Debsian

[Weidt]

Public Announcement
Come join Debsian, the left-wing voice of the Socialist Party USA!

Debsian is anew public list for the discussion of revolutionary democratic socialism and the legacy of Eugene V. Debs. Socialists, communists, anarchists, Marxists and other working class revolutionaries are welcome and encouraged to join and engage in discussion.

Debsian is maintained by the Debs Tendency of the Socialist Party USA. The DT is a left-wing tendency advocating the development of the SPUSA into a revolutionary democratic socialist party fighting in the interests of the working class and all oppressed people.

Debsian list webpage: http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/debsian

To subscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
To post (once subscribed), e-mail: [email protected]

In Solidarity,
Joe DeNeen
[email protected]
Debs Tendency
Socialist Party of Michigan
Socialist Party USA

[SonofRage]

I've been in on this since it was starting and I encourage others to join. There has been some good discussion on the list.

[redstar2000]

I looked at this site and could not locate any discussion...it seemed to be a "list of lists".

???

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[Weidt]

http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/debsian is the Debsian listserve webpage, like Yahoo! Groups or Topica have for their lists. You must subscribe in order to view the message archive and gain access to other features, including the ability to post of course.

Subscriptions require moderator approval too, but only so we can block spam since once in awhile we receive a subscription request from an e-mail that is obviously porn spam or some such crap. Once subscribed, the list is unmoderated so any members may post freely.

I am the moderator too, so you need not worry about my rejecting you. :blink:

[redstar2000]

I "hate" lists that make you sign up before they give you the chance to see what you're signing up for.

So I'll ask you what I would have looked for on that list...

Why is this "caucus" or "tendency" still in the Socialist Party U.S.A.?

What is the political basis for that decision? Do they think the SP can be "radicalized from within"? Why?

Do they propose to "junk" the SP's traditional reliance on electoral politics? If so, are they actually making any progress on this front?

What exactly would they like the SP to do, if they win "control" of the organization? Radical union organizing? Direct action?

And what would it mean, in practical terms, to "win control" of the SP? Are there assets that can be utilized in a better way? If they did "win control", wouldn't the "moderate" elements all leave anyway? Is the "name" of the SP really "valuable" in some sense...and what sense would that be?

You can see where I'm going with this...isn't the idea of trying to "take over" the SP "from the left" rather like seizing control of a museum?

Why not just start a new group and put your energies into that...rather than the inevitable "infighting" with people who do not now nor ever will desire a revolution?

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[Weidt]

Though I am a member of the Debs Tendency, I shall try to tackle your questions as an individual member and not as a spokesperson for the DT. When I say "we" I mean myself and folks who agree with me, but not DT itself.


Why is this "caucus" or "tendency" still in the Socialist Party U.S.A.?
We are already members of the SPUSA and we embrace the history and tradition of the SPUSA, that is its fundamental commitment to working class politics, social revolution and anticapitalism, so far as its early history is concerned anyway. That is, we see Eugene V. Debs as quite possibly the greatest American socialist and feel he did more for socialism in the USA than anyone else. We wish to reclaim that tradition and bring the SPUSA back to its foundational roots, that is of its pre-WW1 status. Of course even then it must be a more radicalized variation too!


What is the political basis for that decision? Do they think the SP can be "radicalized from within"? Why?
The left-wing in the SPUSA is on the verge of majority status, but it is not unified and therefore is not strong enough to affect policy. This is why the Debs Tendency has emerged. We want to unify the growing left-wing that, for the most part, is due to an influx of younger and activist-oriented members. These new comrades, including myself, are tired of the same old crap and want to shift the SPUSA towards the direction of an activist organization and be a staunchly anticapitalist independent political party. The "right-wing" of the SPUSA has a slim majority today, but we invision an ideological shift by the 2005 National Convention.


Do they propose to "junk" the SP's traditional reliance on electoral politics? If so, are they actually making any progress on this front? What exactly would they like the SP to do, if they win "control" of the organization? Radical union organizing? Direct action?
We do believe the reliance on electoral politics should definitely be changed. Electoral politics are useful so far as providing a means to promote socialism and put forther a radical program, but we must have no illusions about winning votes or any office within the bourgeois government. It should be seen as one of many tactics put forth by the SPUSA, but not is sole tactic like at present.

In fact, we proposed a national campaign to promote socialist and engage in activism but it was shot down at the 2003 National Convention back in October. We plan, as the DT, to take this campaign up ourselves and push forward without the SPUSA itself. So yes, we want to expand beyond just electoral politics. Here in Michigan we are organizing May Day 2004 in Detroit in conjunction with other groups and anytime now we will be trust into a struggle against a Detroit railway company as their union will probably go on strike soon after Xmas -- one of our members has been chosen by his union to coordinate this effort knowing he is a SPUSA member and we will definitely be heavily involved in this strike!


And what would it mean, in practical terms, to "win control" of the SP? Are there assets that can be utilized in a better way? If they did "win control", wouldn't the "moderate" elements all leave anyway? Is the "name" of the SP really "valuable" in some sense...and what sense would that be?
Yes, there are assets that are currently either unutilized or poorly utilized. This basically boils down to a lack of commitment, focus and discipline by the "right-wing" membership that dominates the leadership, our national newspaper, etc. Unfortunately these people are extremely pessimistic when it comes to the SPUSA and thus perpetuates the ineffectiveness of the SPUSA instead of actually taking the steps to bring the SPUSA around into an active, growing and radical organization. If a small group like the Workers World Party can do so much, I think our larger group should be able to do far more, and far more than it does now.

As to the "right-wing" leaving the SPUSA if the left-wing were successful in being elected into leadership, I think you may be correct. At our 2003 National Convention in October we had some "moderates" threaten to quit the SPUSA if certain policies were adopted or members elected. It is amazing how the "right-wing" threatens to quit or purge others, while the left-wing speaks none of this. We have no desire for anyone to leave, rather we want to see a transformation of the SPUSA into what it should be, a working class socialist party with a primary focus on activism. We are fundamentally revolutionary democratic socialists and believe democracy is of utmost importance, but so too is sound politics and tactics.


Why not just start a new group and put your energies into that...rather than the inevitable "infighting" with people who do not now nor ever will desire a revolution?
We hold no desire to form a new group, nor any desire to merge with anyone else. The SPUSA is a good name and it was founded on sound politics and tactics that have been distorted, deluded and basically long rejected by a "right-wing" shift over many decades, especially after the 1912 split from IWW, the 1919 CP split and of course the death of Eugene V. Debs.

What is disgusting is how the "right-wing" likes to claim the legacy of Debs while completely rejecting his politics. Personally, I most enjoy countering these fools with direct quotes by Debs that not only show they do not represent Debs legacy, but that we are very much justified in using the name, Debs Tendency.

As a side, we are generally Marxist, nothing more or less.

[redstar2000]

Skeptic that I am, I have to admit that you articulate your position very effectively. If the Debs tendency is "up to your level" generally, then you may indeed have a real shot at winning in 2005.

I confess an admiration for Debs myself. Did he not once say: "I would not lead you into the promised land even if I could; because if I did, the next sonofa***** to come along would lead you right back out again."

Also noted: Debs' SPUSA was the only member of the 2nd International--aside from Lenin's Bolsheviks--to correctly oppose World War I as an imperialist war from the very beginning.

But be careful. If I'm not mistaken, the entire Michigan organization has been expelled before for "ultra-leftism" (in 1919). :lol:

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[SonofRage]

That's one of my favorite Debs quotes. It's from a speech he gave on Industrial Unionism. Here is the excerpt:


Originally posted by "Eugene Debs"

Too long have the workers of the world waited for some Moses to lead them out of bondage. He has not come; he never will come. I would not lead you out if I could; for if you could be led out, you could be led back again. (Applause.) I would have you make up your minds that there is nothing that you cannot do for yourselves. You do not need the capitalist. He could not exist an instant without you. You would just begin to live without him. (Laughter and prolonged applause.) You do everything and he has everything; and some of you imagine that if it were not for him you would have no work. As a matter of fact, he does not employ you at all; you employ him to take from you what you produce, and he faithfully sticks to his task. If you can stand it, he can: and if you don't change this relation, I am sure he won't. You make the automobile, he rides in it. If it were not for you, he would walk; and if it were not for him, you would ride.

The full text is available here for those who are interested:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/debs/works.../industrial.htm (http://www.marxists.org/archive/debs/works/1905/industrial.htm)