Communist Caucus will support the BDSWG’s amendment (Amendment B) if it comes up for a vote, and want to use this occasion to affirm our collective commitment to a popular internationalism, a class-struggle anti-imperialism, and an anti-Zionism within both the DSA and the other working class organizations of which we are a part. For our caucus, anti-Zionism is a foundational matter of internationalism: both because the struggle in Palestine has deep symbolic resonances with fights for dignity and liberation the worldover, and because the international infrastructure of imperial power dispossesses, exploits, and dominates even the working class of this country. The fight for universal emancipation is necessarily a struggle for Palestinian liberation.

But we do not support the amendment uncritically. We are concerned that this debate has played out in such a way as to confuse core political issues, weaken our political work, and risk the coalitions in which our movement is pursuing concrete and actionable measures to roll back Zionist power in the United States.  

What is primarily at stake is not whether or not DSA as a whole is a liberal Zionists organization—the vast majority of members are anti-zionists and we are not going anywhere. What is at stake is the political strategy of the organization, which is caught between a dominant tendency toward ‘right-wing’ electoral opportunism and a subordinate tendency of ‘left-wing’ position taking, often divorced from concrete political work and heavily invested in internecine line-struggle and contests for formal leadership. It is clear to us that the former tendency is primarily–though far from exclusively–responsible for this seemingly intractable conflict over the BDS Working Group. Choosing to prize the fantasy of access to elected officials in government over the internal culture of our activist organization is a serious mistake with possibly lasting consequences: our active members are all we have. To the degree that this debate touches on DSA’s relationship to elected officials who also maintain a relationship to liberal Zionist groups, it does so from within this strategic matrix.

While we support stronger lines around Palestinian liberation in our organization, we think that framing the debate primarily—almost often exclusively—around the behavior of elected officials is strategically wrongheaded. Our conjunctural context matters: Palestinian liberation has not yet become a mass political issue in most parts of the country, and there are too few instances of concrete organizing projects aiming to change that. That we have primarily had a debate on the terrain of messaging, intra-organizational moves, and frequently paper thin relationships to federal level representatives is a symptom of the broader context of disorganization that our organizing needs to change rather than reinforce.

We are disappointed that these debates about ‘punishment’ and ‘discipline’ have eclipsed the central political questions of strategy. Unfortunately,  our movement has not yet broached important strategic questions. We’ve traded serious reflection and communicating unity around ongoing campaigns such as ‘Not on Our Dime’ in New York, No Appetite for Apartheid in Connecticut, or BDS efforts in our unions in favor of intra-organizational cloak and dagger maneuvers. It is not clear to us how anti-zionism or the organization benefits from the framework of debate that we are currently pursuing. Moreover, no one invested in consolidating an anti-imperialist pole of politics in this country should be suggesting that the outcome of votes at this convention would call into question our commitment to Palestinian liberation. 

People are understandably and rightfully hurt by the ways that they’ve been treated over the last few years. Suspicion and mistrust between certain bodies and tendencies in the organization has proliferated, and such a mistrust means any position is said to reflect the other side’s animosity. This is not a fruitful environment for advancing anti-imperialist work. For the sake of our work and our internal culture, the debate must shift gears.

In the context of massive sea changes in grassroots Palestinian politics in both the diaspora and the occupied territories, changes that may recalibrate the watchwords and strategic loci of our solidarity in the coming years, we urge members of the organization to reaffirm our commitment to Palestinian liberation and anti-imperialism—commitments that will not ultimately be secured on the convention floor, or in statements of support and solidarity, but in the ongoing organizing work of building the power necessary to dislodge Zionist institutions in this country. 

2. ON THE AGENDA CHANGE

Communist Caucus will support the cross-caucus agenda amendment proposal when it comes for a vote during the opening of DSA’s Convention. We believe there are critical questions facing DSA not addressed by the original agenda. The Convention, our highest democratic body, should take up and resolve these political questions  as we chart a course for the next two years.

The proposed amendment would add three resolutions to the agenda: A Fighting Campaign for Reproductive Rights and Trans Liberation; the electoral amendment Towards a Party Like-Structure; and the original resolution Make DSA an Anti-Zionist Organization in Principle and Praxis. 

Our caucus doesn’t necessarily endorse each of these proposals as currently written, but they represent important and immediate issues for DSA that deserve discussion. We view them as addressing a strategy for fighting back the anti-trans attacks in our communities that goes beyond the terrain of electoral and legislative organizing;  accountability for DSA-endorsed elected officials; and a practical definition for our commitment to anti-Zionism and BDS.

To make space in the agenda for these additional proposals, the amendment would move three proposals to the consent agenda: the Housing Justice Commission consensus proposal, a renewal of the Activist Conference between Conventions, and the proposal for an organizational mascot. It would also remove the Anti-Zionist amendment to NPC Recommendation 8, which would be duplicative if this agenda change passes.

The Convention is DSA’s highest body, and this straightforward agenda change ensures that our gathering of delegates will earnestly consider some of the pressing issues facing our organization. DSA is healthier when our deliberation includes controversial but pressing proposals in addition to popular ones. We encourage delegates to vote in favor of this agenda amendment and to give these questions a fair hearing.