Socialist Education Reader

Dear Comrade:

Young Democratic Socialists members and activists requested a simple way to keep up the socialist intellectual tradition and to better understand our organization and its beliefs. In response, YDS put together “The Basics of YDS: Who We Are and What We Think” reader for you and your chapter.

We want this reader to foster dialogue and learning in YDS gatherings. While there are no absolute correct answers to many of the questions asked in this reader, there is a facilitator’s guide with the suggested answers based on majority opinions found in YDS.

We encourage you to assign a facilitator to ask the questions. If there is serious disagreement or unresolved issues, you can then check out the accompanying facilitator answers to help you. The guide should be a helpful last resort. We believe in you to take the challenge to work through the questions first, then check against the answers.

You may determine how the conversation is organized. Do take into account that some know more than others and this is a chance to learn from each other. There are no stupid questions, but there are condescending answers. Be aware of how you treat each other. Facilitators should pay attention to maximizing participation of everyone alongside minimizing domination by individuals (especially the facilitator themselves).

Each piece has been broken up as to take no more than 15 minutes to read. You can send it out before hand or read it right before the discussion. Optimal times for weekly discussions are during or after YDS meetings or on another day in a friendly social place. These meetings should be educational and fun – so we’d discourage using places that people may associate solely with academia or that are too noisy for people to focus.

While some of the pieces are timeless, others require updating and some the questions acknowledge of anachronism of the statements.

We strongly suggest, even if you send the readings out before hand, that you have copies ready so people can review it before the discussion.

Learn and enjoy.

In solidarity,

Young Democratic Socialists Month Day, 2009

Toward a Socialist Theory of Racism

This piece, by Democratic Socialists of America honorary chair, Dr. Cornel West, strives to address the inadequacies of socialist theory with regards to antiracism. Basically, he claims the traditional Marxist espousal of macrocosmic paradigms leads to the overlooking of the personal everyday experiences that are shaped by racism, especially the experiences of people of color. He then sketches the framework for a more advanced socialist understanding of racism. West acknowledges the struggles to end racism and to create a democratic socialist society are not identical but claims that genuine antiracism is more likely to be achieved under democratic socialism.

1. What are the four basic conceptions of racism in the Marxist tradition? How are they similar and how are they different?

The first conception of racism was put forward mainly by Eugene Debs. In this view, racism is essentially a “divide-and-conquer strategy” employed by the ruling class to pit laborers of different races against each other.

The Second conception acknowledges that racism exists within the workplace. For example, people of color encounter discrimination on the job and do not have wage parity with white workers.

The third conception is commonly referred to as the “Black Nation thesis.” This theory states that racism is best understood “as a result of general and specific working class exploitation and national oppression.” In other words, African Americans were or are an oppressed national minority in the Black Belt South. This theory can be applied to other “nations” such as Native Americans and Puerto Ricans.

The fourth traditional conception of racism claims that racism is not only the result of working class exploitation but xenophobic attitudes as well.

The theme that links these four conceptions together is that their analysis is based on a macrostructural paradigm. In other words, they focus on societies and their structures as a whole as opposed to the experiences of the individual.

2. Why does Cornel West believe that traditional Marxist thought fails to adequately address the issue of racism? What does it leave out?

West believes these conceptions are inadequate because they fail to take into account the psychological and cultural spheres. The old conceptions are overly focused on class struggle.

Not that class struggle is completely unrelated to racism, there is just more to it. West also criticizes the traditional Marxist belief that racism was born with capitalism since there is abundant evidence that proves otherwise.

3. How does racism function in the psychological and cultural spheres?

People are a shaped by their cultural surroundings. If their cultural surroundings are embedded with racism, they are likely, subconsciously or consciously, to adopt racist attitudes if they are white or self-denigrating attitudes if they are of color.

4. In what ways is racism detrimental to the development of a Democratic Socialist society?

Racism hinders equality, which is fundamental to a Democratic Socialist society. Racism also establishes a hierarchy of types, with the Aryan type at the top. This hierarchy is demonstrated in the cultural artifacts that permeate our society, such as Barbie Dolls, Playboy Magazine etc. Individuals who don’t fit that type are instilled with feelings of inadequacy thus impeding the process of developing the unique self. Individual development is another tenet of a Democratic Socialist society. Moreover, as stated in the traditional Marxist theories of Eugene Debs, race has been employed by the ruling class to divide-and-conquer the labor movement. A strong, united labor movement is essential to the creation and preservation of a democratic socialist society (see “Why Unions Matter” in this reader).

5. In what ways could a YDS chapter put up “cultural barriers” that might hinder the participation of people of color?

Many YDS chapters are predominantly white, which leads to the catch 22 situation described by West where socialist groups genuinely interested in antiracist work are unable to attract people of color because of the groups’ predominantly white membership. According to West, the best way to break this cycle is for YDS groups to demonstrate genuine interest in antiracist struggles by partaking in coalition work. These interactions will lead to the formation of cross racial social bonds and help alleviate paralyzing white guilt. Furthermore, these interactions will demonstrate to the participants that the antiracist and socialist struggles are intertwined.

6. Why is this piece entitled “Toward a Socialist Theory of Racism?”

Understanding racism is an ongoing process. In this piece West is engaging in the process by refining and adding to prior socialist theories of racism. It is especially important that we view understanding racism as an active process because racism is embedded in our cultural fabric and therefore requires serious introspection and a genealogical interrogation of our most basic assumptions and practices.

Toward a Socialist Theory of Racism

What are the four basic conceptions of racism in the Marxist tradition? How are they similar and how are they different?
Why does Cornel West believe that traditional Marxist thought fails to adequately address the issue of racism? What does it leave out?
How does racism function in the psychological and cultural spheres?
In what ways is racism detrimental to the development of a Democratic Socialist Society
In what ways could a YDS chapter put up “cultural barriers” that might hinder the participation of people of color?
Why is this piece entitled “Toward a Socialist Theory of Racism?”

What is Democratic Socialism: 10 Questions and Answers

This pamphlet answers many questions that socialists face about their beliefs. While the piece is a bit dated (i.e. fall of the Soviet Union), these answers are solid responses to basic inquiries. Here are some suggested questions to start a conversation about how your group reacted to the ideas presented in this piece.

You can do a go around for each.

1) What is the most common question you hear about socialism that was answered in this pamphlet?

2) What myths did you feel were disproved by this piece?

3) What questions do you still have about democratic socialism?

4) The last question is directed at young people. Why do you feel youth should build a democratic socialist organization?

Group Questions:

1) What does it mean that YDS is a multi-issue organization?

YDS ascribes to this saying: single-issue activism will always be inadequate to fundamentally change society because we are not “single-issue” human beings. Also, many people are affected by different intersecting forms of oppression such as racism, sexism, heterosexism/homophobia, classism, etc. Hence, YDS rejects “class-reductionism” or the belief that the creation of a classless society will eliminate other forms oppression.

As an organization, both nationally and locally we organize around a multitude of issues. In every campaign we try to tie in the need to eliminate capitalism and provide a socialist perspective. This means walking on two legs: providing public forums that highlight our socialist politics and beliefs, and practice the activism that makes change possible.

Being a multi-issue organization means that we organize around different campaigns, ideas, and beliefs. This is both a national and local perspective; YDS chapters are always free to conduct the campaigns they want. They are constitutionally expected, however, to join in two nationally coordinated activities every year (e.g. Student Labor Week of Action, a march in Washington, Iraq Moratorium, or another event endorsed by YDS).

2) What are the strengths of multi-issue organizing? What are the draw backs?

Strengths of multi-issue organizing: Allowing flexibility in programming, making it easier to fight different forms of oppression head on, allowing for diversity in national and local activities, promotes coalition building, reflects our beliefs.

Weaknesses: Taken to an extreme, it can create the “everything to everyone” programs. People over-commit on programming and end up doing nothing well (if anything at all). Multi-issue organizing does not lend automatically to a clear vision of prioritizing. It takes good organizing and democratic decisions to hold people and ideas accountable and effective.

3) Certain socialist groups prioritize their own agenda over working in coalitions. Some go as far as to create front groups (associations that are run by an organization with the guise of being independent). The Young Democratic Socialists, however, favor openly working as ourselves and in coalitions.

What do you think are the strengths and weaknesses of our strategy?

Strengths of openness: People respect honesty. Allies know that YDS is proud of who we are. Being open about our socialist politics makes it easier to talk about our beliefs. Only if socialist politics, activists, and organizations are visible can we take on anti-socialist rhetoric.

Strengths of coalition building: No progressive organization or group can make mass change on its own. We need to create social movements to enact social change. Coalitions play a critical role in social movements. When YDS and DSA are members of coalitions, we can push our agenda or help move our issues and ideas. This does not mean we want (or think it is best) to control coalitions. What is does mean is if we are in a labor coalition, we want folks to think about ending corporate power not just improve working conditions. If we are in a racial justice coalition, we want folks to talk about how capitalism reinforces racism, not just how races interact.

Weaknesses in openness: Anti-socialism still has a strong resonance in America. Some people are still very unwilling to work openly with socialists. Sometimes we lose opportunity to work with people who are limited by anti-socialism.

Weakness in coalitions: In any coalition, people have to make compromises. The strength of your organization correlates to what kind of sacrifices your group can make. Nationally, YDS is usually a minor player in coalitions. On a local level, however, we can play a bigger role.

In coalitions, certain partners try to take unfair amount of credit. It’s important to make sure that not only our voices are heard, but that we receive fair credit for our work.

4) Young Democratic Socialists is a radical organization that believes in a fundamental transformation of society through the expansion of democracy and the replacement of capitalism with socialism. We do believe that the road to socialism is long, therefore winning reforms now is important to empowering people to believe change is possible.

How do you see YDS on your campus interacting between groups and activists that may believe that reforming capitalism is enough and/or those who believe that reforms are counterproductive to the “revolution?”

This is a personal question. What we can say is that it’s important to for YDS to be the “left-wing of the possible” not “right-wing of the impossible.” It’s more valuable for social justice to push progressives to the left than drag self-righteous and disconnected radicals to the mainstream. Our time on this earth and campus is finite: use it wisely.

5) There are many groups out there? Why choose YDS and build a socialist organization?

Although capitalism will be with us for a long time, reforms we win now—raising the minimum wage, securing a national health plan, and demanding passage of right-tostrike legislation—can bring us closer to socialism. Many democratic socialists actively work in the single-issue organizations that advocate for those reforms. We are visible in the reproductive freedom movement, the fight for student aid, gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered organizations, anti-racist groups, and the labor movement.

It is precisely our socialist vision that informs and inspires our day-to-day activism for social justice. As socialists we bring a sense of the interdependence of all struggles for justice. No single-issue organization can truly challenge the capitalist system or adequately secure its particular demands. In fact, unless we are all collectively working to win a world without oppression, each fight for reforms will be disconnected, maybe even self-defeating. – from “What is Democratic Socialism”

In short: we need to build a YDS because the radical youth movement needs an organization that does political education, connects different forms of oppression, not only calls for the abolition of capitalism but provides a workable alternative, and keeps the idea socialism alive. As long as socialism is a dirty word, any real reform will be deemed “socialistic” and red-baited out of existence.

Group Questions:

1) What does it mean that YDS is a multi-issue organization?

2) What are the strengths of multi-issue organizing? What are the draw backs?

What do you think are the strengths and weaknesses of this strategy?

5) There are many groups out there? Why choose YDS and build a socialist organization?

Group Questions:

1) What are the differences between “push” and “pull” factors?

PUSH: Reasons that people leave a country. Examples are poor economy, loss of family members, political turmoil, religious persecution, etc.

PULL: Reasons that draw people to a country. Examples are job opportunities, better education, family members, political and social stability, etc.

2) What impact does domestic labor law have on where international corporations choose to locate their factories? Why does this matter for immigration?

In a globalized economy, national labor laws and the degree to which they are enforced have a deep impact on whether corporations decide to do business in a country. The rise of neoliberal policies and the flexibility of capital allow businesses to easily move to different nations to set up shop. Countries with weak labor laws are more appealing to capital because it is easier to use and abuse workers and make more profits.

With the global economy, even well-meaning governments have less incentive to enforce labor law. In order to keep and create jobs, states allow corporations to skirt the law – or ignore it altogether.

This is relevant to immigration because the loss (or creation) of jobs is an important reason why people migrate. Job loss in the United States also matters because it, coupled with immigration, causes tensions within the working-class about job security. The left has to be vigilant to make sure these fears don’t develop into xenophobia or racism. Instead, we should try to channel this unrest into an opportunity to organize against capitalism.

3) What are the dangers of a “guest-worker program” in terms of divisions within the working class, xenophobia, racism, and diminishing standard worker rights?

A guest-worker program is one of the most divisive issues in the immigrant rights movement. Guest-worker programs exist throughout the world. They allow people to come legally for designated periods of time for employment. Arguments for guest-worker programs included that they would allow people to enter in legally and provide the opportunity for those who only need temporary work.

Guest worker programs, however, have many downsides for worker rights. Today, undocumented workers inadvertently create a tier of labor that is easily exploited by capital. Undocumented workers can not fight for their rights or expect the same level of protection from labor law as documented workers. They fear coming forward because of the risk of deportation. Their precarious condition is exploited by capital and used to divide the working-class.

Socialists constantly remind workers that the enemy is not the undocumented immigrants, it’s the capitalists who exploits labor. We are critical of populists from both major political parties and independents that pit workers against workers. We must blame capitalism (which fosters unfair conditions of migration) for working-class problems, not the immigrants who are struggling to survive and the citizens trying to preserve their livelihoods and jobs.

A guest-worker program would completely legalize this abusive system. It would create a permanent underclass of worker exempt from many types of labor law. The ability for these workers to organize unions would be questionable. It would damage the rights of all laborers.

Workers need equal protection under the law – not divisions in labor community.

4) Who should lead the immigrant rights movement and what role ought socialists play in this movement?

The role of a socialist in today’s pro-immigrant rights movement is to connect international capitalism with global migration. Too often our national dialogue revolves around pitting workers against workers. Race and ethnicity play an important role in creating these divisions as well.

Socialists must convey that the struggle for immigrant rights is a struggle for worker and civil rights, too. As long as global capitalism can ravage economies, people will migrate for a better life.

Socialists must also act as anti-racists to dispel bigoted myths and divide and conquer tactics perpetrated by capitalists.

Socialists are not supposed to be leaders of the immigrant rights movement unless they are immigrants themselves. Immigrants should lead their own struggle; it’s our job to provide solidarity!

5) YDS does not believe in open borders. We believe, however, the current system is flawed because it prevents people from migrating who are suffering from corporate globalization. How do you think a fair immigration system would look?

No right or wrong answer; group discussion.

“Why Are They Here? Immigration and the Global Economy”

Group Questions:

6) What are the differences between “push” and “pull” factors?
7) What impact does domestic labor law have on where international corporations choose to locate their factories? Why does this matter for immigration?
8) What are the dangers of a “guest-worker program” in terms of divisions within the working class, xenophobia, racism, and diminishing standard worker rights?
9) Who should lead the immigrant rights movement and what role ought socialists play in this movement? 10) YDS does not believe in open borders. We believe, however, the current system is flawed because it prevents people from migrating who are suffering from corporate globalization. How do you think a fair immigration system would look?

“Why Unions Matter” By Elaine Bernard

Group Questions:

1) Democratic socialists care not only about changing economic relationships, but society’s social and political relationships as well. Economically, unions are able to constrain management’s control over decisions that profoundly affect people’s lives. How do unions challenge the autocratic nature of workplaces in social and political ways?

Unions challenge social orthodoxy in several ways. One, they bring people together of diverse backgrounds to work for a common purpose. Often, many workplaces are segregated (intentionally and culturally) by race, gender, ethnicity, etc. Union membership joins a worker with coworkers into an organization where they can collaborate to achieve collective goals. This is why unions are so important as a multi-racial and cultural counterpart to discrimination.

Politically, unions are democratic institutions. Through being active in a union, a person learns that democracy is more than just voting once a year. It’s about participation, campaigning, and struggling to improve one’s own life. Just as importantly, joining a democratic process educates workers about not relying on other people to change conditions for them.

Unions challenge the autocratic nature of the workplace (and society) by changing social and political relationships. Without a union, your boss or management can tell you where to sit and with whom you work. You have no real reason to interact with other coworkers outside of your immediate work group. A union brings people together – a value being increasing lost in a digital world in an already individualistic society. Uniting people challenges the decision making power of employer in whether people come together or not.

2) Right-wing ideological attacks on unions are based in “free-market ideas.” Bernard stresses that markets are never free because of the imbalance of power created by economic wealth. In other words “one dollar, one vote.” How does “one dollar, one vote” differ from the democratic principle of “one person one vote?” How do unions act as a check to capital’s power?

One of the main weaknesses of “free-market ideology” is that free-markets do not exist in reality. For example, if business really wanted government out of the market then why do banks like CitiGroup and Goldman Sachs accept multibillion dollar bailouts from the federal government? Hence, it’s hypocritical for conservatives who are concerned with the “free-market” to criticize unions when many large businesses owe their existence to government intervention.

Bernard’s point about “one dollar, one vote” is that equality like in politics (one person, one vote) can not exist in the already semi-autocratic market if some have so much more wealth than others. While our electoral system is not perfect, we still have the principle of one person, one vote. Being able to give large campaign contributions increases a wealthy individual’s influence over others. But in politics, working people and the poor can still organize, do sit-ins, outnumber the rich in votes, etc. to influence elected officials. In electoral politics, voting blocs matter as much as campaign funding.

In the capitalist market place, this is not the case. Workers and management are not equals. Even if the majority of workers disagree with management’s decisions, employees can do little without a union. Unions can change this – especially if the union has heavy grassroots involvement.

Unions provide a way for workers to negotiate and speak with management as a united front. While they can not change the fundamental control management will always have over a company, they can make the boss make concessions and handle work in a different way. Unions fix the imbalance of power of creating one voice out of many people.

3) Unions have been called “schools for socialism.” Also, a historic tenant of democratic socialism is industrial democracy. A) How do unions increase democratic control in the workplace? B) How can unions be instrumental in a transition from capitalism to socialism?

One of the main principles of democratic socialism is extending democracy from the political into the economic sphere as well. When a workers become active in a democratic union, it’s one of the only opportunities they get to vote for important matters concerning their economic life. Hence, unions are schools for socialism because they empower workers to take control of their own lives through solidarity with their union brothers and sisters. If done democratically, it works to build shared control of the workplace between the employees and management.

A basic principle of industrial democracy is based on the democratic socialist view that workers should not only have a say in negotiating a union contract, but it the business decisions. This is a rejection of Communist (Marxist-Leninist) thought, which holds the state should own the means of production and should make economic decisions for the good of the workers. This is also a rejection of liberal capitalist thought that purports workers just need good contracts and should have no role in economic decisions that affect them. We believe industries should be run democratically; those who create the wealth (not just provide the capital) must have a voice, too.

Unions, therefore, do not just increase democratic control by creating a unified voice to deal with management. They create more democratic control where workers vote for a variety of positions (shop stewards, delegates, bargaining committee, etc.) amongst themselves. Unions also empower workers to protest abuse and take more ownership of their shop. For many employers, the real problem unions create is not more expenses via raises and healthcare, but lost power over their employees. Putting more power in the hands of the working-class is another example of how unions are schools for socialism.

The Democratic Socialists of America believe that unions will play an instrumental role in any transitions from capitalism to democratic socialism.

From Section 4 of “Where We Stand”:

Socialists have historically supported public ownership and control of the major economic institutions of society -- the large corporations -- in order to eliminate the injustice and inequality of a class-based society, and have depended on the organization of a working class party to gain state power to achieve such ends. In the United States, socialists joined with others on the Left to build a broad-based, anti-corporate coalition, with the unions at the center, to address the needs of the majority by opposing the excesses of private enterprise.

While any future progressive majority will need components from the broader social justice and radical movements, unions are one of the most necessary elements. Unions represent the largest and most diverse part of the Left. They also will play a central role in any radical change because they are organized directly against capital. Their organizational structure can be used to usurp management and put control of industries in the hands of workers. The future of democratic socialism hinges on a strong and rank-and-file led labor movement with heavy density in industry. By constraining corporate power unions can make moves to overtake capitalism. This will only happen, however, if socialists and radicals remain active in the labor movement and keep it moving in the right direction

4) Unions have not always been a force on the political left in the United States. Organized labor, like any institution in American society, has dealt with problems of racism, sexism, xenophobia, and even classism. Yet, Bernard reminds us unions build social solidarity and remain the most diverse institutions in civil society. How does the collectivism of unions differ from the narrow individualism promoted by capitalism?

Unions are imperfect institutions. Socialists would often point to many as failures of working-class institutions. Organized labor has been plagued by many problems. Conservative or corrupt leadership, often deaf to the anti-racist and feminist movements, share a good deal of blame for organized labor’s poor state today. Unions today, however, are under more progressive leadership. Well-meaning leadership cannot be the only source by which to increase the size of union membership.

What remains a huge impediment to union organizing is the cultural significance of individualism in our society. Bernard reminds us that many people feel both disempowered in institutions as individuals and that it’s their own responsibility to look after themselves. They do not feel any social solidarity with the coworkers as a whole. They may have bonds and friendships with those close by, but not with the whole institution. This narrow individualism promoted by capitalism helps support those who benefit from the system because people see no point in organizing collectively.

Unions force people (at least those who are active in the union) to interact with one another. At best, people begin to see “an injury to one is an injury to all,” or that workers have to be united to make the most gains. If one person can be undermined by management, then everyone is at risk. By working together, people learn that solidarity (sharing in each other’s struggles). This counters the individualism of capitalism. Destroying that cultural norm is key to building any foundation for socialism. This is because socialism (as the name suggests) is based off of social cooperation. People have to be invested in one another to believe in social unity. Unions help foster that notion among people who might normally never associate. That is why unions matter to socialists and are dangerous to conservative ideology.

5) Democratic socialists care not only about changing economic relationships, but society’s social and political relationships as well. Economically, unions are able to constrain management’s control over decisions that profoundly affect people’s lives. How do unions challenge the autocratic nature of workplaces in social and political ways?

6) Right-wing ideological attacks on unions are based in “free-market ideas.” Bernard stresses that markets are never free because of the imbalance of power created by economic wealth. In other words “one dollar, one vote.” How does “one dollar, one vote” differ from the democratic principle of “one person one vote?” How do unions act as a check to capital’s power?

7) Unions have been called “schools for socialism.” Also, a historic tenant of democratic socialism is industrial democracy. A) How do unions increase democratic control in the workplace? B) How can unions be instrumental in a transition from capitalism to socialism?

8) Unions have not always been a force on the political left in the United States. Organized labor, like any institution in American society, has dealt with problems of racism, sexism, xenophobia, and even classism. Yet, Bernard reminds us unions build social solidarity and remain the most diverse institutions in civil society. How does the collectivism of unions differ from the narrow individualism promoted by capitalism?

Stay informed on our latest news!

Previous issues

Socialist Education Reader

YDS Email Blasts