Is the Socialist Party of USA a third-way, social-democratic party?

[TrotskistMarx]

Dear friends, I would like to know if The Socialist Party of USA supporting Stewart Alexander, and Alejandro Mendoza for US president and Vice-President in the November, 2012 elections of USA are a member of the Socialist International organization, which is an organization of social-democratic parties. The Socialist Workers Party of Spain (PSOE), is a member of the Socialist International.

This is the main link of Stewart Alexander for US president: http://www.stewartalexanderforpresident2012.org/

Thanks


.

[gorillafuck]

there are different factions in sp-usa. some members are more radical than others.

[The Douche]

I don't think the SP is a member of any internationals. But yes, it is effectively a social democratic party, though with some revolutionaries in the rank and file, who are pretty effectively suppressed by the national committee.

[Sam_b]

Here is your answer (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=members+of+the+socialist+international)

[Ilyich]

Is the Socialist Party, USA a member of the social democratic, third way Socialist International? No, it is not. I believe there is a strong current within the party that would like the party to join, however. I do not know what is stopping them since they seem like the same people who control the party. The SI's affiliate in the United States is the Democratic Socialists of America. Like the Communists, the DSA is nothing other than the left-wing section of the Democratic Party.

[Ocean Seal]

No they aren't. They are a multi-tendency organization which has some revolutionaries and some reformists. In any case, this is evidence that working with reformists doesn't work. Ask the user Chegitz Guevara for his experience with the party.

[GoddessCleoLover]

Apparently the American section of the Socialist International is the Democratic Socialists of America. I suppose they are even to the right of the SPUSA. So many sects. So little effective organizing of the proletariat. The USA's tale of woe.

[The Douche]

No they aren't. They are a multi-tendency organization which has some revolutionaries and some reformists. In any case, this is evidence that working with reformists doesn't work. Ask the user Chegitz Guevara for his experience with the party.

Chegitz is gettin purged. He's going through literally, the exact same thing I went through a few years ago.

[TrotskistMarx]

Hi there, thanks a lot for your explanation !!! My friend, i hate talking about other leftists, because the left is too divided. But I just want to say that the candidate for President of the Socialist Party of USA, Stewart Alexander is not too friendly with other leftists. I was a member of his campaign in Facebook, and he and I think other leaders of his political electoral campaign banned me for posting articles by Trotsky, Lenin, etc. In fact I recieved a private message from one of their leaders saying that they hate talking about Marx, Lenin, Mao, Trotsky and the main founders and writters of socialism, because according to them, that would not be too marketable to the american masses.

So I think they are a bit social-democrat and even a bit of progressive liberal. Like many Progressive Liberal writters, like Chris Hedges, Michael Parenti, Naomi Klein, Paul Krugman, Alexander Cockburn, Juan Cole, Matt Taibi, Jeremy Scahill, Norman Solomon. And the writters of http://www.commondreams.org http://www.alternet.org http://www.counterpunch.org http://www.tomdispatch.com http://www.thenation.com and many other progressive-liberal news websites, who write great articles against US Imperialism and Militarism. But never even talk about Marx, Lenin, F. Engels and the main thinkers of socialism.

Thanks






I don't think the SP is a member of any internationals. But yes, it is effectively a social democratic party, though with some revolutionaries in the rank and file, who are pretty effectively suppressed by the national committee.

[Book O'Dead]

According to Wikipedia the only socialist party in the US that is member of the Socialist International is the Democratic Socialists of America.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_International#Member_parties
http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html

I view the SPUSA as a quasi-ecumenical organization. That is, the SPUSA is an all-inclusive party that accepts people of all left-political inclinations (perhaps excluding Stalinists), and whose ruling bodies are largely controlled by a large Marxist minority.

[Leftsolidarity]

Chegitz is gettin purged. He's going through literally, the exact same thing I went through a few years ago.

Yeah, Chegitz will be out soon from what I've heard from him.

[Ilyich]

Hi there, thanks a lot for your explanation !!! My friend, i hate talking about other leftists, because the left is too divided. But I just want to say that the candidate for President of the Socialist Party of USA, Stewart Alexander is not too friendly with other leftists. I was a member of his campaign in Facebook, and he and I think other leaders of his political electoral campaign banned me for posting articles by Trotsky, Lenin, etc. In fact I recieved a private message from one of their leaders saying that they hate talking about Marx, Lenin, Mao, Trotsky and the main founders and writters of socialism, because according to them, that would not be too marketable to the american masses.

Really, he did that? I suppose I should not be surprised. After all, he is the candidate of the Socialist Party, USA. Still, I was hoping he would be slightly different. I guess he is not.

[Leftsolidarity]

According to Wikipedia the only socialist party in the US that is member of the Socialist International is the Democratic Socialists of America.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_International#Member_parties
http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html

I view the SPUSA as a quasi-ecumenical organization. That is, the SPUSA is an all-inclusive party that accepts people of all left-political inclinations (perhaps excluding Stalinists), and whose ruling bodies are largely controlled by a large Marxist minority.

No, those in power in the party are not Marxists.

[Book O'Dead]

Apparently the American section of the Socialist International is the Democratic Socialists of America. I suppose they are even to the right of the SPUSA. So many sects. So little effective organizing of the proletariat. The USA's tale of woe.

Alas, I share your lament! However, I think that the sectarian and ideological divide that keeps socialists apart isn't unique to the U.S. almost everywhere in the world that has parties of socialism there is some kind of rift or divide.

[Leftsolidarity]

So I think they are a bit social-democrat and even a bit of progressive liberal. Like many Progressive Liberal writters, like Chris Hedges, Michael Parenti, Naomi Klein, Paul Krugman, Alexander Cockburn, Juan Cole, Matt Taibi, Jeremy Scahill, Norman Solomon.

This confused me.

[Book O'Dead]

No, those in power in the party are not Marxists.

Then who governs the SPUSA?

[Leftsolidarity]

Then who governs the SPUSA?

Social Democrats from my experience, what I've heard/seen, and what/how the party talks about things.

I can confidently say they are not Marxists.

[Prometeo liberado]

I was a member about three years ago and what seemed like a party that was flying the general socialist banners was very much in fact looking for ways to better "market" those banners sans the marxist rhetoric. Talking like a red and writing like a red are not what they are about. If what you are looking for is a more left wing version of the DS of America then I think you'll like it there.

[Book O'Dead]

Social Democrats from my experience, what I've heard/seen, and what/how the party talks about things.

I can confidently say they are not Marxists.

Note I stated that I thought that the SPUSA's governing bodies are for the most part controlled by a large minority consisting, mainly, of Marxists.

I agree with the idea that the SPUSA is not a Marxist party per se. But based on their literature that I have read, Marxism is the ruling ideology of its leadership (God I hate that word!)

[Leftsolidarity]

Note I stated that I thought that the SPUSA's governing bodies are for the most part controlled by a large minority consisting, mainly, of Marxists.

I agree with the idea that the SPUSA is not a Marxist party per se. But based on their literature that I have read, Marxism is the ruling ideology of its leadership (God I hate that word!)

I know what you're saying. That is what I disagree with. I think cmoney has a better perspective on it. The leadership is made of social democrats.

[Prometeo liberado]

I was never privy to to what the leadership was actually thinking other than what was written or put into practice so I may be reaching here a bit. But it always seemed to me that the leadership took the view that in order to "win" the working class over the old language, and thus old tactics couldn't be used. They seem convinced that any deviation of this in practice is detrimental to the party. Thus you find many different tendencies amongst the membership, but as soon as those tendencies move from talk to action/organizing the mechanisms of the party extinguish it through suffocation or dismemberment. You'll meet many nice people though.:)

[Grenzer]

I think calling the SPUSA "third position" would be an overstatement. They are old style social democrats from my understanding. I think some people on this board are members, they could probably tell you more.

From what I can see from their website, they seem to be much further to the left than the CPUSA, which isn't saying much. Personally, I'm wondering why revolutionaries would want to join. Entryism?

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

According to Wikipedia the only socialist party in the US that is member of the Socialist International is the Democratic Socialists of America.


We shouldn't call those parties "socialist". The socialist international is not, and neither are Democratic Socialists of America. They are regressive anti-communist social-democrats, or ex-social-democrats, many of them having long since abandoned even that, so to call them socialists is preposterous. Those filthy types are the ones that try to claim socialism as the term for their anti-worker and capitalist policies. At least the stalin-kiddies are few and far between outside of Soviet Empire; those former social-democratic types are often regarded as the "legitimate socialists" by main-stream perception, and therefore should definitely be a much greater concern. Democratic Socialists of America are, in addition, nationalistis, Democratic party-supporting and have supported several of the U.S.'s war adventures.

[The Old Man from Scene 24]

Here is your answer (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=members+of+the+socialist+international)
Very polite of you. :rolleyes:





Anyways, to the OP - I honestly consider the Socialist Party USA to be as pathetic as the Communist Party USA. The fact that they actually bother to nominate presidential candidates shows that they are reformist liberals, not leftist revolutionaries.

[Book O'Dead]

We shouldn't call those parties "socialist". The socialist international is not, and neither are Democratic Socialists of America. They are regressive anti-communist social-democrats, or ex-social-democrats, many of them having long since abandoned even that, so to call them socialists is preposterous. Those filthy types are the ones that try to claim socialism as the term for their anti-worker and capitalist policies. At least the stalin-kiddies are few and far between outside of Soviet Empire; those former social-democratic types are often regarded as the "legitimate socialists" by main-stream perception, and therefore should definitely be a much greater concern. Democratic Socialists of America are, in addition, nationalistis, Democratic party-supporting and have supported several of the U.S.'s war adventures.

I understand what you're saying. I use the term "socialist" broadly, to include everyone I agree and disagree with on a theoretical or doctrinal basis who claim socialist legitimacy. Of course, I exclude the so-called national socialists.

I think that when we assume public positions like yours regarding other socialists we reduce the space in which we can maneuver for compromise and possible unity on the basis of a general revolutionary strategy.

[thriller]

Anyways, to the OP - I honestly consider the Socialist Party USA to be as pathetic as the Communist Party USA. The fact that they actually bother to nominate presidential candidates shows that they are reformist liberals, not leftist revolutionaries.

Right, because nominating members from our own party is just as pathetic as supporting Obama :p

No, the SP-USA is not a member of the Socialist International. Many, if not most, members are, as we would call them, social democrats. A good handful are revolutionaries. I think it's better to look at the specific Locals of the SP-USA to get a better idea of where people in the party stand. The Milwaukee party are basically left leaning democrats. But I know of other Locals that are more of the revolutionary flavor.

[Leftsolidarity]

Right, because nominating members from our own party is just as pathetic as supporting Obama :p

No, the SP-USA is not a member of the Socialist International. Many, if not most, members are, as we would call them, social democrats. A good handful are revolutionaries. I think it's better to look at the specific Locals of the SP-USA to get a better idea of where people in the party stand. The Milwaukee party are basically left leaning democrats. But I know of other Locals that are more of the revolutionary flavor.

You know, I keep hearing of this so called "Milwaukee branch". From living only about 20 minutes outside of it and doing a lot inside Milwaukee, I've never even meet another party member there. I don't think it exists. It took me personally mentioning this fact to Billy Wharton to get the branch to even return my phone calls.

[The Douche]

Right, because nominating members from our own party is just as pathetic as supporting Obama :p

No, the SP-USA is not a member of the Socialist International. Many, if not most, members are, as we would call them, social democrats. A good handful are revolutionaries. I think it's better to look at the specific Locals of the SP-USA to get a better idea of where people in the party stand. The Milwaukee party are basically left leaning democrats. But I know of other Locals that are more of the revolutionary flavor.

Lol more of the "I swear there's revolutionaries in the party, somewhere"...

Its a party run by social democrats which runs candidates who are progressive liberals.

[Leftsolidarity]

Lol more of the "I swear there's revolutionaries in the party, somewhere"...

Its a party run by social democrats which runs candidates who are progressive liberals.

Well, there are revolutionaries in the party. They just aren't the majority and don't have any power. They are there, just few and far between.

[NewLeft]

So I think they are a bit social-democrat and even a bit of progressive liberal. Like many Progressive Liberal writters, like Chris Hedges, Michael Parenti, Naomi Klein, Paul Krugman, Alexander Cockburn, Juan Cole, Matt Taibi, Jeremy Scahill, Norman Solomon. And the writters of http://www.commondreams.org http://www.alternet.org http://www.counterpunch.org http://www.tomdispatch.com http://www.thenation.com and many other progressive-liberal news websites, who write great articles against US Imperialism and Militarism. But never even talk about Marx, Lenin, F. Engels and the main thinkers of socialism.

I read the nation and they do talk about Marx quite a bit, maybe not Lenin. And I'm pretty sure Parenti is a ML. Naomi Klein, Chris Hedges.. Anarcho-liberals. Norman Solomon, bourgeois politician.

[Ilyich]

You know, I keep hearing of this so called "Milwaukee branch". From living only about 20 minutes outside of it and doing a lot inside Milwaukee, I've never even meet another party member there. I don't think it exists. It took me personally mentioning this fact to Billy Wharton to get the branch to even return my phone calls.

Actually, the headquarters of the Socialist Party of Wisconsin is located in the "Peace Action Center" at the corner of Keefe and Weil. They have not had a meeting in almost a year and their website is down.

[Leftsolidarity]

Actually, the headquarters of the Socialist Party of Wisconsin is located in the "Peace Action Center" at the corner of Keefe and Weil. They have not had a meeting in almost a year and their website is down.

ewwwwwwwwwwww. Yeah, I know of Peace Action.

[thriller]

Lol more of the "I swear there's revolutionaries in the party, somewhere"...

Its a party run by social democrats which runs candidates who are progressive liberals.

Haha! I know I know. But we are in there. But many left when RUG split, so it's at a much lesser percent. Also, I'll always have sympathy for the party, Debs is a huge inspiration for me.

[thriller]

You know, I keep hearing of this so called "Milwaukee branch". From living only about 20 minutes outside of it and doing a lot inside Milwaukee, I've never even meet another party member there. I don't think it exists. It took me personally mentioning this fact to Billy Wharton to get the branch to even return my phone calls.

Yeah, they would show up for meetings, and that's about it. The SEC was in Milwaukee but they are defunct now too. No actions ever took place. Wait, there was a picnic once!

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Well, there are revolutionaries in the party. They just aren't the majority and don't have any power. They are there, just few and far between.

It's an awful waste to see such stay in a ship sinking into the abyssal trench of electoralism and social-democracy, which effectively pacifies them.

[Leftsolidarity]

It's an awful waste to see such stay in a ship sinking into the abyssal trench of electoralism and social-democracy, which effectively pacifies them.

Agreed. Luckily (?) though I've noticed the revolutionary factions breaking from the party or basically being thrown out. I'm personally out. I've just been too lazy to send in my offical letter telling them that I am no longer a party member.

[teflon_john]

shit is dope as fuck. i hope i get purged from a party one day. like straight up it's on my bucket list.

[TrotskistMarx]

Dear friend, i hate talking about other progressives, leftists and even against social-democrats. However, I just want to say that the leaders of The Socialist Party of the USA, should be more sympathetic, more loving, more outgoing, and less closed-minded, less arrogant, less selfish.

I say all this, because I was a member of the campaign of Stewart Alexander and Alejandro Mendoza, running for President and Vice-President of USA in the November elections of this year. But just because I used to publish marxist literature in their Facebook Campaign Site, they banned me, without even communicating me the reasons of banning me.

And I think that many intellectuals, thinkers and very smart leaders of the left should put away their arrogance that naturally comes when you are well-read and smart, and should practice a bit of humility and love with the oppressed. Because I think that it is humility, honesty, love, compassion, forgiveness, and altruism one of the main requirements to be a great revolutionary


.



Very polite of you. :rolleyes:





Anyways, to the OP - I honestly consider the Socialist Party USA to be as pathetic as the Communist Party USA. The fact that they actually bother to nominate presidential candidates shows that they are reformist liberals, not leftist revolutionaries.

[The Douche]

shit is dope as fuck. i hope i get purged from a party one day. like straight up it's on my bucket list.

Its not fun, its pretty disheartening and depressing to be thrown aside from an institution that you devoted so much time and energy to, especially when they generate all kinds of lies about you during/after the process.

[A Marxist Historian]

Is the Socialist Party, USA a member of the social democratic, third way Socialist International? No, it is not. I believe there is a strong current within the party that would like the party to join, however. I do not know what is stopping them since they seem like the same people who control the party. The SI's affiliate in the United States is the Democratic Socialists of America. Like the Communists, the DSA is nothing other than the left-wing section of the Democratic Party.

I think you've answered your own question. The DSA, who they don't like, has the SI franchise, which is what stops the SP from affiliating.

That some of the rank and file might not like it is a pretty minor consideration I suspect.

-M.H.-