What's the biggest socialist party in the U.S.?

[bif]

I'm thinking of joining and was just wondering which one is the most organized.

[IrateCitizen]

1. Do you want to join a PARTY or ORGANIZATION?

I ask this because there are socialist ORGANIZATIONS that are active within Democratic Party politics. Democratic Socialists of America is one of the most well-known (http://www.dsausa.org).

I'd recommend the organization route if you're more of a pragmatic socialist -- someone who lives by the axiom stated by Rev. William Sloane Coffin of "continuing to ask the socialist questions, but not necessarily depending on the socialist answers." However, if you're a dogmatic socialist seeking the complete overthrow of market economics, then the party route is probably better for you.

[bif]

3. Organization.

Realizing that I'll continue to vote straight ticket Democrat. But I do believe in socialism. Not total overthrow of the government. I'd actually like to see our country run like the Scandanavian countries. Where all the citizens are taken care of. Why not? We're the richest country on earth and we can't even provide health care for our workers? Pathetic.

[IrateCitizen]

8. If that's the case, then it sounds like DSA is for you

I'm not a member of their organization, but I agree with much of their platform. I'm more of a "movement" socialist than one who believes in the dogma and ideology of a socialist "party".

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BayCityProgressive]

5. Democratic Socialists of America

is the biggest organization with like 7-10,000 members. Socialist Party USAis the largest Socialist Party with about 1,500 members, or the Communist Party USA with 2-3,000 members.

[Imperialism Inc.]

4. Socialist Party USA and Socialist Equality Party will both be fielding

candidates for the 2004 election, though I strongly recommend not voting for either.

Socialist Party USA
http://www.sp-usa.org/

Socialist Equality Party(World Socialist Web Site)
http://www.socialequality.com/
http://www.wsws.org

[Minstrel Boy]

6. Democratic Socialists of America would be my bet.

http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html

And happy rabble rousing. :)

http://www.ndp.ca/

[bif]

7. Thanks for the info!

I knew I'd get a quick response.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bif]

12. I worry a lot about Free Republic

I like the "Get Bent" comment. Very open minded. And by the way, the topic is socialism, not communism.

[IrateCitizen]

13. The request was for SOCIALIST, not communist info

That DU is a hotbed of communist activity.

Guess that just goes to prove, once again, that knee-jerk red-baiting is as alive among the Democrats as it is on the far-right.

Free Republic will love this thread.

Who gives a flying f*** what FR thinks of this thread? In their eyes, anything to the left of Genghis Khan is communist.

[DenverDem]

17. I AM a socialist

but this thread is a set up to discredit the forum.

You guys know exactly what you are doing.

[bif]

19. Excuse me?

I set this up to discredit the forum? I'm asking for information. Sheesh! Are you for real? I didn't think I'd encounter attacks for asking for some info.

[Christ was Socialist]

20. get used to it, like i said the party never appreciates it's left n/t

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mouse7]

59. Yeah, wouldn't want rumors of the US associated with Norway

That would be horrible, right?

[IrateCitizen]

24. If you ARE a socialist, you wouldn't shirk from the label so much

Nor would you make the obvious mistake of equating socialism with communism.

I know of no socialist on this forum who has EVER been apologetic about their beliefs as you seem to be. If there is anyone here who is being disingenuous, it's you.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[IrateCitizen]

31. No more needs to be said, because you've been exposed.

I have plenty of people on these boards who can vouch for my adherence to many ideals of movement socialism -- both those in agreement with me and those against.

Out of all of the socialists and communists I have come across on this site, you are the ONLY poster proclaiming to be a socialist while at the same time attempting to silence others from discussing socialism, equating socialism with communism, and worrying about what a bunch of armchair warriors on a fascist website might think about us.

No "wink, wink... nudge, nudge" needed. You've been perfectly transparent.

[DenverDem]

36. If you are not working in concert with bif on this

then you are just being played.

[IrateCitizen]

43. Played by what? By answering bif's question?

Please. You're being utterly delusional now.

[bif]

35. I like the analysis

based on my posts. Actually I rarely post in GD and have rarely shared my political beliefs. I usually hang out in the lounge. and now I see why. I ask a simple question and now I have to defend my beliefs? And how do you figure I'm being apologetic? I believe in socialism (from a personal standpoint) but am pragmatic in knowing a socialst isn't going to be elected president. So that's why I vote Dem. And since I'm not active in any socialistic party or organization, why do I have to defend some party line?

[Christ was Socialist]

37. That is self defeating

" I believe in socialism (from a personal standpoint) but am pragmatic in knowing a socialst isn't going to be elected president. So that's why I vote Dem. And since I'm not active in any socialistic party or organization, why do I have to defend some party line?"

So if you think that, and the next man does because you do, it is self defeating, you must vote for whomever, not follow someone else, and calling it pragmatism. When a canidate is fielded because people say he is "electable" then we have begun a desent out of democracy.

[IrateCitizen]

41. See my post below on "movement" vs. "party" socialism...

It's really too short to do justice to the topic, but it's an extremely quick summary of my thoughts on the matter.

[Wabbajack]

46. Is Genghis Khan really "Right-Wing"?

I mean all he did was destroy stuff.......oh right. :p

[King_Crimson]

21. Wonder when people are going to get it in their heads...

that "SOCIALISM" IS NOT "COMMUNISM"! Joe Stalin is the one that perverted and distorted Socialism! Of course, Stalin was a Republican you know!
Excellent site is www.wsws.org

[mgc1961]

23. Personally,...

...I don't give a damn what Free Republic loves. I don't need their approval. Are you going to self-censor because you're afraid what someone else thinks or what they might make of it?

I really like Socialists views. No apologies. I've thought about joining them too although I currently vote Green when I have the option.

The greatness of a nation is in its diversity, not in uniformity of thought and action.

[DenverDem]

32. The point, of course, being that this thread was started

to give Free Republic ammunition.

I am a Democratic Socialist, believing in taxation to provide communal services, and if this was a genuine discussion of those philosophies I would gladly join in.

I do not believe that is what is going on in this thread.

[IrateCitizen]

38. You seem to be the only one here concerned about FR...

I think the consensus here is that people don't give a f*** what they think about us.

What do you think -- that if socialism isn't brought up, that they'll repent of their ways and suddenly like us? Please.

They're jack-booted thugs -- nothing less. Just the fact that we want some taxes to go toward schools, and some of us believe that the military budget should be less than $500 million per year, and some of us think that a bazooka should not be available for immediate purchase at a gun show, they're going to call us communists.

Why do you care so much about what they think, anyway????

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[IrateCitizen]

42. Ooooooohhhhhh... I'm REALLY scared, now!

DenverDem's got his eyes on me! I'd better watch my every step around here now!

:eyes:

I'll just say that I worry about as much what you think of me, as I worry about what the people at FR think about me.

But if you feel that it is a productive use of your time to monitor my postings on an internet discussion board, go right ahead. I really could care less.

[DenverDem]

54. Sorry, I'm off to work

you boys play amongst yourselves.

[Minstrel Boy]

44. lol!

"I've got my eyes on both of you."

This thread is turning into John Carpenter's remake of "The Thing."

[Michael Costello]

29. communist activity

The communist slogan is "from each according to ability, to each according to need". The socialist slogan is "from each according to ability, to each according to work". In other words - workers should be able to keep the wealth they create. As simple as that. I know the corporate press always says socialism means big government. The fact that every time they say the word socialism they add "which means big government". That is sort of a tip off that it isn't true. The concept is that money should be earned by work, not parasitism like rent, profit and interest. Half of Europeans vote for either a socialist party or a labor party. The US doesn't have a large socialist or labor party so the AFL-CIO endorses Democrats, and many socialists or organized workers vote Democrat.

I will probably be voting for Nader or the Green party candidate this year. Kerry is too pro-war, voted for NAFTA and is in the DLC and so on and so forth. People here complain how people are voting for Nader and have to come back into the Democratic party, yet when they come back and start talking about socialism, they're told they have to keep quiet. People should make up their minds - do they want socialists in the Democratic coalition and voting for Kerry, or do they not want that represented in the party, whereas there should be no complaints about people voting for Nader.

If you look at European electoral history and see how large the labor, socialist and communist parties were in the 20th century and are in this century, it should dawn on people that there are a lot of people in the US who think in the same manner, and a lot of them vote Democratic.

[Nadienne]

58. I'm beginning to think I'm a socialist

I really like the idea of "to each according to work" - especially since US's society seems to say "to each according to ownership of capital".

I know a couple of republicans who whine about welfare, giving money to those who don't earn it. A lot more wealth goes to those who don't earn it, who's only method for having and keeping their wealth is through the employment of others. And they act as though they are doing us a favor, by employing us.

It would be interesting to see how many people would agree with this if 1) there wasn't so much anti-socialist (pro-corporation, pro-capitalist) propaganda in the media and the rest of the country and 2) there wasn't such a terrifying boogey-man polarizing the country.

:)

[Vladimir]

30. Who gives a fuck? n/t

[bobbieinok]

10. is there a way to find out if there's a state or local org of dsa???

[IrateCitizen]

15. Go to their website -- www.dsausa.org (nt)

[Minstrel Boy]

11. Good statement from the DSA about the 2004 election.

For those jittery about splitting the anti-Bush vote:

It is imperative that we defeat the Bush regime in the 2004 elections.

The Bush regime took power after the 2000 elections against the will of the majority of Americans, and has now achieved domination of all three branches of the federal government. On a host of issues - massive tax breaks for the rich, brutal cuts in spending for pressing social needs, attacks on workers' rights, civil liberties, reproductive rights and racial justice, corporate destruction of the environment, packing the courts with right-wing ideologues, a foreign policy of imperial arrogance and perpetual war - the Bush regime is an unmitigated disaster. Its new National Security Doctrine of "preemptive wars" purports to justify the United States overthrowing any government that gives offense to the U.S. The Bush regime is perhaps the most reactionary in American history; its program of deregulation, upward redistribution of wealth and income, and imperial global domination threaten to roll back the twentieth century and return us to the McKinley era.

Democratic Socialists of America Political Action Committee (DSA PAC) is not endorsing any candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination at this time. We urge DSA members and our allies, in working for progressive candidates in the primaries, to advance our support for peace, universal health care, workers' rights and a living wage, reproductive rights, racial justice, etc. As the DSA 2003 convention made clear, a vigorous, anti-Bush effort offers an opening to build these movements for social change - movements DSA supports and of which it is a part. Participation in an anti-Bush coalition also helps position the democratic left to keep the eventual presidential winner responsive to the needs of ordinary Americans.

While there will no doubt be differences within the broad democratic Left over which candidate to support in the Democratic primaries, there should be no doubt of our determination to unite to defeat Bush and the Republicans in Congress. Any such differences in the primaries must not become obstacles to unity in the fight to depose the Bush regime democratically in the fall elections. DSA's strategic goal in the Democratic presidential primaries will be to push the debate - and ultimately the Democratic nominee - to the left, particularly on foreign and economic policy issues. Regardless of who is elected in the 2004 elections, the democratic Left must continue to work together to fight for the progressive agenda.

...

DSA welcomes the grassroots renewal movement within the Democratic Party, named for the late Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone, in which DSA members have taken a leadership role in some areas around the country.

http://www.dsausa.org/LatestNews/election04b.html

[Christ was Socialist]

18. So our ideals/beliefs/positions don't matter?

I wonder if slavery was an issue right now what you would be saying.

"Sure Slavery is morally wrong, but we must capture the white house, because that is the number one goal, you can't vote for an anti slavery canidate, because it's a vote for bush"

[Minstrel Boy]

25. I don't follow you.

I was passing on the Democratic Socialist position on the presidential election. That is, that they're not running a candidate, are working with a broad progressive coalition to influence the Democratic platform, and given the crisis the Bush presidency poses, will be endorsing the Democratic nominee. That sounds like a very principled position, based upon strongly-held ideals and beliefs. "Slavery"?

Myself, I'm a proud member of Canada's socialist party, and on the left-wing thereof. But our support is in the 20% range nationally, and we form provincial governments. We're viable, right now. Americans are not going to be electing a socialist president in 2004, but building a viable socialist party is a worthy ambition.

Understand where I'm coming from?

[Christ was Socialist]

34. Oh sorry i was reffering to americans

Canadians support and belief in socialist ideals. Even most dems in america see "red" whenever anyone mentions it. There is an old saying, "When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist." - Archbishop Helder Camara

[IrateCitizen]

28. "Movement" socialism vs. "party" socialism

That seems to be the disconnect here.

Personally, I'm more of a "movement" socialist -- not because I discount many of the end goals of socialism (a more just, more democratic, and ultimately happier society), but because I believe that socialism is something that has to come more from a shift in attitudes and beliefs than from elections themselves.

I see the disconnect with "party" socialists in that they seem to believe that in achieving political power, they will be able to implement their aims. I see two problems with this. First, it does nothing to address the negative attitudes permeating our society that perpetuate inequality, injustice and unhappiness. Second, it relies too much on a centralization of power within a party apparatus rather than emphasizing the effective diffusion of power throughout society -- resulting in a mere replacement of one kind of tyranny for another (as happened in the USSR, China and Cuba).

[Vladimir]

48. A combination of both is necessary IMO n/t

[Ruby Romaine]

14. the GOP!!!! Socialism for corporations & Millionaires!!!!

n/t

[Christ was Socialist]

16. As a socialist let me warn you

Stay away from the communist fronts, and stalinist organizations. There are many in the us but an organization would be more viable. A lot of dems are anti socialist as you can see in the post already, and they wonder why people vote nader. And in florida the socialist workers party got enough votes to make a difference. The Party has been ignoring the true left for awhile now. Also I have provided links to the history of america abusing us




Workers world party
http://www.workers.org/

Socialist party usa
http://www.sp-usa.org/

Socialist.org
http://socialist.org/


Democratic socialists of america
http://www.dsausa.org/


New socialists
http://socialist.org/newsocialists

FBI COINTELPRO Documents
Communist Party, USA -
http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/cpusa.htm

Socialist Workers Party
http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/swp.htm

New Left
http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/newleft.htm

[DenverDem]

26. Whatever.

These guys are about as socialist as Joe McCarthy.

You need to be more careful who you hang around with.

[IrateCitizen]

33. Hey, you're the one looking to censor debate DenverDem

If anyone's playing McCarthy around here with censorship and red-baiting, it's you.

[DenverDem]

39. Debate all you want, if that's what this is.

I have my doubts.

[IrateCitizen]

45. If it isn't "debate", then its mostly because of you

You're the one who's first response on this thread was along the lines of "Get bent!", and you went on to say how this would help FR smear us as a bunch of communists.

I'm done with you on this. It's obvious that you are the one whose only goal is to disrupt.

Have a nice day.

[bif]

47. Man, you people love to argue

Read my original question. A very simple request for information. And look at all the flames and personal attacks that followed. I wasn't looking for an argument. Maybe I should have asked the question, gotten a couple of responses and leftwith the information. And after hearing some of the nasty comments and accusations from some self-declared, self-righteous "socialists" maybe I don't need to look into it.

[IrateCitizen]

49. Don't let it get you down, bif

The nasty responses were all from one person on this thread who seemed more interested in disruption than anything else. Sadly, his efforts worked -- because the majority of us (myself included) took the bait and engaged him in a fruitless exchange.

[bif]

52. Thanks.

Yeah. I know it was from one person. If someone was really into socialism, it seemws to me they'd be more apt to share information rather than question someone else's beliefs in a confrontational tone.

[DenverDem]

55. Get a room.

Puleeze. You take this covert action pretty seriously.

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[IrateCitizen]

51. Why would you not?

:shrug:

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[IrateCitizen]

56. Do you instead support the Pentagon losing over $1 trillion...

... over 30 years? That's not how much they spent, that's how much they can't even ACCOUNT FOR over the that time frame.

It seems to me that that is a much more costly government program than anything like universal health care. In fact, under a single-payer program, we would actually pay LESS per capita than we do now. The US currently has the highest per capita spending on health care in the WORLD while still failing to cover some 14% of its population.

The reason for being a socialist to some degree is the belief that people should be paid according to the work they do -- as opposed to the parasitic relationship of those who live solely off interest, rent and inheritance. You should really do a little research on the origins of the socialist movement to get a better idea of what they're really about. I'd suggest reading up a bit on Eugene Victor Debs, one of the pioneers of the late 19th/early 20th century socialist and labor movements.

The avatar picture is the Indian author and activist Arundhati Roy. You might want to do a search on her to read some of the things you wrote -- although I'm not certain you'd find a great deal of agreement with her. I'm a white 30-year-old man, and look nothing like the picture. Sorry to get your hopes up.

[No2W2004]

57. Well, here's why

We are socialists because we reject an international economic order sustained by private profit, alienated labor, race and gender discrimination, environmental destruction, and brutality and violence in defense of the status quo.

We are socialists because we share a vision of a humane international social order based both on democratic planning and market mechanisms to achieve equitable distribution of resources, meaningful work, a healthy environment, sustainable growth, gender and racial equality, and non-oppressive relationships.

Please explain what is bad with the above statement, taken from the DSA website..