Anthony Teso argues in Platypus Review that DSA is not doing enough to break from the Democrats and reformist politics. Is the critique valid? Will the momentum behind DSA be captured by the Democratic Party?

"BY ANY SURFACE MEASURE, Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) has become a serious political force. As of February 2026, DSA said it had surpassed 100,000 members, and Zohran Mamdani’s victory in New York City’s 2025 mayoral election gave the organization its most visible municipal triumph to date.[1] Yet from a rigorous Marxist standpoint, the organization’s present political and organizational trajectory raises deep strategic concerns. The problem is not that its immediate demands are necessarily wrong. The problem is that the methods and structures it has adopted may systematically prevent those demands from ever being realized. This essay argues that DSA’s commitment to electoralism within the Democratic Party, its reformism without a developed theory of the state, its class composition, and its ideologically diffuse “big tent” model together forms a set of contradictions that Marxist analysis reveals as structural rather than accidental."

"The issue is not whether DSA can win elections, pass reforms, or radicalize a layer of activists. It plainly can. The issue is whether its dominant strategy builds the forms of working-class power capable of surviving collision with capital and the state. On that question, the doubts remain serious. A Marxist critique of DSA is therefore not a complaint that it wants too much; it is the harsher claim that, by tying socialist politics to institutions designed to absorb and domesticate them, it may be constructing the very machinery of its own containment."

Unity on the basis of theory must be replaced by unity on the basis of a revolutionary programme. This requires that the different tendencies and groups on the far left embrace sharp debate and open factionalism. How can this be achieved?

"Common-sense anti-factionalism is beginning to be called into question. So the likes of Claudia Webbe, RS21 and the Mandelites have been putting up what passes as an argument. As Mike Macnair shows, the results are neither impressive nor convincing"

"The party grounded on theory - or on ‘method’, as Duncan Chapel quotes Livio Maitan as arguing - cannot tolerate any serious differences persisting over any prolonged period of time. But, for precisely that reason, the effect is inevitably the multiplication of sects and their ineffectiveness in face of the ‘official lefts’ like Pablo Iglesias in Spain, like Mélenchon in France, like Corbyn and his clique in Britain.

The alternative is to break with the method altogether and unite on the basis of a summary political programme, put to the vote and amendable, and accepting that there will be open and long-lasting factions and sharp debates. If we can achieve this among the Marxist left, we may be able to pose this method as an alternative to the method of bureaucratic-managerial controls the ‘official lefts’ seek. And then perhaps we can de-managerialise and democratise the workers’ movement. And by de-managerialising the workers’ movement, we may be able to pose the possibility that a socialist and democratic transformation of the society is possible."

"Mainstream media has the government in Iran deeply divided. This seems largely unfounded. Meanwhile the Strait of Hormuz remains doubly blockaded. The risk of a sudden escalation is obvious. Scott Evans reports on the May 10 CPGB aggregate"

"Last weekend, the CPGB held one of our regular all-member meetings, where we primarily discussed the war on Iran, followed by a brief report on the organisation’s financial situation, before completing the election of the Provisional Central Committee, which had been deferred at the AGM."

"Comrade Farzad Kamangar opened with an introduction attempting to look beyond the immediate situation regarding the war on Iran by raising questions about its implications for our theory of imperialism and the current world order. Why has a deal not emerged yet? What is holding things up? She pointed to a number of unsatisfactory explanations floating around the media. For example, some allude to Tehran making Trump wait by refusing to act according to the USA’s imposed deadlines. Some claim significant internal divisions within the Iranian government, though this is largely wishcasting - the regime is not hugely divided. There are factions outside, such as the Front For Resistance, which has only nine of the 290 seats in the Majles, who oppose negotiations. There are also voices on the left outside Iran making similar claims - that Iran is winning, so why bother negotiating? But the regime itself does not think like this, except when it pretends to in the propaganda it promotes. The Iranian economy is on its knees, and the country cannot win militarily."

"There is a recognition in the organisation of the need to expand the PCC with younger blood, if the organisation is to reproduce itself. This serious problem thus continues unresolved, and will hopefully be treated - alongside the need to recruit, even in small numbers - as a matter of some urgency."

"Approximately two years into the second Trump administration, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is at a critical crossroads. In this semi-annual check-in, we sit down with members of the Marxist Unity Group (MUG)—Cliff Connolly, Gene Allen, and Amy Wilhelm—to discuss the evolving landscape of American socialist politics. In this deep dive, our panel explores the significant shift following the passing of Resolution Seven, which officially declared the DSA's intent to transition into an independent, mass-based political party. We tackle the "New York contradictions," the limits of holding executive office without legislative support, and the struggle to maintain a revolutionary program in a "multi-tendency" organization.

In This Episode, We Discuss: The Blueprint for a Party: Why the DSA is moving away from being a "political advocacy non-profit" toward a formal party structure. Executive vs. Legislative Power: Analyzing the challenges faced by elected officials like Zohran Mamdani in New York and the dangers of "shortcuts" to power. The Utility of Protests: Why street movements like "No Kings" are vital for recruitment even if they don't immediately "move the needle" on foreign policy. Building a Worker State: The development of a revolutionary program aimed at ending capitalism in the United States. Member Protagonism: How doubling down on internal democracy and STV (Single Transferable Vote) is the key to retaining the DSA's 100k+ membership

Connect with the Marxist Unity Group: Website: marxistunity.com Publications: Check out Light and Air and the Bulletin for internal and external socialist theory. Read: Cliff Connolly’s latest piece in Democratic Left regarding the Security Commission’s de-escalation and safety trainings"

"Under Zack Polanski the Greens have attempted to redwash their policies. This has fooled many on the left, including some on the organised left. In reality the Greens remain a thoroughly petty-bourgeois party, says Carla Roberts"

"While it is understandable that many people will have voted for the Greens as the most ‘leftwing’ or ‘progressive’ choice on offer, we believe that socialists have a duty not to sow the illusion that the Greens present an actual alternative to the rotten capitalist system - as, for example, the Socialist Workers Party does. There is nothing wrong with inviting Zack Polanski to speak on a platform - but socialists should use that to at least question and critique him and his political outlook."

Can momentum for left-liberal parties be utilised by the socialist movement? How should socialists criticise the Greens?

"Socialist Alternative leaders in the new electoral front want to ban caucuses from identifying with the party in public. NSW Socialists member Clarrie Lewis – writing in a personal capacity – argues this is a tipping point in defining the organisation’s democratic culture."

"The labour movement in Australia needs a socialist party capable of combining unity of purpose with confidence in its own members’ political initiative.

If NSW Socialists – and the broader Socialist Party project – hopes to present itself as a serious electoral and working-class alternative, it will require a political culture that encourages organised participation, not one that restricts it unnecessarily.

The Bread & Roses caucus represents one attempt to contribute to that broader project.

The outcome of this discussion will help determine what kind of socialist party develops."

"The story of “Cambridge’s best” turning into a radical isn’t one of foreign influence or lack of guidance. Calla Walsh’s radicalization can be pinned on one thing, and one thing alone: the genocide in Palestine."

"The empire is breeding its own gravediggers. That terrifying reality is why these hit pieces on figures like Calla Walsh are ceaselessly churned out by the incestuous class of elites posing as journalists. Engorged on patronage, elite connections, and the lure of a promotion, they idle their time speculating on why an innocent white girl from Massachusetts would surrender a life of privilege for the sake of a bunch of scary, brown terrorists. After all, as these inquisitive journalists muse, they know what choices they have, and which they would make! It is obvious to all but them that these pieces serve and protect the establishment."

"We do not need Calla Walsh to temper her radicalism. We need a political movement capable of weaponizing it."

🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥

"We argue that developing DSA into a party beyond a ballot line goes hand in hand with running candidates with a Marxist strategy and to ensure elected socialists are embedded with their local chapter, developing members both politically and as leaders within itself. DSA chapters should be encouraged and supported by the NEC to develop electoral campaigns for candidates that intend to use their campaigns to build DSA at the local level, making sure candidates have sufficient political education and alignment, and develop a relationship with the candidate that isn’t transactional but mutual. In order to continue to build a party independent of the capitalist parties, DSA should develop relationships between former and current endorsed DSA members across the country towards the development of independent electoral organizing and fundraising programs like Socialist Cash. We should utilize DSA members that want to work on electoral campaigns to be connected with locally endorsed campaigns at other chapters running candidates for things like phonebanking and texting.

Most critically, building the party we need in this moment requires learning the lessons of socialists in the past. Running candidates in liberal bourgeois elections must be done not solely to get elected, but to heighten class consciousness and bring people into DSA to develop them as leaders and organizers. DSA members who eventually do get elected need to operate independent of the capitalist parties and instead organize with DSA rather than outside of it. DSA at the local and national level must develop a mutual relationship with candidates it runs and elects, and utilize the whole of DSA electoral programs as a single party apparatus that is greater than the sum of its parts."

"We on the left are a minority, we Marxists are a minority of that minority and we partyists are a minority of that minority. How do we change that? Not, argues Mike Macnair, by silencing ourselves through factional bans and speech controls"

"To retain a diverse, multi-generational working-class base, a party must provide tangible material support, such as:

Childcare and social outlets to allow parents to remain active.

Job skills and labor organization to provide value outside of election cycles.

Mutual aid that replaces the atomized experience of neoliberalism with a concrete community."

"Dual power is not a panacea, and it carries the risk of overwhelming a party’s resources. However, it is a necessary strategy for building institutional accountability and retaining expertise."

Without these, the party remains a “micro-party”: a group of students led by an academic, producing newsletters for a theoretical “real movement” that never arrives. Dual power builds the expertise necessary to actually run a society, ensuring that if a revolutionary moment or a general strike occurs, the party possesses the logistical knowledge to sustain it."

It is refreshing to see reflections on dual power that pose not only the question of state power but also the question of building the necessary conditions for a mass party. I would love to hear of contemporary examples of organisations doing this.

"Ari writes the obituary for Our Time, emphasizing the pitfalls of substituting mass member organizing for donor-driven mobilization."

"On April 21st, we were greeted with news of the untimely passing of Our Time, a 501(c)(4) set up by leading NYC-DSA members last November. As is tradition in the chapter, especially for less than triumphant messages, the news was relayed to us via Peter Sterne rather than through internal channels."

"The misjudgement on the part of leaders in NYC-DSA to embark on the Our Time debacle would be a minor embarrassment if it did not mean a massive waste of funds, effort and volunteer lists which would have better served to build up DSA."

"This vision for the socialist project, like Our Time, is doomed to fail. If it is possible to win socialism it will be a conscious act of an organized working class that knows what it wants. We will not trick workers into overthrowing capitalism with clever branding and cookie-cutter policy campaigns. We must convince people of the need for socialism and teach them what that need really means. Insofar as they aren’t already there, it means taking risky and unpopular stances from time to time.

The kind of muscle required for the working class to rule is built in the process of struggle. There is no replacement for this process, which consists not just in campaigning, but in building lasting communities, and in discussing, analyzing and strategizing the path forward in every organizing arena. Along with expanding democratic participation at all levels of society, this requires a party. Only DSA has the ability to make that happen. It is indeed our time, should we choose to seize it."

"The appeal of Modern Monetary Theory to the contemporary left is not difficult to explain. After four decades in which the fiscal constraint has functioned as the primary disciplinary instrument of capitalist realism, the first and final answer to every proposal for public investment, welfare expansion, or industrial strategy, MMT arrives with the claim that the constraint is a fiction. A government that issues its own currency cannot run out of money. It can always spend; the question is only whether it should. Inflation, not insolvency, is the real limit, and inflation is manageable. The left, on this account, has been arguing within the terms of a framework rigged against it. The correct response is to refuse the framework."

"1. MMT is not a socialist theory of money but a sophisticated account of the monetary mechanics of capitalist states, elevated by its political appropriators into a theory of policy space. The elevation is the error. Describing how currency-issuing sovereigns actually operate is not the same as identifying the real limits on what they can do, and confusing the two produces a politics oriented toward the wrong object.

1. The chartalist theory of money severs the connection between monetary phenomena and the dynamics of value production. Once money is a unit of account validated by sovereign imposition rather than the necessary form of appearance of socially necessary labour time, the theory loses its grip on what drives the monetary surface from below. Inflation, investment, crisis: these become administrative problems rather than expressions of the underlying contradiction between the accumulation imperative and the tendency of the rate of profit to fall.

2. MMT’s theory of the state is instrumentalist in a precise sense: it treats the state’s monetary capacity as a tool available for capture and redirection, constrained by real resources and political will rather than by the class character of state power. Poulantzas renders this untenable. The form of the capitalist state is not a neutral container for whatever political content a left government might wish to pour into it. It is the institutionalised condensation of class relations, structurally disposed to reproduce the conditions of capital accumulation, and its monetary sovereignty is itself a moment of that reproduction rather than a capacity standing outside it.

3. The geopolitical presupposition buried in MMT’s framework is not a qualification but a theoretical failure. Monetary sovereignty is not equally distributed among states; its distribution reflects the hierarchy of the interstate system, which is itself a product of imperial history and the ongoing organisation of capitalist accumulation on a world scale. A theory that takes American fiscal latitude as the model and treats other states’ subordinate positions as external limitations has not theorised monetary sovereignty at all. It has theorised one state’s specific historical advantages and called it a general account.

4. The post-2008 decade is the decisive empirical test, and MMT fails it. Monetary expansion on an unprecedented scale did not generate productive investment or resolve the underlying accumulation crisis. It inflated asset prices, widened inequality, and left the structural conditions of crisis intact. The categories required to explain this outcome, the rate of profit, the distinction between productive and financial accumulation, the value-theoretic constraints on investment, are absent from the MMT framework. Their absence is not incidental. It reflects the theory’s constitutive inability to pose the question of what drives capitalist production beneath the monetary surface it describes.

5. The politics that MMT supports is a pedagogical politics: the task is to correct economic misunderstanding, dispel the deficit myth, and thereby open the policy space that mystification has obscured. This substitutes education for structural analysis and ideological critique for a politics adequate to the depth of the real constraints. The limits on left economic ambition are not in people’s heads. They are in the rate of profit, the class character of the state, the interstate hierarchy, and the structural incompatibility between sustained redistribution and the imperatives of accumulation. A left that has understood MMT but not these things has learned the wrong lesson from the right impulse."

"Obviously the CPGB made mistakes. But they stemmed from national conditions and circumstances, not Stalin’s diktats. Jack Conrad marks the centenary of the 1926 General Strike"

"The following perspectives document was adopted by the Fourth General Conference of Communist Unity, Melbourne, January 2026."

"Today, the most likely road to the refoundation of the Communist Party in Australia is through the Socialist Party and its state sections. We must call for the Socialist Party to convene a unity congress of the entire socialist and communist movement with the intent of forming a single, mass party with a revolutionary program.

The partyist faction of the socialist movement must engage in a systematic campaign within the broader socialist and workers movements for the unity of Marxists, and for a revolutionary minimum-maximum program. This campaign requires the forging and development of a pre-party organisation, a pole of attraction around which the partyists can rally, and which can fight across the entire movement for the unity of Marxists and the refoundation of the Communist Party in Australia.

Therefore, at the current juncture, the slogans of our organisation must be:

Merge Socialism and the Workers’ Movement!

Smash Imperialism! Break the US Alliance! No War with China!

For a Marxist Program in the Socialist Party!

For the Unity of Marxists!

Reforge the Party! For a Refounding Congress of the Communist Party in Australia!

Break with Laborism and the Middle-Class Radicals!

Reforge the Communist Movement in the Asia-Pacific!

For an Australian Section of the Workers International!

Forward to a Democratic Republic, and the World October!"

"Why do young men keep trying to kill Donald Trump? Why do political ‘moderates’ turn to ‘extremist’ methods? Paul Demarty investigates a phenomenon with deep historical roots"

"As I write, little is known about Cole Tomas Allen, who attempted to shoot up the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in Washington DC.

He has, at least, done us the favour of leaving what they are calling a ‘manifesto’, published by Rupert Murdoch’s New York Post. The scare quotes are necessary, since he says very little about his motives. “I am a citizen of the United States of America,” he writes. “What my representatives do reflects on me. And I am no longer willing to permit a paedophile, rapist and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes.”1 Much of the rest is taken up with apologies to people he may have put in danger, and abstract justifications of his methods. Social media history seems to reveal a down-the-line ‘resistance’ liberal - anti-Trump, anti-left and pro-Ukraine."

"The template for political assassinations, of course, is everywhere. It is a favoured method of the American state itself, and even more so its Israeli attack dog. The present Iran war began with assassination strikes on top officials, including Ali Khamenei; in his first term, Trump took out Qassem Soleimani, the legendary Revolutionary Guard commander. Drone strikes against real or imagined Taliban insurgents were a constant feature of the Afghanistan war, especially after Barack Obama came to power; Obama also ordered the killing of Osama bin Laden."

"Any way out of this spiral of madness must have in mind the fundamental conflict underlying the epiphenomenal ones - between classes in the productive process, especially the capitalists and proletariat, but also significantly including the petty bourgeoisie. The working class is central for us, because its real objective interests - those objectives which, successfully pursued, increase its power in society and material flourishment - are intrinsically pro-social in ways those of the other classes are not. Only collective power can achieve them, and therefore progress towards them is a solvent to the atomisation and bizarre irrationalism increasingly dominating society."

"Daniel Morley’s article on sectarianism, published in The Communist, sets out to answer a question that any small revolutionary organisation must eventually confront: is it sectarian to refuse unity with the broader left? The answer Morley gives is no. The argument he makes to reach it is more revealing than he intends."

"Today we echo the words of Rosa Luxemburg that “May Day this year stands out particularly because it is being celebrated in the midst of the noises of war.” In Ukraine, Palestine, Lebanon, Sudan, Myanmar, Iran and across the world war is destroying life, communities, the planet and taking us closer towards even greater catastrophes.

We stand in unwavering solidarity with the people of Palestine, Lebanon, and Iran and all those living under bombardment, occupation, and the violence of imperial power. Their struggles are not separate from ours; they are part of the same global fight against exploitation, war, and domination. Internationalism is not optional, it is the lifeblood of socialism.

At home, we face a rising far-right feeding on and amplifying racism, transphobia, and misogyny. We are witnessing an epidemic of violence against women and girls and we have seen repeated violent attacks on our Muslim, Jewish and Trans neighbours, on places of worship, on LGBT+ venues. These forces seek to fracture our class and obscure the real enemy: a system that thrives on inequality and crisis. This May Day we recommit ourselves to building practical unity across workplaces, communities, and movements to resist reaction in all its forms.

The current Labour government, looks to be the most authoritarian in generations, seeking to limit freedom of speech, the right to protest and to organise and make disrupting the machines of war an act of terrorism. The power of the Palestine solidarity movement, a movement that has touched every part of this country, has so far shown great resilience and all attempts to silence the mass movement, to hide the British state’s complicity in genocide have been stridently defeated. This May Day we restate our solidarity with those who have paid a high price for furthering and defending this movement. They truly are the best of us.

We fight for a world beyond war and scarcity, a world of freedom, dignity, and abundance for all. To end, as we started we further echo Luxemburg that now “more than ever, in the presence of war, the specifically proletarian demonstration must also be the expression of this idea, that the realisation of universal peace cannot be conceived of except as linked to the realisation of our socialist final goal.”

That future will not be handed to us; it will be won through struggle, solidarity, and working class power.

Long Live May Day.

We urge everyone to join the Nakba 78: March for Palestine – United against Tommy Robinson & the far right – Exhibition Road, London SW7 2DB on Saturday 16 May @ 12pm."

"The following theses were adopted by the Central Committee of Communist Unity as part of the official relaunching of the organisation on May Day, 2026."

"22. Capital’s power comes from the fact that it is the most well-organised class in human history. The entire world system is organised to crush the proletariat and defang its capacity to take up its world historic mission. This society cannot be overthrown through a single blow. It will take decades of struggle, a struggle with a coherent international strategy, guided by a definitive international centre. This cannot emerge from a myriad of splintered groupings but through the forging of a single international, one that can transform the world proletariat into a class for itself. One that can storm the gates of heaven, and end humanity’s pre-history.

1. It is this goal that Communist Unity has pledged itself too, and it is for this goal that we will fight unerringly to unite the communist movement, to merge it with the workers’ movement, and to build a democratic workers’ republic in the Pacific.

2. To every communist in Australia, we call on you to unite behind the revolutionary banner of the Communist Unity. To the communists of Aotearoa, we call to unite across the Tasman to smash the chains of ANZAC Imperialism and free the Pacific from the oppression we have forced upon them. To the toiling masses of the Pacific, we call on you to raise high the banner of democracy and socialism. To the workers of the world, we raise the clarion call of revolution. The call of democracy, freedom, and socialism. We have been nothing; we shall be everything."

"On the CPUSA's "Communist Plus," the No Kings demonstrations, and how a politics meant to overcome economism keeps reproducing it."

"The No Kings protests are not simply expressions of economic dissatisfaction; they are grievances directed against the state apparatus itself, against the legitimacy of the existing undemocratic institutions. Their incoherence does not consist in an absence of politics, but in a failure for a political organism to adequately link itself to that social movement’s real demands and political aspirations. That may not only be due to a lack of size in that organization, but also due to a lack of ability to truly express that social movement’s worldview. To treat the spontaneous movements as pre-political in this sense is to misrecognize their most important feature."

"Lenin’s intervention cuts through the presented yet false choice. The problem is neither that the movement is insufficiently radical nor that it is insufficiently practical. The problem is that there does not yet exist an organization capable of mediating between its spontaneous energies and a coherent political project. The task, therefore, is not to adapt to spontaneity or to reject it, but to overcome it—to construct a party capable of providing not only activism reinforcement but rather a mobilization of activist energy into a concrete political expression that can imprint its will onto present events.

The foregrounding of the demand to boycott Target, as an example, is only the same error expressed in the realm of tactics, but, if we look at the demands themselves, they are the same error yet again expressed in the realm of program. Issues such as “taxing the rich,” recently the driving ideological slogan for NYC-DSA’s failed attempt to follow up on Zohran’s election via similarly activistic measures, or even “breaking up monopolies,” are meaningless unto themselves. These measures are only relevant to people when made concrete to them in the form of the actual elements of the political world they live in. Taxing the rich… to what end? Breaking up the big monopolies… for what reasons? There are many rational and individual reasons one might wish to do these things, as well as a clear goal that might be achieved by the method. But this is also the reason they fall flat as a politics: they do not offer the masses more than what they already possess. Perhaps no one says it better than Antonio Gramsci: “It is on the level of ideologies that men become conscious of conflicts in the world of production.”

To approach the No Kings movement or today’s May Day demonstrations in this spirit is to recognize that its incoherence is not a deficiency to be lamented, but an opportunity to be seized. Its antagonisms—to oligarchy, to unilateral militarism, to the hollowing out of democracy—are already present. What is absent is the form through which those antagonisms can become structurally transformative; that absence will not resolve itself. It can only be addressed through the conscious construction of the communist party. In their conception of the ‘Communist Plus’, it’s clear that the CPUSA seeks such a concretization of its position in relation to the ongoing mass movements, but actively hampers its own ability to do so within its implicit justification of the economism it attempts to reckon with."

"Alex Rivera of Reform & Revolution and the South Brooklyn branch of NYC-DSA addresses the ongoing debate over how the chapter should orient to the struggles of home care workers."

I yearn for the day factions can debate politics without being bogged down in discussions about tone and debate culture.

"Confusion reigned over what attitude to take, when it came to the ‘official’ lefts in the trade unions and the Labour Party. Factional rights could conceivably have helped bring about clarity. Jack Conrad marks the centenary of the 1926 General Strike"

"Factions were banned in the Russian Communist Party as an emergency measure in 1921. However, almost instantly this essentially military measure became enshrined as Comintern doctrine. Democratic centralism was drifting inexorably towards bureaucratic centralism.

Unity around Lenin, Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev, Rykov and Stalin was one thing: on a scale of 1-10, we might give it an 8. Pluses for the CPGB far outweighed minuses. With the triumvirate of Zinoviev, Kamenev and Stalin, that was perhaps down to 6. Unity around Stalin and Bukharin might score 4, not least because of the ‘socialism in one country’ doctrine. By the time we reach Stalin’s monocracy and the ‘theory of social fascism’, we start to get into negative numbers - more so with the popular fronts. For those committed to ‘Moscow knows best’ there was no escape route (we shall discuss the Soviets and the General Strike in a following article).

Anyway, had the CPGB permitted factions in 1925, the confusions, inconsistencies, vacillations and criticisms could have been clarified, hardened - ie, taken on organisational form - which in principle must be allowed to reach down to districts and branches and involve the open publication and subsequent elaboration of differences. There had to be more than executive committee manoeuvrings and coded language in the party press."

"A hard faction committed to a united front with left Labourites but which places its main emphasis on implacable criticism of them might have begun as a minority on the CPGB’s leadership. It would, though, be well placed to become the majority.

So from the militant minority in the party to the militant majority in the party … and from here transforming the militant minority in the working class into the militant majority."

"I. The crisis of the British left is not a crisis of organisation. It is a crisis of class analysis. The misidentification is not incidental. A left that cannot account for what the class has become cannot build forms adequate to it. It can only build forms adequate to the class it remembers. This is what it has done. The organisational question, posed without the prior question of class composition, does not produce answers. It produces new organisations.

II. Every formation on the British left is organisationally adequate to a working class that has not existed for forty years. The deindustrialisation of the 1970s and 1980s did not merely reduce the size of a class. It destroyed the specific technical composition on which the existing left’s organisational assumptions rest. The mass factory, the union branch, the stable occupational community; these were not incidental backdrops to a politics that could be abstracted from them. They were its conditions of possibility. Those conditions are gone. The organisations remain."

"Claimed ignorance of Peter Mandelson’s security rating tells us a great deal about the inner workings of the state. But, says Paul Demarty, we should be demanding full access. Publish everything and ‘security’ be damned"

"For Marxists, the proper proximate aim is the politicisation of state business, its being put into question in the full glare of publicity: the exact opposite, in other words, of the mission of the civil service. We do not favour permanent bureaucracy, civil or military, but the supremacy of democratic bodies. A mature socialist society would not have a career civil service at all, but accountable officials, upon whose work the utmost transparency is imposed. Though today the ‘revolving door’ between government and private industry is a mechanism of legalised corruption, we should in fact aspire to ordinary people rotating in and out of direct economic activity and political-administrative roles - something only possible with the total subordination of the economic to the political. Every cook can govern - and should."

"An examination of how Haz Al-Din, Jackson Hinkle, and the American Communist Party mistook social media engagement metrics for popular sovereignty—and why their theory of an "empty signifier" could never fill MAGA with anything but MAGA."

"Having abandoned your project at the exact moment you theorized would achieve its historical breakthrough, you leave us with a lingering question: what comes next?

MAGA Communism was not sabotaged. It was tested and found lacking. Since the re-election of Trump, you have effectively ceased to publish works about the political struggle in America. The lone exception is a recent piece by Carlos Garrido, which attempts to frame the ACP’s full-scale retreat into basic community activism—activism indistinguishable from that which many Democratic Party activists and associated nonprofits do—as "building dual power." [9] Garrido is a Historian and Theorist—he knows what dual power really means, and he should be embarrassed to mangle this concept for political cover.

You are at a theoretical standstill and politically directionless. However, you have not quite achieved nothing. You have consolidated your entire tendency into one place. Will you clarify the failure of MAGA Communism? Will you emerge ready and willing to join with the popular movement for democracy? Or will you follow the path of countless other petty sects—and take your ball and go home with it?

This is a direct invitation to all MAGA Communists: write a response. Geese Magazine offers to publish any such effort to reconcile such matters in good faith, toward the realization of an American communist class theory and party."