Decision Time

What did the convention decide? Some of the most important political decisions were settled prior to the meeting itself by means of consensus resolutions drafted after months of membership input and discussion by, for instance, the National Labor Commission (NLC). The NLC’s resolution — adopted as part of the consent agenda along with several other consensus resolutions — noted, “Socialism’s true home is in the workplace and in the labor movement.

In order to overcome the historic divide between the socialist and labor movements in this country, DSA must continue to reconnect the two at the level of the rank and file. DSA recommits to the Rank and File Strategy that has led our successful labor work for the last 6 years.” Additionally, the resolution pledged to help DSA members organize new union shops, promote Labor Notes and its Troublemakers regional conferences, prioritize organizing at Amazon, and build toward a general strike in 2028.

All of this is common sense in DSA today, an enormous shift from pre-2016 DSA practice. As long-time organizer David Duhalde notes, DSA didn’t adopt the rank-and-file strategy, which among other things prioritizes the organizing of reform caucuses within unions to challenge conservative and complacent leadership, until 2019, and it was relatively controversial at the time as “many veteran DSAers were uneasy with publicly siding in internal union disputes and elections.”

The National Electoral Commission’s (NEC) consensus resolution — adopted as part of the consent agenda — pledged to recruit three independent socialist candidates to run as test cases (as opposed to running in Democratic primaries) and to tighten up the DSA’s national endorsement process by clarifying how the National Political Committee interviews and decides upon a potential nominee. It recommends that chapters send “paper endorsements” where the organization signals support but doesn’t actively campaign for a candidate. And it lays out a procedure for addressing DSA-endorsed elected officials whose actions or statements “diverge” from DSA’s politics.

In general, the resolution prioritizes endorsements for candidates with a strong relationship to the organization. At the same time, the resolution leaves the door open to endorsing other left or labor candidates who “contribute to working-class political activity or the advancement of the socialist movement in broader society.”

Broadly speaking, the consensus resolutions reflect persistent work and communication between DSA’s national structures and its locals — which is not to say that there aren’t controversies.

The absence of a left-wing candidate in 2024’s presidential election hurt the movement. Exactly how to address this problem in 2028, especially in light of the UAW’s call for a general strike on May Day, led to one of the sharpest debates at the convention. In the end, 59 percent of delegates voted in favor Resolution 33: Unite Labor and the Left to Run a Socialist for President jointly promoted by the Groundwork and Bread and Roses caucuses, aiming to “draft a socialist candidate for presidential 2028 election” in alliance with labor unions and other mass organizations.

“DSA should back a viable candidate in the Democratic presidential primary, such as a nationally known elected official, labor leader, or public figure who will primarily publicly identify with and promote DSA, socialism and/or left-labor coalition rather than the Democratic Party,” the resolution reads.

This will be easier said than done, requiring a high degree of united-front action, tactful negotiations, and more than a bit of luck. There is obviously a degree of tension between this resolution and the NEC’s consensus resolution. For instance, few would argue that DSA was wrong to endorse Bernie Sanders in the past, but one of the criteria in the NEC’s resolution is the degree of involvement in the “internal” life of the candidates’ chapter. There are very few “nationally known” labor leaders or elected officials who are active in their local DSA chapter. However, the fact that DSA has decided to begin thinking about a 2028 strategy now will put us in a stronger position to judge our own capacities and those of our allies in the years to come.

Another hotly contested vote passed with 56 percent of delegates in favor of Resolution 22: For a Fighting Anti-Zionist DSA, drafted by the Springs of Revolution caucus. This resolution seeks to make support for the call for boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) against Israel a litmus test for DSA candidate endorsement as well as raising the possibility for expelling DSA members who have “consistently and publicly opposed BDS and the Palestinian cause.”

The large minority in opposition to the resolution does not reflect a capitulation to Zionism; rather, it points to delegates’ concerns about the complicated dynamics facing any serious DSA-backed candidate and to many delegates’ unease with litmus tests and expulsions. The majority of delegates voted to mandate support for BDS, among other things, as a precondition for endorsement, while many in the minority held that DSA should remain open to tactical alliances with forces who do not wholly support BDS but who may support the Palestinian cause in other ways, in the interest of building the movement against genocide in Gaza.

And as with the tension in the electoral resolutions, Stephen Kimmerle of the Reform and Revolution caucus explains that “would not have allowed DSA to endorse Bernie Sanders” nor would it “allow DSA to critically endorse for example a candidacy of [UAW President] Shawn Fain” in 2028, however critically. Thankfully, the resolution leaves the door open to thinking this through with the twin goals of maximizing Palestinian solidarity and building the greatest possible working-class unity.

The contradiction between holding up a hard line declaring solidarity with Gaza and working to build a broad, working-class campaign in 2028 that can actually act in ways that substantively move the needle toward ending the genocide in Gaza is one that exists in the real world, not simply in the heads of DSA members supporting competing resolutions.

Using One’s Own Brains?

So what about the caucuses? Probably only a couple thousand (generously) DSAers belong to one of the many internal caucuses, but they represent some of the most active members and play an outsize role at convention and in the life of several chapters. This was apparent in the makeup of the newly elected National Political Committee, with all but one winning candidate campaigning on a caucus slate.

The general consensus is that caucuses standing on the left of DSA came out slightly ahead in the voting. That’s true enough on paper. But the idea that the organization is shifting to the left should be taken with a grain of salt, both in the sense of what it means to be “on the Left” inside a socialist organization and in thinking about what tasks will confront DSA in the next few years.

During the dog days of World War I, Vladimir Lenin famously lurched to the left, demanding splits with moderate socialists as well as revolutionaries who didn’t share his views on party tactics. Four years later, he wrote “Left-wing” Communism: An Infantile Disorder, excoriating ultras who refused to make tactical compromises in the interest of working-class unity and action.

“It would be absurd,” wrote Lenin,

to formulate a recipe or general rule (“No compromises!”) to suit all cases. One must use one’s own brains and be able to find one’s bearings in each particular instance. It is, in fact, one of the functions of a party organisation and of party leaders worthy of the name, to acquire, through the prolonged, persistent, variegated and comprehensive efforts of all thinking representatives of a given class, the knowledge, experience and — in addition to knowledge and experience — the political flair necessary for the speedy and correct solution of complex political problems.

Here’s one place where the caucuses could help fill a hole. While DSA members developed and campaigned for competing resolutions, or collaborated to create consensus views, the general absence of conjunctural analysis presented and debated at convention — in the form of a political report presented by the NPC, for instance — was a glaring absence. How strong is Trump? How can we understand the Republican monopolization of all three branches of government? How do we characterize his attack on federal unions? Should we be preparing for a stolen, or sabotaged, election in 2026? Who are our allies in the union movement and immigrant rights organizations? How do we relate to liberal forces? How do we assess and test DSA’s pockets of strength?

Unfortunately, delegates and national leadership were only able to address such questions by way of brief interventions from the floor debating for or against resolutions and amendments — although there were very popular breakout sessions on labor, teacher organizing, and the history of socialist organizing. All caucuses can play a role in overcoming this deficit by emphasizing the need for research, hypotheses, and mutual exchange. This habit will not only increase DSA members’ sophistication, it will also help DSA extend its political influence to layers of people looking for answers.

For instance, if Mamdani’s campaign is lifting boats all across DSA nation, then DSA chapters can learn lessons from some of the Socialist Majority caucus, typically referred to as being on the “right” of the organization and whose members were instrumental in creating the conditions for his breakthrough. Likewise, DSA reelected Ashik Siddique (from the “moderate” Groundwork caucus) and Megan Romer (from the “left” Red Star caucus) as national cochairs because they value their leadership skills. Most active DSA members appreciate caucuses and leaders when they come up with good ideas, but what they really want is effective strategy and careful planning. They want to win and do not choose tactics, in general, based on whether they are “left” or “center” or “right.”

All in all, DSA will head into Trump’s second year and the midterms growing significantly, better organized, and more experienced than it has ever been. It’s a remarkable achievement. DSA can play a central role in helping build and develop a genuinely mass, working-class left for the first time in generations. Despite shades of opinion, all agree we need to prepare for 2028.

The 2027 convention will democratically resolve exactly where we will throw our weight in 2028 and the members, chapters, and caucuses that will be the most influential then will be those who have demonstrated they can put ideas into practice now. Yet we remain small and the path to mass politics is long and complicated. We will need humility, creativity, and expertise in equal measure to navigate it.