has one. These are the people I blame for giving Americans a bad name abroad, the ones whon don't try and talk in a native tongue when they are in a country with a different language, the ones who always talk about the glory of America and say everywhere else sucks, who complain about prices and loudly proclaim the low tax rates that make everything so cheap. It makes one want to deficate on the Stars and Stripes and rub it in their face. They are guests, they are lucky enough to go abroad and see what the rest of the world has to offer, and they need to remember that before they start their childish nationalism.

Français:

Quelques fois sur mes journies à travers l'Europe, j'ai rencontré d'autres Américains voyageant en une qualité similaire. La plupart d'entre eux étaient des étudiants et la plupart d'entre eux étaient des gens polis et raisonnable qui voulaient faire l'expérience de l'Europe dans leur propre chemin. Mais j'ai aussi rencontré américains qui pratiquaient une flagrante, et très américain, sous forme d'ignorance en refusant d'agir comme des invités dans un autre pays et fièrement clamer leur patrimoine comme un garçon de 5 ans, agitant son pénis autour comme il doit prouver qu'il a une. Ce sont les gens que je blâme pour donner Américains une mauvaise réputation à l'étranger, le whon de ceux qui n'en ont pas essayer de parler dans une langue maternelle quand ils sont dans un pays avec une langue différente, ceux qui parlent toujours la gloire de l'Amérique et de dire partout ailleurs suce, qui se plaignent au sujet des prix et clamer haut et fort les faibles taux d'imposition qui font tout pour pas cher. Il donne envie de deficate sur le Stars and Stripes et le frotter dans leur visage. Ils sont invités, ils ont la chance d'aller à l'étranger et voir ce que le reste du monde a à offrir, et ils doivent se rappeler que avant de commencer leur nationalisme enfantin.

In Defense of Democratic Socialists of America/À la défense des Socialistes démocrates d'Amérique

English:

If there is one organization on the left in America that receives more hype and criticism from both the right and the socialist left, it's Democratic Socialists of America. Founded in 1982 from the merger of Michael Harrington's Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee, a faction of the disintegrated Socialist Party of America, and the New Left-influenced New America Movement, it has become one of the largest socialist organizations in the United States. Today, they are involved primarily in labor movement, student, and immigration activism along with limited electoral activism in support of Senator Bernie Sanders in Vermont and Representative John Conyers in Michigan. Most of the criticism from the right is not worth going into, simply because it is delusional (thinking that DSA is somehow the puppet master of the Democratic Party). But the criticism from the left is valid at times and worth addressing. The position of the organization on the Democratic Party for years was one of pushing them to the left as a party of labor, and many members of the older generation still continue to hold that position. Further, there is criticism of the ideology of Michael Harrington and for the fact that the organization is a member of the centre-left Socialist International, since the International has hosted parties that have turned to Blairite third-wayism in the past decades. But I have witnessed a new leadership with young members coming out of Young Democratic Socialists that are less inclined to agree with these concepts. While the organization did back Obama in 2008, it refused to give any endorsement in 2012, a pattern I hope they will follow. In 2010, DSA/YDS members supported the Socialist Party USA's Ohio candidate for Senator Dan La Botz, and they have also been supportive of other independent leftists as well. On the issue of Michael Harrington, there is a very constructive debate occurring right now betweem ISO member Joe Allen and Jacobin Magazine founder Bhaskar Sunkara about the legacy of Harrington on the U.S. left that I hope will bridge the divide between the far-left and DSA. Further, although I will  not defend the organization's membership of the SI, they are probably the most left-wing of the members of the SI, as they are critical of neoliberalism and capitalism and do desire a radical alternative to society. It is not a perfect organization, but it is not fair to call it a group simply aligned with the Democrats anymore since it has worked for campaigns that go against the neoliberal agenda of the Democratic Party. It has grown up, its members have included Jacobin Magazine's Bhaskar Sunkara, academic and activist Cornel West, and author Barbara Ehrenreich. It has a true influence over the national discourse on labor and immigration, and it is going even more to the left as more young people of my generation join. It is not as nervous as it once was with working with and endorsing other socialists, even though some on the left will never be able to accept the change that has occurred within DSA (see Socialist Organizer and the Daily Show interview from March 9, 2012). It has much more work to do, like all of the left in the United States, but its role as a key player for spreading socialism and engaging with the liberal establishment of American politics cannot be ignored by the left if the it wishes to grow in prominence.

Français:

S'il ya une organisation sur la gauche en Amérique qui reçoit plus hype et les critiques de la droite et la gauche socialiste, c'est socialistes démocratiques de l'Amérique. Fondée en 1982 par la fusion de social-démocrate du comité organisateur de Michael Harrington, une faction du Parti socialiste désintégré d'Amérique et la Nouvelle Gauche influencée Mouvement New America, il a été devenu l'une des plus grandes organisations socialistes aux États-Unis. Aujourd'hui, ils sont impliqués principalement dans mouvement ouvrier, étudiant, et l'activisme de l'immigration avec l'activisme électoral limité à l'appui du sénateur Bernie Sanders du Vermont et le représentant John Conyers du Michigan. La plupart des critiques de la droite n'est pas la peine d'aller dans, tout simplement parce qu'il est illusoire (pensant que DSA est en quelque sorte le maître de la marionnette du Parti démocrate). Mais la critique de la gauche est valable au temps et mérite d'être relevé. La position de l'organisation sur le Parti démocrate depuis des années était l'un d'eux en poussant vers la gauche comme une partie du travail, et de nombreux membres de l'ancienne génération continuent à occuper ce poste. En outre, il ya la critique de l'idéologie de Michael Harrington et le fait que l'organisation est membre du centre-gauche socialiste internationale, depuis l'Internationale a accueilli les parties qui se sont tournés vers Blairite troisième wayism dans les dernières décennies. Mais j'ai assisté à une nouvelle direction avec les jeunes membres sortant de jeunes socialistes démocratiques qui sont moins enclins à être d'accord avec ces concepts. Bien que l'organisation a fait revenir Obama en 2008, il a refusé de donner une approbation en 2012, un modèle j'espère qu'ils vont suivre. En 2010, les membres DSA / YDS soutenus Ohio le candidat du Parti Socialiste Etats-Unis pour le sénateur Dan La Botz, et ils ont également été favorable à d'autres gauchistes indépendants ainsi. Sur la question de Michael Harrington, il ya un débat très constructif se produisant en ce moment betweem ISO membre Joe Allen et jacobin Magazine fondateur Bhaskar Sunkara sur l'héritage de Harrington sur les Etats-Unis quitté que j'espère combler le fossé entre l'extrême gauche et DSA . En outre, bien que je ne vais pas défendre l'adhésion de l'organisation du SI, ils sont probablement les plus à gauche des membres de l'IS, car ils sont essentiels du néolibéralisme et du capitalisme et font un désir d'alternative radicale à la société. Ce n'est pas une organisation parfaite, mais il n'est pas juste d'appeler cela un groupe simplement aligné avec les démocrates plus car il a travaillé pour les campagnes qui vont à l'encontre du programme néolibéral du Parti démocrate. Il a grandi, ses membres ont inclus Bhaskar Sunkara de Jacobin Magazine, universitaire et activiste Cornel West et auteur Barbara Ehrenreich. Il a une véritable influence sur le discours national sur le travail et l'immigration, et il va même plus à gauche que plus de jeunes de ma génération se joignent. Il n'est pas aussi nerveux que par le passé de travailler avec et en approuvant d'autres socialistes, même si certains à gauche ne sera jamais en mesure d'accepter le changement qui s'est produit dans les DSA (voir L'organisateur socialiste et le Salon entretien quotidien du 9 Mars 2012 ). Il a beaucoup de travail à faire, comme l'ensemble de la gauche aux États-Unis, mais son rôle comme un acteur clé pour la diffusion de socialisme et de s'engager avec l'establishment libéral de la politique américaine ne peut pas être ignoré par la gauche si la elle souhaite se développer dans proéminence.