One more thought. I’m incredibly happy at what DSA was able to accomplish, but to say that WFP and labor groups essentially need to get down or get run over is ridiculous. Besides the fact that WFP has been in this fight for much longer and has proven consistently to be about the right things. The DSA does not have enough power to defeat all of the institutions we face. If we want a better world it will take a broad coalition. We need each other.
Of course it’s my opinion. I just write it. DSA engages in magical thinking. Their statements alternate between saying they can capture the DP or they can move it to the left. This leads to class collaborationist policies rather than independently mobilizing workers in militant action. To me, that’s an obstacle.
This evangelical project sounds very promising Eric. I always thought we needed some sort of capitalism anonymous style group to counter alienation and build belonging.
Great post! Book project sounds promising... Check out Jama Lazerow oldie but solid 1995 Religion and the Working class in Antebellum America. Influential new left theorist Harry Boyte sclc/sncc/sds/nam/dsoc,university.. consistent, radical, religious and unsung. communitarian projects now, but not to overlook debates with Mike Davis, Michael Lerner, Lenin and Lukacs too.
Ooh, thanks great reading suggestions. Can you suggest particular writings from Mike Davis and co on this? Which debates would you suggest tracking down?
Excellent rewrite, and even more important, setting a terrific example of comradely discussion and reflection. You're charting entirely new ground on the left: taking criticisms seriously, thinking deeply about them, and addressing them! Who does that? We all owe you for that.
One caveat: Brad Lander, a Mamdani’s ally who helped get him elected, and was backed by the WFP, won his primary for Congress with the largest differential in New York City.
We need to work with and push the WF to the left. Also, if there is any hope for unions to turn around and grow we need to do a lot of work there.
The way you described Reynoso endorsement tells me you don’t know how the endorsement process at the working families party votes. One chapter wanted Claire Valdez, several organizations representing hundreds of members wanted Reynoso. There’s a reason he got that endorsement.
I appreciate the emphasis on expanding the base. Discussions/arguments/tirades over what ethnic groups or working class voted for Avila Chevalier or Espaillat or Valdez or Reynosa have limited value when voter turnout is so low.
"…the WFP and non-profit leaders’ decision in February 2026 to endorse Reynoso over Valdez — thereby overruling the votes of their own on-the-ground members…"
You answered your own question, and the proof is in the fact that two unions that recently took back control by their rank-and-file did endorse the democratic socialists. Granted, the unions and groups that didn't are rather between a rock and a hard place, since one suspects they're operating from the basis of having to work with the winners, but it should be getting clear by now that they're losing touch with their bases.
I think the Unions are an outdated organization. I’ve been with a union once. What a waste of my weekly fee. I reached out a few times all I saw was impotence.
That’s because with a few exceptions most of them were taken over by the wannabe bosses decades ago. They were still useful, but they switched to convincing the rank-and-file it was as good just getting a piece of the pie as it was owning it. That appears to be changing.
I was surprised and disappointed to see this kind of triumphalist sectarianism from a writer whom I respect a great deal. I found it unnuanced and unhelpful, and I don’t understand why such a usually thoughtful writer would indulge in this sort of hit piece.
I supported the Valdez and Chevalier campaigns and was excited by their victories, but DSA needs to recognize where there remain weaknesses among its great strengths in order to broaden and deepen the organization’s mass base. How about some recognition of DSA’s relatively weak base in labor, and its even weaker base in working-class communities of color? Chevalier’s victory, for example, seems (according to initial numbers) to have relied mainly on Manhattan college-educated youth, while she lost the lower-income areas, the Bronx, the Black vote and (overwhelmingly) the Latine vote. Valdez lost the Black vote by 50 points and the lower-income vote by 32 points. Isn’t there something to discuss there, something DSA can improve on in the future? Isn’t it fair to analyze the extent to which DSA itself “speaks for the working class they claim to represent”? Are the WFP, unions and non-profits the only ones who can benefit from self-analysis? And is it really accurate to lump Reynoso (and presumably Nydia Velasquez and Letitia James) in with the “old guard politicians”?
Grandstanding about “the movement of the future being built with or without” them, and attacking progressive organizers who took a different approach and now have their own hard summing up to do, is no way to build the type of left/progressive coalition which is essential to defeating MAGA. It also betrays a touch of New York blindspot which assumes that every tactic and strategy suitable to blue cities in blue states will apply equally across the country.
DSA as currently constituted, based in the movements and communities where it is strongest, can do some things and not others. One thing it can (and must!) do is help lead a broad front to defeat the Right. But leadership requires self-knowledge, investigation, analysis, and “extending the hand of proletarian solidarity” when people make mistakes. DSA will not defeat Trump and MAGA on its own, and if it tries it risks spinning off in isolation and squandering its amazing electoral achievements. I’m all for building unity through struggle, but greater unity still needs to be the aim, and that aim seems missing here.
I did not vote for Chevalier. In fact I voted for Espaillat for the first time ever in a primary (I’ve been his constituent for almost 2 decades). But I appreciate your take here. I’ve been in labor activists circles as member of UFT opposition groups. I left many of those spaces when it became clear that if I didn’t pass certain litmus tests that I wouldn’t be welcome. I don’t think DSA or their allies understand that larger victories will require them to adopt a big tent approach. To the contrary, pieces like these seem to confirm that the far left is content to play the gatekeepers for what are and are not acceptable policy positions and political rhetoric on the center left to left. In low voter turnout elections, like the NYC primary, this might lead to more victories. But they will reach an electoral ceiling much quicker with this approach.
Your perspective on a “broad front to defeat the Right” is correct. What’s not correct is thinking that the corporate Dems are in any way interested in mobilizing the working class.
Who thinks corporate Dems are interested in mobilizing the working class? I certainly don't, except insofar as they're interested in mobilizing workers in the interest of certain sections of capital, which is part what the Democratic Party does.
Exactly. DSA has a delusional idea that they can capture the DP, or in some cases force it to the “left”, creating an alliance with workers and one of Capital’s primary instruments of exercising power.
Your comment has some insightful parts and I appreciated reading it. The first paragraph and some of the third have a touch of an ad hominem fallacy though. Unfortunately, it conveys defensiveness that undermines the helpful content. Nevertheless, thank you for sharing it.
According to the post ops I saw, the working class voted for espaillat, esp in the Bronx. Darializa won the college educated upper west side. Not making a quality judgement here just saying that’s what I read numbers wise.
Excellent post. The old guard is crumbling and finally for good reason. It’s time for unions to get on board or get out of the way.
One more thought. I’m incredibly happy at what DSA was able to accomplish, but to say that WFP and labor groups essentially need to get down or get run over is ridiculous. Besides the fact that WFP has been in this fight for much longer and has proven consistently to be about the right things. The DSA does not have enough power to defeat all of the institutions we face. If we want a better world it will take a broad coalition. We need each other.
You're right; I think the piece was overstated and one-sided, I'm going to make some edits right to reflect these helpful criticisms.
Wow, I was not expecting this type of response. Thanks for hearing me out.
The WFP is a doppelgänger of the Dems. They’re an obstacle to the working class taking control.
That is your opinion, and it’s an incorrect opinion.
Of course it’s my opinion. I just write it. DSA engages in magical thinking. Their statements alternate between saying they can capture the DP or they can move it to the left. This leads to class collaborationist policies rather than independently mobilizing workers in militant action. To me, that’s an obstacle.
Thank you, Eric, for your courage in writing this. You convincingly expressed what for me was in inchoate & uncertain inkling of a feeling!
This evangelical project sounds very promising Eric. I always thought we needed some sort of capitalism anonymous style group to counter alienation and build belonging.
sounds like these unions need a class struggle reform slate like the uaw had!
Great post! Book project sounds promising... Check out Jama Lazerow oldie but solid 1995 Religion and the Working class in Antebellum America. Influential new left theorist Harry Boyte sclc/sncc/sds/nam/dsoc,university.. consistent, radical, religious and unsung. communitarian projects now, but not to overlook debates with Mike Davis, Michael Lerner, Lenin and Lukacs too.
Ooh, thanks great reading suggestions. Can you suggest particular writings from Mike Davis and co on this? Which debates would you suggest tracking down?
Socialist Revolution 1972/Socialist Review 1978, Boyte Backyard Revolution 1980 "acknowledge MD my best critic". Davis NLR 1985 Dems and the Left..
I'm tracking it and will share!
Thank you!
Boyte, another anti-Marxist lauded by the ruling class. Good grief!
Excellent rewrite, and even more important, setting a terrific example of comradely discussion and reflection. You're charting entirely new ground on the left: taking criticisms seriously, thinking deeply about them, and addressing them! Who does that? We all owe you for that.
Excellent article. I agree.
One caveat: Brad Lander, a Mamdani’s ally who helped get him elected, and was backed by the WFP, won his primary for Congress with the largest differential in New York City.
We need to work with and push the WF to the left. Also, if there is any hope for unions to turn around and grow we need to do a lot of work there.
The way you described Reynoso endorsement tells me you don’t know how the endorsement process at the working families party votes. One chapter wanted Claire Valdez, several organizations representing hundreds of members wanted Reynoso. There’s a reason he got that endorsement.
Really appreciate the edits you made to this and the perspective you ultimately landed on, it feels really generative and productive.
I appreciate the emphasis on expanding the base. Discussions/arguments/tirades over what ethnic groups or working class voted for Avila Chevalier or Espaillat or Valdez or Reynosa have limited value when voter turnout is so low.
Very good. and it fits nicely with my 'Six-Party System Hypothesis, version 6.0, which I'll release in a week.
Thank you for being open and undogmatic. Yes, we need to work together.
"…the WFP and non-profit leaders’ decision in February 2026 to endorse Reynoso over Valdez — thereby overruling the votes of their own on-the-ground members…"
You answered your own question, and the proof is in the fact that two unions that recently took back control by their rank-and-file did endorse the democratic socialists. Granted, the unions and groups that didn't are rather between a rock and a hard place, since one suspects they're operating from the basis of having to work with the winners, but it should be getting clear by now that they're losing touch with their bases.
Everybody is pro union til the union disagrees with them
I guess.
I think the Unions are an outdated organization. I’ve been with a union once. What a waste of my weekly fee. I reached out a few times all I saw was impotence.
That’s because with a few exceptions most of them were taken over by the wannabe bosses decades ago. They were still useful, but they switched to convincing the rank-and-file it was as good just getting a piece of the pie as it was owning it. That appears to be changing.
You’d be guessing wrong.
I was surprised and disappointed to see this kind of triumphalist sectarianism from a writer whom I respect a great deal. I found it unnuanced and unhelpful, and I don’t understand why such a usually thoughtful writer would indulge in this sort of hit piece.
I supported the Valdez and Chevalier campaigns and was excited by their victories, but DSA needs to recognize where there remain weaknesses among its great strengths in order to broaden and deepen the organization’s mass base. How about some recognition of DSA’s relatively weak base in labor, and its even weaker base in working-class communities of color? Chevalier’s victory, for example, seems (according to initial numbers) to have relied mainly on Manhattan college-educated youth, while she lost the lower-income areas, the Bronx, the Black vote and (overwhelmingly) the Latine vote. Valdez lost the Black vote by 50 points and the lower-income vote by 32 points. Isn’t there something to discuss there, something DSA can improve on in the future? Isn’t it fair to analyze the extent to which DSA itself “speaks for the working class they claim to represent”? Are the WFP, unions and non-profits the only ones who can benefit from self-analysis? And is it really accurate to lump Reynoso (and presumably Nydia Velasquez and Letitia James) in with the “old guard politicians”?
Grandstanding about “the movement of the future being built with or without” them, and attacking progressive organizers who took a different approach and now have their own hard summing up to do, is no way to build the type of left/progressive coalition which is essential to defeating MAGA. It also betrays a touch of New York blindspot which assumes that every tactic and strategy suitable to blue cities in blue states will apply equally across the country.
DSA as currently constituted, based in the movements and communities where it is strongest, can do some things and not others. One thing it can (and must!) do is help lead a broad front to defeat the Right. But leadership requires self-knowledge, investigation, analysis, and “extending the hand of proletarian solidarity” when people make mistakes. DSA will not defeat Trump and MAGA on its own, and if it tries it risks spinning off in isolation and squandering its amazing electoral achievements. I’m all for building unity through struggle, but greater unity still needs to be the aim, and that aim seems missing here.
I did not vote for Chevalier. In fact I voted for Espaillat for the first time ever in a primary (I’ve been his constituent for almost 2 decades). But I appreciate your take here. I’ve been in labor activists circles as member of UFT opposition groups. I left many of those spaces when it became clear that if I didn’t pass certain litmus tests that I wouldn’t be welcome. I don’t think DSA or their allies understand that larger victories will require them to adopt a big tent approach. To the contrary, pieces like these seem to confirm that the far left is content to play the gatekeepers for what are and are not acceptable policy positions and political rhetoric on the center left to left. In low voter turnout elections, like the NYC primary, this might lead to more victories. But they will reach an electoral ceiling much quicker with this approach.
Your perspective on a “broad front to defeat the Right” is correct. What’s not correct is thinking that the corporate Dems are in any way interested in mobilizing the working class.
Who thinks corporate Dems are interested in mobilizing the working class? I certainly don't, except insofar as they're interested in mobilizing workers in the interest of certain sections of capital, which is part what the Democratic Party does.
Exactly. DSA has a delusional idea that they can capture the DP, or in some cases force it to the “left”, creating an alliance with workers and one of Capital’s primary instruments of exercising power.
Your comment has some insightful parts and I appreciated reading it. The first paragraph and some of the third have a touch of an ad hominem fallacy though. Unfortunately, it conveys defensiveness that undermines the helpful content. Nevertheless, thank you for sharing it.
According to the post ops I saw, the working class voted for espaillat, esp in the Bronx. Darializa won the college educated upper west side. Not making a quality judgement here just saying that’s what I read numbers wise.