530
submitted 2 months ago by geekwithsoul@lemm.ee to c/politics@lemmy.world

“With membership at new lows and no electoral wins to their name, it’s time for the Greens to ditch the malignant narcissist who’s presided over its decline.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ZMoney@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

I have a question about PSL. My organizational background is in labor mostly, though I have done some door knocking for critical elections.

How is your candidate getting however many votes (feel free to estimate) going to help the working class? Or alternatively, how does your electoral campaign help PSL? Is this ultimately a recruitment drive?

[-] bloodfart@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago

Well, PSL is a socialist party with a platform that explicitly promotes worker control over the means of production, but on a less theoretical level, they show up and provide material support to strikes and worker action.

So if it was just a recruitment drive I think it would be good because a bigger psl means more support for workers.

But I honestly don’t think it is just a recruitment drive. Psl seems to have an actual theory of power that is in opposition to the structures of power that support the democrats and republicans.

In order to build that power psl needs to show people that their government doesn’t have to be trash which doesn’t represent them or help them. Participating in electoralism does that.

Even if psl goes nowhere, a big showing would force other major parties to recognize that there is significant support and, critically now, stability to be gained by adopting the principles of a pro worker party.

So pretty much I think it’s an unalloyed good for workers.

[-] ZMoney@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Yeah, I'm just wondering why they're launching a national presidential campaign rather than trying to win locally first. See for example DSA's (the veil falls lol) cadre candidates like Zohran Mamdani.

It seems to me like PSL is skipping this step and going straight to national, with the net result of devoting a lot of energy that could be spent on worker organizing on a campaign that everyone knows is not going to win.

This also bears the risk of helping Trump win by siphoning off votes from Harris, and a Trump victory will have damaging effects on the NLRB, an organization which in its current state is making it a lot easier for workers to unionize.

So I'm just not seeing how any third party presidential run ties into building worker power, but maybe I am missing something.

[-] bloodfart@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago

I think if psl were just running a presidential candidate and nothing else then you’d have a good point, but especially in California (the party started there?) they run a bunch of candidates for different positions.

I think that’s different from dsa because psl purports to have party discipline whereas that was a big problem and point of contention in dsa over the past four years.

I actually think that to the extent it matters, parties like dsa and greens take away more votes from the democrats because they’re basically places for spicy or heady democrats to go respectively.

Of course, the onus falls on the political party plying their platform to pander to the populace and not the reverse, so basically if the democrats want psl, dsa or green votes it’s their responsibility to adopt those positions or enter into some coalition with those parties.

As far as the nlrb goes, the next step is the same if we end up with an extension of the Biden nlrb, a trump nlrb (or the dissolution thereof) or some third party nlrb: build and express worker power that can actually successfully demand concessions from the ruling class as opposed to subsist on crumbs allowed to fall from the table.

I don’t honestly think it would be significantly easier under Biden than trump and the rail strike is evidence. Rather than acquiesce to some pretty milquetoast demands, the Biden administration broke the strike.

If you’re involved in dsa, how’s your local?

[-] ZMoney@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

My local is great but I don't have any others to compare to so it's a pretty vapid description. There's a PSL here too and they come to a lot of our events. It's always interesting to hear from the more radical formation.

The thing with DSA "party discipline" is that it's not a political party. It's basically a nonprofit with local chapters that all have their own agendas, some of which run candidates. So I'm interested to see what happens with a more centralized (as far as I understand it anyway) structure like PSL.

In terms of labor organizing I do think the political climate matters. The rail strike is an example of national scale union busting, but on more local levels (Starbucks, Amazon, Cemex...) that the NLRB actually matters. Here's an article about it.

https://www.laborpolitics.com/p/how-bidens-nlrb-has-boosted-bottom

[-] bloodfart@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 months ago

I interact with a decent amount of dsa people too. In conversation we tend to disagree about some things but in the moment of a conflict they’re right there. I think the police would get a lot farther with them over a cup of coffee than with the plastic shields lol.

I think the party discipline is important in a moment of movement building because it keeps party candidates honest. It makes sense why dsa doesn’t and kinda can’t have it, but for me it’s something important.

You’re right that a pliable nlrb was important in getting some of the victories lately. I guess I have a pretty pessimistic view of the position organized labor is in now considering it’s experiencing a resurgence and we still have declining union density over that same time frame.

From my perspective an nlrb that will play nice is the least of our worries.

this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2024
530 points (93.3% liked)

politics

19148 readers
2262 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS