There's a reason why Kautsky insisted that the SPD have a workers-only membership policy, and consistent with that stance he sold his newspaper to the party. With all the usual euphemism about "organic links to the working class" referring to either "workerist" cults (Barnes) or usually-yellow trade unions, and given what I've written about private-sector collective bargaining as an albatross, I think the SPUSA would do well to have a policy restricting membership to workers "by hand or by brain" (to quote UK Labour's old Clause 4).
Some of our most reformist members are workers, while not a few of the revolutionaries come from the intelligentsia.
Perhaps I should reintroduce my definition of "worker" here: Those performing manual, clerical, or professional work that produces surplus value / directly or indirectly sustains workers' aggregate consumption bundle / contributes to the development of society's labour power and capabilities (in short, the modern proletariat or proper working class) As opposed to Those performing non-proletarian work that is non-self-employed work in opposite to that described above (butlers, housemaids, even factory workers in the arms industry) Or Those outside the formal wage labour system but doing underground work (slum work, rank-and-file gangsterism, and other lumpenproletarian or modern Proletarii work for the Roman precedent). Do those "intellectuals" have subordinate research staff? I'm not sure if Kautsky, while continuing to be the editor, had subordinate research staff.
Some of these folks are college students.
