At the 8/7 Steering Committee meeting, a new set of guidelines for our Detroit Socialist newspaper was brought forward, including number five on internal debates:

5. We should strive to keep internal debates and disagreements internal. We should not make it a habit to air our proverbial dirty laundry. At the end of the day, we are all comrades and we all want to achieve socialism. There is no reason to give our enemies ammunition to use against us. Internal debates are important and are critical to the democratic process, which is why they are better suited to our chapter’s internal discussion platforms and processes.

This guideline was met with pushback from Steering Committee members Jon Mukes and Mohamd Z., as well as other chapter members in attendance. Comrade Mo suggested that such a contentious issue should be referred to a General Membership meeting, but that proposal was not taken up and it was sent back to the Newspaper Committee while the rest of the guidelines were passed. At the newspaper Zoom meeting on 8/13, it was proposed that articles labeled “internal debates” would be placed in the chapter Discord, rather than in the Detroit Socialist, so that they are not available for public consumption. Any debate article could be published in the Detroit Socialist only with a hidden link not visible on the site, or it would have to be published with an accompanying counterpoint article as part of the same post.

After yet more pushback from Mohamd Z., myself and others, around what constituted an “internal debate,” an extra newspaper meeting was scheduled for 8/20. That meeting was attended by nearly every Metro Detroit member of the Groundwork caucus, as well as members of Bread and Roses, Marxist Unity Group, the Detroit Democracy Coalition, and independent members. Newspaper meetings average about five attendees, including the editors. The Groundwork members favored the guidelines; the Bread and Roses, Marxist Unity Group, and Detroit Democracy Coalition members opposed them. At the August 30th Steering Committee meeting, the committee voted to adopt the updated internal debate guideline. It’s difficult to parse the actual guideline from the agitation for the guideline (full text here), but the most relevant portion is this:

For the purposes of this proposal, internal debate and discussion will be defined as follows: “Discussion that directly affects a strategic decision taken by the membership imminently.”… Should a member still wish to publish their work on an internal debate in The Detroit Socialist, they will have the option to either publish it on an unlisted link on The Detroit Socialist’s Medium page — meaning that only individuals with the link may access the work — or, members may publish in The Detroit Socialist, but it will be published on the same page of an article with an opposing view.

These guidelines would turn The Detroit Socialist into nothing more than a promotional brochure — a place to “celebrate our victories” but not to tackle any difficult political discussions. Taking political debate out of The Detroit Socialist, or trying to hide it away in a Detroit-only Discord server, will prevent uncaucused comrades from influencing national DSA politics, cut off our chapter from the national DSA movement, rob this chapter of its best forum for political discussion, and debilitate the political development of our membership and the wider working class.

The Detroit Socialist is the only place for uncaucused comrades in our chapter to set out their own political positions for a broader public audience. Whereas caucused members of our chapter (a very small minority) will be able to publish under their caucus letterhead, those without a caucus who want to publish something on internal Detroit politics will be relegated to a quiet cul-de-sac where no one in the broader organization, or the wider working class, will be able to read it. This will force chapter members to join a caucus if they want to have a voice in the wider national discourse and create a built-in privilege for chapter members who are already part of a caucus.

There is no “local issue” when DSA is involved. Many other chapters are likely engaging in similar debates as Metro Detroit, or they likely soon will be. Issues like: the adoption of email voting, how to rewrite bylaws, whether or not to endorse a candidate with only a tenuous connection to the chapter. It is important that every member of our chapter has an opportunity to write and be published in a paper that can be shared nationally, because as DSA members we are part of a national party, and as socialists we are part of a global movement. Decisions taken by Metro Detroit DSA will change the local and national political situation, influence the way DSA is perceived as a whole, and hopefully provide a guide for how other chapters can organize in their area. Internal debate in The Detroit Socialist is a vital stream of information for other chapters to understand the political conditions within our chapter and we have an obligation to openly share this discourse with them.

Transformation of the working class from political objects to political subjects is one of the most important tasks of DSA as the nascent party of the working class. We need to show people that when they are collectively organized, they can enact their will on the world. This political development requires that workers can articulate for themselves what our party is fighting for. The Detroit Socialist is a training ground for members of the working class to build themselves into political thinkers who can construct nuanced arguments in long-form articles. The current political and cultural situation shows a dire need for long-form writing to be defended as a necessary skill for human flourishing. With AI slop becoming a blight on everyday life, it’s our socialist duty to defend and develop the human ability to think for oneself (The Detroit Socialist expressly forbids AI-written articles). Writing is a unique and edifying form of thought, and by writing I mean setting down one’s thoughts in a long piece, not slapping a quip in a discord chat. There’s a reason Elon Musk spends all his time posting on Twitter: he’s a moron. And we will be condemning our chapter to moronhood if all we have for internal discourse is a Slack or Discord forum that’s essentially constructed the same way as a Facebook comment section.

We already had an online forum for political discussion: the Slack channel, which many members already avoid because the level of discourse was usually low, poorly constructed, and at times devolved into ad hominems. This is not necessarily the fault of the participants. The medium is simply unsuited for intellectually rigorous debate. The Discord will likely experience all of the same problems. I challenge anyone to say they gained more intellectually from reading a 100+ reply Slack thread than from reading an article. I can say as the Political Education Co-chair, we do not ask people to read forum posts before attending New Member Political Education; we ask them to read articles.

The writing in The Detroit Socialist comes from the same intellectual tradition as the pieces we do read as part of the curriculum. Marx, Lenin, Luxembourg– take your pick. They developed their thinking and the politics of the working class as a whole by debating political points in publications that were freely available to the masses. These were not writings that were hidden away for only party members to be able to view (as long as they weren’t censored by the state); they were shared and discussed by members of the working class who were not necessarily formal members of a socialist party. These writings are still read and discussed today. The great socialist theorists never feared airing their “dirty laundry,” because there’s nothing dirty about disagreement in a democratic organization. We should be proud of a robust culture of political debate and of our transparency as an organization. A pair of articles debating a political point are not a pair of dirty socks, they are red banners. It is not shameful that we debate, it is our socialist honor.

There is concern that allowing certain points of view to be expressed in The Detroit Socialist will make our chapter look bad. For example, when Anthony D. argued against endorsing Donavan McKinney, it was said of the article, “It was bad for Donavan and it was bad for us.” The article was shared by a Metro Phoenix DSA page. Critics argued that this article confused readers and made it seem as if the chapter opposed Donovan’s endorsement. I think that confusion was cleared up when we voted to endorse him. But, if that doesn’t assuage these concerns, perhaps The Detroit Socialist can do what literally every other newspaper does and put a big “OPINION” above articles that aren’t meant to reflect the views of the chapter.

If there is still concern over disagreements in this chapter making Metro-Detroit DSA look bad, I encourage the supporters of these restrictive guidelines to address disagreement the democratic way: make your case to membership and win your comrades over to your point-of-view through well-reasoned arguments.

Maybe write an article in The Detroit Socialist?

Chris W. is a law student and an uncaucused member of the Democracy Coalition.

The Detroit Socialist is Not Dirty Laundry was originally published in The Detroit Socialist on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

By Dave N. and Kathy E.

In July 2024 the city of Westland signed up for a trial run with Flock Safety that would last until August 2026. Flock’s cameras are Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR) that mark the date, time, and location where a vehicle passes.

Flock claims that its technology does not scan human faces, but its cameras are able to fingerprint cars based on minute details like rust or bumper stickers. The technology is similar to that used in facial recognition software. These services are sold to law enforcement and advertised to cities as a tool for safety (e.g. tracking stolen vehicles or resolving car accidents). In reality, police officers have used this technology to stalk ex-spouses, target women seeking abortions, and aid ICE raids.

Given privacy concerns, civil rights, and the actual safety of citizens, it was in the interest of any resident of Westland to shoot Flock down. We learned, however, through hearing from citizens at Westland city council meetings and by talking with council members, that Westland is a very pro-police city. Even with a DSA-endorsed socialist, Mike McDermott, as council president, the majority of the council were convinced by the police department’s arguments for Flock. Upon approval in 2024, ten new Flock poles were placed in the city.

In 2025 Metro Detroit DSA began organizing in western Wayne County by forming a geographic working group that became known as Socialists Organizing Western Wayne (SOWW). In the beginning, we were learning about one another, how to organize, and even what socialism meant. After six months, we had grown to over 20 members with 15–20 consistently attending meetings. Organizing around the Flock contract turned into our first real project.

The group’s main goal was to find a way to guarantee four council votes (a simple majority) against renewing the Flock contract. Elijah Nemr led the anti-Flock campaign. He was a relatively new DSA member who leveraged his technical background to facilitate meetings, organize members, research, and speak at Westland city council meetings and other civic events.

Most of the city council members are openly pro-police. Mike was able to guarantee one vote besides his own, from the only Republican, Emily Bauman. Mike’s ability to gather two more votes was hampered by a law prohibiting four or more council members to meet in private. SOWW’s Flock sub-group saw that public pressure was the main way to gather two more votes.

Mike proposed two approaches to achieve this pressure, and we executed both: the inside and the outside. The inside approach was to have SOWW members attend city council meetings and speak publicly to council members. We also spoke to the other residents attending the meetings to create public anger and gain more support.

The outside approach was for SOWW members to canvass in neighborhoods and distribute petitions to pressure Westland not to renew the contract. While canvassing we learned that most people didn’t understand the difference between Flock cameras and CCTV cameras. CCTV cameras require a warrant or a subpoena to access the footage, while Flock cameras upload information to an unaccountable database that law enforcement can access at any moment. Once we showed examples of police who misused the technology and explained how Flock cameras didn’t require warrants, residents immediately became disturbed and supported our efforts.

One of the strongest tactics we used was to leverage a wide array of talking points when addressing city council. We got help on our petitions from our sibling group in Ferndale, the Ferndale Area Organizing Committee (FAOC), which had successfully pressured Ferndale not to renew its Flock contract. FAOC gave us many resources, literature, and debate strategies that had been effective there.

We began forming speeches personal to each Westland resident about why they opposed Flock. For example, we have several mothers in our group and one of them, Liz, decided to highlight the predatory threats Flock cameras posed to children. At a council meeting, she stated:

As a parent, I’m deeply concerned about the ever-increasing levels of surveillance our children are being raised to believe is normal. There are many stories emerging of Flock’s inability to keep the sensitive information they collect safe, further raising concerns about this kind of surveillance technology and how it impacts our youth.

Liz’s story, along with framing that focused on the safety concern that Flock cameras pose, immediately garnered public support. This video of one public comment session shows Liz and others who spoke about why they oppose surveillance.

We allied with the president of the Westland Democratic Club to put more pressure and speak out against Flock to the council. We consulted with independent journalists and collaborated with other organizations such as The People’s Assembly. Peoples’ Assembly and DeFlock (a national open-source project that maps Flock cameras) sent speakers to our council meetings. The first meeting of July showed the fruits of these efforts — instead of SOWW members being the main public commenters on Flock, multiple constituents who had not spoken before on the topic rose to voice their concerns about the cameras.

That meeting was the boiling point — within a few days, councilwoman Melissa Sampey posted to Facebook the council’s decision not to renew the contract and to let it expire. Sampey’s post revealed the force behind this decision: “Community Engagement Matters.”

Mike McDermott is our only SIO on city council, and SOWW demonstrated that a DSA geographic group can multiply the efforts of our SIOs. We built an issue campaign to create public pressure on elected officials, through a unified group that devoted time to forming relationships with constituents. Attending Westland Democratic Club meetings and Westland cultural events allowed us to create allies, and those allies came out and spoke against Flock.

SOWW also cultivated organizing skills, and new members gained memorable organizing experience that they can take beyond the Flock campaign. SOWW trained new organizers to speak publicly, compile literature, and canvas.

Growing as an organizer also requires personal development. One of our new members, Kate, said she was “inherently a socially anxious person, but working with such a supportive and motivated group really helped me feel comfortable speaking up.” People are motivated to try things they struggle with when it’s for a greater cause and for others; that’s a core tenet of organizing. The support and camaraderie in SOWW made a space to develop future organizers.

And there’s a need for those organizers: our work on ending mass surveillance is far from finished. Inkster, Livonia, Garden City, and Romulus all have Flock contracts. Our group needs to carry this momentum to one of these cities, but we need to decide soon.

SOWW was created to organize locally alongside our Socialists in Office (SIOs) — Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, State Representative Dylan Wegela, and Westland City Council President Mike McDermott — where their districts overlap in Westland, Romulus, Inkster, and Garden City.

If you are interested in the work we do, please contact Jill Rossiter, Elijah Nemr (Elijah S), or Kathy Elrick on Slack or fill out our interest form.

David N. has been an active member of DSA since July 2025. He is not a part of any caucus. In SOWW he has contributed to power mapping Westland, town hall organizing, and mutual aid.

Kathy E. has been an active member of the chapter since 2023 and is co-chair of SOWW. She started hosting DSA coffee socials in western Wayne County in 2024. She is uncaucused and active in starting a local DSA, community garden collaboration in Norwayne, and Mutual Aid 101 and 102 events.

Flock Off: How Westland DSA Members Pushed Flock Cameras Out of Their City was originally published in The Detroit Socialist on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

By Kevin Szczesny

To get clean Porta-johns in our workplace, construction workers at the Marriott site in downtown Detroit marched on the boss. Workers from at least seven unions of the building trades were represented, with zero union staffers or officers present. Many union halls were in support of the action, but the work and the application of leverage were entirely rank-and-file driven.

As an active member of IBEW Local 58 (Electrical Workers), I often hear from sympathetic organizers who “can’t imagine how hard it must be” organizing in a largely conservative and obstinate workforce. Our campaign is a contribution to the death of that narrative, and an answer to the universal follow-up question about how these shop floor conversations go in detail.

Day One on the job, as I met my 50 or so fellow electricians, I was immediately overwhelmed with warnings that the bathrooms were going to be unsanitary. I knew before the end of my shift that the issue was widely felt, and every electrician already had the same idea: we wanted the cleaning schedule changed from twice a week to three times a week. I had a long conversation with the steward about what efforts were already in progress to correct the issue.

The first instinct of a construction worker is to “drag” (quit), drive over to the union hall, and pick up a new job. As expected, there was a steady trickle of drags and conditions on site had not improved. OSHA had been called and walked the job soon after my arrival, only to say that the number of bathrooms was up to their standard.

The electrical contractor had been notified, but because the bathrooms were for all of the trades to use, our bosses didn’t feel it was their responsibility to pay for additional cleaning. The local IBEW contract only gestures vaguely to “sanitary facilities,” and protects us explicitly should we leave site to find a “sanitary” facility. This clause was exercised regularly, but no one could say for sure whether the boss was even aware we were leaving.

Over time, smaller issues would pop up and get resolved quickly with small actions. Sweeping compound to control toxic dust, unprecedented changes in break time, trades doing the work of other trades out of convenience: these were things that were easily managed by the steward with one or two voices in support. I got involved with a couple pushes and so was asked to fill in for the steward while he was out for a few days.

When I walked the job to make sure everyone had my number, more than half the conversations touched on the bathrooms. I then introduced myself to the stewards from the other trades, who all encountered the same comments from their members. The idea was formed to take the issue above our bosses and straight to the general contractor (who hires out each trade and is responsible for the job site at large).

A letter was written titled “Unacceptable Bathroom Conditions,” which opened politely and assumed the boss was ignorant of the problem. The letter referenced the impact on our work and a widespread feeling that we were not being treated with respect by the contractor. We suggested that the person responsible for scheduling use our bathrooms for a week, to better assess the need for more cleanings and a wash station. We gave one week for a response.

Every worker who was presented with the letter signed immediately, but reactions were mixed. Most people felt like they would just laugh at our demand, but were interested in the idea of swarming the bosses’ trailer at lunch and forcing them to read it in front of us.We fielded many suggestions, from delivering the letter and going home to tipping over Porta-johns on the way to the boss, and we told our coworkers that if our response date came and went without change, we would be coming back around “to have a different conversation.” This demand had to be made collectively and clearly first so that any future action would be naturally tied to the lack of clean facilities, and we had to start our escalation low enough that further demonstrations would be felt.

Many of our one-on-one talks were focused on assuring the workers that we would circle back for an escalation if the letter went ignored. “This is only the beginning”, “they probably will ignore this or lie, but we need to show that we’re all on the same page first,” “dragging only leaves behind the people who can’t quit with shitty conditions,” etc. We warned of possible counter-strategies from the boss and stressed the importance of demonstrating solidarity, especially across the trades, above all else. We also left out the officers at the hall and our reps on purpose, though we did inform them. We had a lot of conversations about the power in the hands of the rank-and-file. “Every member is a steward” has become sort of a slogan for us.

In the end we had 105 signatures and roughly 35 folks across four trades who gave up their lunch break to deliver the letter. The contractor read that letter, was brought outside to look at us, and immediately conceded to our terms.

Maybe they didn’t know how bad the bathrooms were, maybe they didn’t know how widely and deeply felt the issue was on site, or maybe they figured it was fine to ignore. All we know for sure is, when a seemingly small fraction of us came together with the backing of three times as many signatures, it didn’t matter if we had the hall behind us. We are the union, the working people who don’t walk away from a job which doesn’t satisfy us, and our demands have been met.

Kevin is a trade unionist and has been a member of the IBEW for two years and DSA member for five.

Organizing from the Bottom: IBEW’s Fight for Sanitary Facilities was originally published in The Detroit Socialist on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

By AJ

When I left full-time employment in 2019 I had never heard of war tax resistance. I knew about conscientious objection to participating in war, but as someone who did not want to join the military (and whom the military would not want) it felt as though there was no concrete way for me to voice my opposition to war, the military as an institution, and the outrageous amount of money they receive from our federal tax payments. It turned out that one of the side effects of my semi-retirement and greatly reduced income was that I became a war tax resister by default.

A brief history of war tax resistance

War tax resistance is often associated with the Quakers. Participation by individual Friends and entire Quaker meetings in war tax resistance as part of their peace testimony has ebbed and flowed over the centuries. One of the strongest periods of Quaker war tax resistance was during the American Revolutionary War. In 1776, the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting came to consensus that “a tax levied for the purchasing of drums, colors, or for other warlike uses, cannot be paid consistently with our Christian testimony.”

Quaker active war tax resistance rose again following World War II, as part of the Peacemakers movement, which formed in response to the horror and devastation caused by the dropping of nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and continued throughout the Korean, Vietnam and Cold wars. The Peacemakers bought together Quakers, Catholic Workers, Methodists, Presbyterians, agnostics, and atheists to publicly share practical information on war tax resistance. This work led to real results during the Vietnam War when popular war tax resistance reached its peak with artists, university professors, and thousands of comrades who refused to pay federal income taxes and the federal telephone excise tax, which was earmarked specifically for war expenses.

The momentum for war tax resistance among U.S. Quakers carried through the end of the Vietnam War and into the Cold War. In the early 1980s some Quaker Yearly Meetings assisted their employees in resisting war taxes by not withholding income tax from their paychecks, some instructed all their members to resist war taxes, and some set up programs to help their war tax resisting members deal with any legal consequences.

During the 1990s and the early 2000s participation in war tax resistance waned significantly. Much of the focus of those who oppose war taxes moved towards the electoral goal of establishing a Religious Freedom Peace Tax Fund Act through legislation in the U.S. Congress, with the goal of offering conscientious war objectors a place to pay their income taxes where the money would not be used for military purposes. The Peace Tax Fund Act has been introduced four times (1992, 1995, 2017 and 2021). The current iteration of the bill, H.R. 4529, introduced in July 2021, is still languishing in the House Committee on Ways and Means.

Interest in war tax resistance recently spiked again in response to the U.S. kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, ongoing U.S. military support for the Israeli genocide in Palestine, and the killings of small boat crews in the Pacific by U.S. forces even before the beginning of the U.S./Israel war on Iran and Lebanon. In January 2026, more than 110,000 people visited the NWTCC’s website and conversations on the subject on Reddit receive thousands of views and hundreds of comments.

A brief outline of the costs of war today

As participation in war tax resistance has dropped precipitously, the percentage of our federal income taxes spent directly and indirectly on war, weapons, and the military has increased dramatically. The 2026 Department of Defense budget is $2.08 trillion. This accounts for nearly half of government discretionary spending and is more than the defense spending of the next nine countries combined. In addition, since October 2023, the Biden and Trump administrations and Congress have sent $21.7 billion in military aid to Israel with which it prosecutes its ongoing genocides in Palestine and Lebanon. The U.S. government’s commitment to funding war shows no signs of abating. The War Resisters League’s recently published “Where your income tax money is going” pie chart estimates that 58% of the 2027 federal budget will be spent on past or present military.

War Tax Resistance: Legal Quagmire or Civil Initiative

In a recent article on war tax resistance, CNBC briefly talks about the increased interest in the practice before getting into full scaremongering mode by listing all the various financial penalties and legal actions that the IRS could take against non-filers, frivolous filers, and fraudsters. In reporting an 11% rise in federal criminal tax fraud cases it fails to note that war tax resistance is not fraud, tax evasion, or failure to file a return.

Over on Reddit conversations on the topic veer between discussion on the logistics of war tax resistance, speculation on the potential legal and financial quagmires that could result, some confusion — or maybe willful misunderstanding — between war tax resistance and general opposition to all taxation, and the moral imperative to do something tangible in response to all the warmongerings.

While it is easy to become mired in the quantitative questions of IRS codes and financial repercussions, successful war tax resistance is built on research, contemplation of qualitative questions about our relationship to humanity and the world we want to live in and community support. Unlike other forms of activism which are often focused on influencing other people’s actions like marches, canvassing, tabling at events, and other outward facing activities, war tax resistance is a quiet, deeply personal type of activism. It grows from a conversation with your conscience.

When I am my best self my conversations with my conscience are informed by my understanding of Civil Initiative rather than my impulse to hide as deeply as I can from the government. Civil Initiative requires that citizens intervene to ameliorate harm caused by their governments, that we build human rights into our way of life, and make protecting them an accepted social standard. For as long as our government continues to wage war on Iranians, Palestinians, Lebanese, Cubans, Venezuelans, immigrants, and indeed almost everyone in the world, war tax resistance is a Civil Initiative that should be the accepted norm. The unquestioning paying of federal taxes for the war machine should become the fringe, outlier position.

How to be a war tax resister

It is important to be clear that war tax resistance is NOT blanket opposition to taxation. Most war tax resisters only withhold a percentage of their federal taxes equal to the percentage of the federal budget spends on the military. Often, they give the money they would have paid in war taxes to local peace, anti-militarization, or other community organizations. Sometimes, they save the money in case the IRS comes knocking on their door or on the door of a fellow resister. War tax resisters also pay their state, local, and real estate taxes.

The National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee offers resources to everyone who wants to become a resister. Resistance can look as simple as mailing a letter of protest to the IRS when you submit your tax return (note that you cannot email the IRS so letters must be sent via regular mail). It can become as complex as refusing to pay some or all of your federal taxes and informing the IRS directly of your decision and why you made it.

We are all in the position to question our relationship to war taxes. While many of us may not be in a position to accept the risks of more complex forms of war tax resistance, many more of us are than currently do. Each form of resistance has its own risks and rewards, and everyone should think carefully about their capacity for both before engaging in war tax resistance.

Over the past couple of years my relationship with war tax resistance has become more intentional.

There have been ebbs and flows in my capacity to commit to the practice. When I see the cost of gas, groceries, and general living rising, I feel the pressure to take more hours at my job to increase my income. That same pressure arises when I realize I am getting closer to retirement age, when I begin to fear that one day I may no longer be able to work even part-time, and won’t have enough savings for retirement. The pressure to earn more is also subconscious, ingrained through more than 50 years of living in capitalism.

Then I read the news and I am again appalled and ashamed by the actions of my government. My commitment to Civil Initiative comes flooding back. I commit again to keeping my income to a level where I will not be contributing financially to the horror my government is inflicting on the world.

For more information:

National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee https://nwtrcc.org/

Peace Tax Return https://nwtrcc.org/PDFs/PeaceTaxReturn.pdf

War Resisters League https://www.warresisters.org/war-tax-resistance/

War Industry Resisters Network https://wirn.worldbeyondwar.org/

War Tax Resistance: Legal Quagmire or Civil Initiative was originally published in The Detroit Socialist on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

By Luis Feliz Leon and Jane Slaughter

United Auto Workers members are voting by mail ballot for their top officers, for the second time in the union’s 91 years. Ballots went out August 21 and are due back by October 5.

The contest will decide whether President Shawn Fain, who became famous for leading 2023’s Stand-Up Strike against the Big 3 automakers, will be able to continue the union’s about-face from its previous employer-friendly ways.

William Hughes, a member of UAW Local 249 at Ford Kansas City, said the election is about maintaining the union’s momentum in winning gains for the membership.

“During my 27 years in the union, I’ve never seen anything even close to the amount of gains that we’ve been getting in all these contracts — not just in the Big 3,” said Hughes. “I built seats before I came to Ford, and under no circumstances that I can recall would the parts sector ever strike these plants and try to really push for bigger contracts.”

Fain was first elected in 2023 on a platform of “no corruption, no tiers, no concessions.” He is running on a record of successful contract fights at the Big 3 and elsewhere, and a pledge to keep organizing parts suppliers and nonunion auto plants in the South.

His opponents have downplayed the gains made in the last three years, asserting that any president could have won them. Instead, they have focused on strife at union headquarters and unflattering reports issued by the federal monitor, Neil Barofsky, who was appointed in 2021 to oversee the union after massive corruption was uncovered and a dozen officers went to jail.

NEW SMILES

Fain’s strongest base of support is in locals where members have experienced the new willingness to fight management.

JoAnna McClenathan is a senior designer at General Dynamics Electric Boat in Connecticut and a steering committee member of the reform network UAW Member Action, which is backing Fain. She credits Fain for opening up bargaining and creating a new Department of Bargaining Strategies that helped her local score a “record contract” with 30 percent raises.

Fain set up that department to research employers and involve members in escalating campaigns. “During our contract fight last year, he came down and met with us, and he was a big reason we had the resources we did,” she said.

“We had essentially been bargaining behind closed doors since the 1980s. For so long, a lot of us in our local felt powerless: this is what they’ve given us, so we’re just going to vote for this. Last year, the rank and file was able to use our voice and become more engaged, and that’s due to the new strategy.”

Similarly at American Axle, an auto parts supplier in Three Rivers, Michigan, members are happy with the results of a two-week strike in June. They will be making $30 an hour by 2030, up from a top pay of $22.

“We’re starting to see a change in the parking lot,” said bargaining committee member Jon Krause. “People are now able to buy cars that can get them to work. Some are looking to buy their first homes. We’ve seen a few people smiling that we haven’t seen smile in years.”

Krause predicts Three Rivers members will vote for Fain’s United UAW slate.

Legal services worker Brian Sullivan, a member of UAW Local 2325, said workers in his industry have set their sights on bargaining sector-wide. They were inspired by Fain’s industry-wide strategy with the automakers, he said: “We want a UAW leadership that’s going to back us as we take similarly big swings.”

FIVE CHALLENGERS

Fain’s five challengers spent most of the union’s presidential debate July 30 attacking him. They are Rich Boyer, vice president for the Stellantis Department; Tricia Geiger, an international servicing rep; Stellantis worker Brian Keller; Mack Truck worker Will Lehman; and Greg Mooney, recording secretary from Local 2147.

Of the challengers, Boyer and Keller have the most name recognition. Keller won 14 percent of the vote in 2022 and spearheaded failed efforts to recall Fain last year. He finished fourth out of five candidates in his local union’s (Local 1248) delegate election this spring.

Boyer and Fain ran on the same slate in the last election, as did Vice President Mike Booth and Secretary-Treasurer Margaret Mock, also now opposing Fain’s slate on their own slate, Integrity. Their differences have been the subject of long reports by the monitor.

Fain accused Boyer of failing to enforce the contract at Stellantis and of responsibility for a new attendance program that members hated, as well as trying to secure union jobs for family members — standard practice in the old UAW.

Boyer has consistently maintained that it’s the union’s job to enforce company attendance policies. In a video message to members about the 2023 contract ratification, he bemoaned the overuse of medical leave (FMLA) by people who “don’t want to do the work” and implied that plants would close if the union didn’t help fix attendance.

The union’s executive board voted to relieve Boyer and Mock (who had also tried to put a family member on the payroll) of some of their assignments. Fain and other board members said Mock was using her office to block projects and retaliate against staffers she disliked.

The monitor agreed with Boyer and Mock that their removal was “retaliation,” and they were reinstated. Earlier, the monitor had called Fain to lobby against the executive board’s December 2023 call for a ceasefire in Gaza. Fain angrily refused to back down, and he charges the monitor with having it in for him ever since. Barofsky accuses Fain of seeking favors for his fiancee and her sister.

“The truth when it comes to Boyer is that I didn’t want him running the Stellantis Department because he wasn’t doing a good job for our members,” Fain told The Nation magazine. “I wouldn’t let him hire family members into UAW positions, and I wouldn’t stand by while he bargained concessions with Stellantis and failed to enforce our contract.”

Boyer’s supporters say he is outspoken and a fighter. His main pledges in his campaign statement in the UAW magazine were to lower union dues to two hours a month, reduce the staff and salaries at union headquarters, and hire only from within the membership. Delegates at this summer’s convention voted to keep dues at 2.5 hours to build up the strike fund and provide resources for aggressive organizing and bargaining campaigns.

The dueling ugly accusations have fed member cynicism, the prevailing attitude before 2023. Fain’s opponents are largely focused on the “infighting” among the leadership. “I don’t like the way [Fain] treats people,” said Jennifer Miller, recording secretary at Local 1700 near Detroit, who backs Boyer. “I don’t like the arrogance of him. I don’t think he deserves credit for everything he says he’s done.”

In the last election, Fain, who was running against then-President Ray Curry, benefited from a powerful anti-incumbent sentiment, stemming from years of frustration with concessions, plant closures, and corruption at the union’s top levels. This time, he won’t have that advantage.

JJ Barbosa, a millwright at Stellantis’s Jeep plant in Toledo, has backed Keller, a prolific Facebook presence, in all three of his runs. He sees Keller as tenacious and consistent, and he is “disgusted that there are still tiers.” He says all the incumbents are guilty of “cronyism and nepotism.”

MOMENTUM

In interviews with members across the union, it was common to hear that they were impressed that Fain showed up at locals to talk with members and supported their contract fights.

Carlos Gonzalez-Rios, a 27-year worker at the General Motors engine plant in Buffalo, New York, said he met Fain twice. He rattled off a few of the gains he’s seen, including a pay increase of 25 percent. “We got COLA back,” he said. “We don’t have endless temporary workers for five or six years.”

He also cited the union’s win at Volkswagen in Tennessee, where workers voted to join the UAW and won a first contract earlier this year — becoming the first unionized foreign-owned auto assembly plant in the South.

What’s at stake in the election, Gonzalez-Rios argues, is whether this momentum will continue. “I’d rather go with the guy that’s been proven and has the leadership skills that brought us what we have right now,” he said. “And we still have issues that we are working towards — we want health care for all at GM after retirement.”

“I’ve held people accountable and that pisses some people off, I understand that,” said Fain during the presidential debate. “But running on a platform of ‘the monitor said this or that,’ that’s not going to deliver for the membership.”

CHANGING ALLIANCES

The union’s 400,000 active members and nearly 600,000 retirees will be electing all 14 positions on the union’s International Executive Board.

Fain’s United UAW slate, which is contesting 13 of the seats, includes candidates who ran against him in the last election as members of the “Administration Caucus” that had run the union since the 1940s and overseen multiple waves of concessions in recent decades. Some have been won over by the impressive contract results that Fain’s bold approach has achieved; others may be inclined to go with the one in power.

In early August, three ex-UAW presidents, Ray Curry, Rory Gamble, and Ron Gettelfinger, attempted to resurrect the old ruling caucus by releasing a letter backing Geiger, Mock, and other Fain opponents. Fain shot back, reminding members of Gettelfinger’s “sellout deal” in 2007 that cut wages in half for new-hires and created the two-tier system.

Four regional directors on Fain’s slate are running unopposed: Mark DePaoli in Region 1A, Mike Miller in Region 6, Tim Smith in Region 8, and Brandon Mancilla in Region 9A. The other five director seats and three vice president seats are all contested, as is the secretary-treasurer slot.

Candidates need a majority to avoid a run-off, and votes will be tabulated October 6.

Luis Feliz Leon is a staff writer and organizer with Labor Notes.

Jane Slaughter is a former editor of Labor Notes and co-author of Secrets of a Successful Organizer.

This article originally appeared in Labor Notes.

UAW Members Voting for International Officers was originally published in The Detroit Socialist on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

By Will Froberg

Michael Albert takes you into a parallel universe in which the fictional Revolutionary Participatory Society (RPS) mass movement has grasped the levers of power in the United States, and is now in the process of implementing their participatory vision. Through a series of interviews with RPS organizers, Albert explains the means by which the movement eventually prevailed.

Their vision includes an alternative to capitalism called a participatory economy, which the author invented alongside Robin Hahnel back in the 1960’s, and which he has spent his life advocating for. One of the RPS organizers reflects on the direction the movement settled on at their first convention. She describes a participatory economy as being “a system of decentralized, cooperative negotiation between workers’ and consumers’ councils,” in which “resources, workplaces, and the very infrastructure of production were not owned by a few but shared by all.” It is a democratic economy with remuneration for need and effort/sacrifice. Another key component is balanced jobs, which are described in the following passage:

“But each worker should be in a position to participate — really participate. That meant restructuring work itself. No more corporate hierarchies where a small class gets the empowering, decision-heavy tasks, and everyone else is left with rote obedience. We called the alternative ‘balanced job complexes.’”

I find Albert’s vision difficult to dismiss: it’s comprehensive, rigorous, and strikes a great balance between various values that I believe are highly desirable. One of these values is self-management: that people should have a say in decisions in proportion to the degree they are affected.

The RPS program extends well beyond economics. Albert makes very clear how important it is to avoid putting one sphere of relations above any other. He does this by having the organizers also discuss vision and strategy for political, community, and kinship relations — as well as environmental and international relations.

This book is very different from Albert’s other works because it does not provide a detailed technical breakdown of either his vision, or even critiques of current systems. Although the interview format can be slightly dry at times, it allows Albert to do what he does best: let his originality flow while communicating ideas simply and, in this case more than in his previous works, evocatively.

The book’s coverage is incredibly wide. It covers all the essential facets of what a movement like this would entail: the many tactics and strategies RPS used to win, psychological tendencies they had to contend with, and so much more. Ultimately this is a very human exploration of a movement’s possibilities, struggles, failures, and successes.

A surprising bonus was that it is a smooth and easy read. Its ideas often leave you nodding along and asking yourself: “Why didn’t I think of that?” Some of the insights feel like common sense, but only after you encounter them, like when one of the RPS organizers says:

“We understood a basic principle that is often lost in political projects: that a less-than-perfect agreement achieved with genuine consensus and mutual trust, real participation, can be far superior to a technically ‘better’ proposal imposed through division or maneuvering.”

This book often made me wonder why leftist movements have not already been working like RPS. Perhaps it’s time to!

Will Froberg is a DSA member and former editor of The Detroit Socialist. He writes about post-capitalist vision and strategy and works as a data architect for the City of Detroit.

Review: The Wind Cries Freedom: An Oral History of the Next American Revolution was originally published in The Detroit Socialist on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

One year into an experimental electoral project to organize alongside our Socialists in Office, DSA is setting down real roots in western Wayne County.

Below is an approximate transcript of comments made by members at the June 2026 General Meeting detailing progress on Metro Detroit DSA’s organizing in western Wayne County.

Anthony D., engineer, Royal Oak, 2025–2026 SOWW chair:

At our 2025 Convention, members passed an amendment to the Socialists in Office (SIO) Committee consensus resolution, authored by Anthony D. and Frances R., that created a unique and experimental ‘Geographic Working Group’. It was designed as a space for rank-and-file DSA members living in State Representative Dylan Wegela’s and Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib’s overlapping districts, to regularly meet with and organize alongside them. Our SIOs are surrounded daily by politicians ranging from corporate Democrats to fascist Republicans who serve the same ruling class, so we imagined this group as the socialist antidote and support system. The idea was to experiment with a new concept of how DSA and our SIOs should use elected office and carve a path towards our political independence. The amendment included the clause below.

The Geographic Working Group will issue a report at both the six-month (December 2025) and twelve-month (June 2026) mark to:

• provide an update on progress towards our goals and explain any roadblocks to accomplishing them
• offer an analysis and critique to consider whether it should be replicated by future similar bodies or other SIO Committees around the country
• normalize open reporting on the progress of this and other unique experiments in the chapter — all of which can be expected to have misses and fails, which are acceptable so long as the lessons learned are defined and shared with membership similar to past electoral campaigns

We conducted the first report-back at our December 2025 GM six months ago and wrote an article for the Detroit Socialist. We are doing so again today at the one-year mark. As of June 1, I am now the former chair of the group after having led it for a year, and have since handed off duties to our newly elected co-chairs, Jill and Kathy.

Jill R., stay-at-home mom, Westland, 2026–2027 SOWW co-chair:

As of June 1st, I’m one of the new co-chairs of Socialists Organizing Western Wayne (SOWW). I had first heard of DSA from Dylan when he knocked on my door during a canvass for his election a few years ago. Though it sounded interesting, I told him I didn’t want to drive out to Detroit for events. That didn’t stop him from trying to get me to join every time I saw him after that initial meeting. Then, last summer, I went to an event that Dylan and Mike McDermott had hosted just three minutes from my house. Dylan once again brought up DSA, where I once again told him I didn’t want to drive to Detroit.

That’s when he told me that a new group was forming and would be meeting in Westland. I told him to let me know the details as that was definitely something I would be willing to attend. I finally attended my first SOWW meeting at the end of October 2025 and joined DSA the following week. I’m now willing to drive to Detroit for General Meetings and other DSA events, but if it wasn’t for SOWW existing in the first place, I wouldn’t be here.

One of the projects I’ve worked on was having SOWW co-host the March No Kings event with UAW Local 900 in Wayne. I know a lot of us have mixed feelings about the No Kings events and the mobilization versus organization aspect to them, but attending the October No Kings gave me the little bit of hope I was missing that allowed my ADHD brain to finally contact Dylan for information about SOWW, which led me to DSA. And I wanted to use the March No Kings event as a chance to find some folks who may have been needing a little bit of hope, too.

After seeing the Wayne event pop up on the No Kings map and realizing that hosting one in Westland wasn’t going to be an option, I contacted Tonya, the Wayne host, to see if we could support in any way. Tonya is a UAW retiree who had talked her leadership into letting her have the No Kings event at their local union hall. She was able to convince leadership to let us co-host because so many DSA folks had joined the Local 900 members on the picket line during the 2023 UAW auto workers strike. Tonya and her leadership remembered the strong strike support and solidarity that DSA provided during those weeks.

During the event, we had a table where we talked to folks about DSA and SOWW and we had members, including newbies, crowd-canvassing to get signatures for the Mop Up Michigan petition. We provided medics and wrote up a safety plan, and Mike and Dylan both gave speeches to the 100+ people that attended. It was one of the smaller No Kings events due to it being a first-time location, but overall it went well and we’re looking forward to working with Tonya and Local 900 again. Tonya and I are still in contact and let each other know about any potential chances to organize together, and her husband Paul, who is a State Field Director at Voters Not Politicians, has attended SOWW meetings and shown interest in joining DSA.

Alissa B., retiree union staffer, Romulus, SOWW member:

I joined DSA in late July 2025 as a relatively new resident in Michigan. I got a call from Anthony not long after joining and he told me about this experimental Geographic Working Group that we now call SOWW, and invited me to a meeting. I was excited about the chance to connect with my community and like-minded people in the area. Ever since, I’ve been a regular attendee and have been able to observe the growth of this group.

SOWW meetings are intentionally structured to foster membership growth and leadership development. This is a space for new folks who don’t know much about DSA but are socialist-curious. It’s easy for non-members to show up to something local and feel comfortable getting to know DSA before joining. They get a chance to “dip their toes in,” and we build political reading and discussion on current issues and socialist theory into every agenda.

These productive discussions help expose us to a variety of perspectives. We can gradually ease people into organizing and socialism in a way that isn’t overwhelming, so people can learn about democratic processes and how to be active participants in organizing out in the world. In organizing alongside our SIO’s, you can see the direct benefits of organizing. Another aspect of the membership growth and leadership development model is task rotation. Each meeting, we rotate the standard tasks: facilitators, notetakers, food coordinators, space reservers, political reading and discussion developers, etc., so everyone has an opportunity to try different roles.

Lastly is the growth in numbers. In less than a year, we’ve doubled our membership from 30 members in December 2025 with an average of 12–13 meeting attendees to now having 60 members and 20–25 meeting attendees. Seventy different people have attended at least one SOWW meeting, and nine have joined DSA through their participation in SOWW.

Number of meeting attendees, SOWW members that have joined DSA, and first time attendees since the group’s inception a year ago.

James M., engineer, Westland, Dylan Wegela re-election campaign co-chair:

I joined DSA nearly a year ago after I was spotted at a No Kings Rally by my coworker and DSA member, Dan W. After attending a couple of General Meetings, I was struggling to find a group to get involved with because of the long distances to attend DSA meetings and I did not find Zoom meetings appealing. That’s when I got a call from Anthony about this Geographic Working Group to organize alongside our local SIOs. Fast-forward to today, and I am now one of the co-chairs for Dylan’s re-election campaign.

Dylan’s campaign isn’t your typical campaign, as he represents a fairly blue district and is running unopposed in the primary on the Democratic Party ballot line. Dylan having no opponent is surprising given how he has fought the mainstream Democratic Party and corporate interests by voting ‘No’ on every corporate handout brought to a vote and is continuing the fight against corporate handouts and AI data centers in Michigan.

Because Dylan is running unopposed, we have a unique opportunity to get creative with our campaign. Not just using it to get people to vote for Dylan, but to get Dylan’s constituents to work alongside him on tackling many of the issues plaguing our district, such as AI data centers, ICE occupation and detention facilities, tenants’ rights, and Flock.

So far, we have held some traditional events like a campaign launch party with a turnout of over 200 people. We’ve also held campaign fundraisers and canvasses which we have used to engage with the community about the myriad of issues in our district.

At the moment, we are planning to host some social events to bring the community out so that Dylan and SOWW can engage with them, with the goal to recruit more people into SOWW and DSA. We are also working on holding joint canvasses with Rashida’s team and other DSA-endorsed candidates.

Elijah, engineer, Livonia, SOWW Flock campaign chair

I joined DSA three months ago through my brother and through SOWW. SOWW has started a subcommittee to address Flock and AI-surveillance more broadly. I have been given the privilege of leading this group and bottom-lining our tasks. Our goal is to replicate the success of our sibling group in Ferndale. They were successfully able to push their city to cancel their Flock contract, proving that it is possible in southeast Michigan.

In Westland, we are taking two parallel approaches. The first is to build broad public support. Our group has canvassed homes and created literature to spread. The second is to build connections with the city council and ensure we can make a persuasive case against the technology. To achieve both aims, we informed, motivated, and organized many new members who had been attending SOWW meetings.

We set up weekly meetings to support each other. With the assistance of Ferndale and other knowledgeable members, we educated otherwise uninformed members about Flock and how best to go about the above goals. We have been successful in leveraging everyone’s unique skills and experience. Members who have never attended a city council meeting before are now showing up and speaking their minds. Other members are helping with creating literature, media, and petitions. Ensuring that we maintain pressure and consistent communication with Westland City Council has been possible thanks to the dedication of all members.

With all the above efforts, we are confident in our chances. We look forward to reporting back in July when the contract is canceled [Westland City Council announced on July 9 that they would not be renewing the contract]. Further, we are eager to expand our efforts so that ALL people in southeast Michigan have their privacy rights protected.

I would like to take a moment to talk about SOWW itself. SOWW presents a unique opportunity for this kind of work. First, local residents have the greatest impact on electeds in local communities, and second, SOWW is what gave me the opportunity to be a contributing, active socialist. I am grateful to this chapter for backing this initiative and bringing DSA closer to my home. Further, the opportunity to learn how to be a leader and how to organize from experienced members, such as Anthony, is also a privilege I am grateful for.

The Next Six Months

We plan to continue our recruitment of western Wayne County residents into SOWW and develop them into socialist organizers, through a cycle in which each new cohort is taught by the last. We will report back to membership again in six months at the December 2026 General Meeting. Through both our verbal and written debriefs we hope to continue normalizing open reporting on the successes and failures of our organizing work so we can all learn from it together.

Socialists are Organizing in Western Wayne County was originally published in The Detroit Socialist on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Metro Detroit DSA endorsed four candidates in local races and eked out wins in all four, flexing the political muscle the likes of which NYC-DSA and Denver DSA demonstrated a month ago in their barrage of wins across endorsed races.

Cadre candidate and environmental advocate Chris Gilmer-Hill ran against incumbent Democrat Helena Scott in Michigan’s 8th State House District — covering areas of Ferndale, Pleasant Ridge, and Northwest Detroit — and won by 6 percentage points. In an election season increasingly defined by the role of corporate money in politics, Scott was a vulnerable candidate due to her close relationship with DTE and corporate interests. Gilmer-Hill ran on a progressive platform, stumping for key DSA priorities like taking on DTE, enacting Medicare for All, and expanding socialized housing access and protection. Gilmer-Hill will face Republican Bruce Langran in the November general election.

By far the most ambitious campaign for Metro Detroit DSA this primary was Donavan McKinney’s campaign to unseat incumbent Democrat Shri Thanedar in Michigan’s 13th Congressional District, encompassing all of Grosse Pointe, most of Detroit, and some of the Down River cities. Thanedar, a Metro Detroit DSA member until his expulsion a few years ago, had become embattled in recent years due to unpopular political positions in a district that was historically held by the late Democratic Socialist John Conyers. Last year, Thanedar voted with House Republicans to “thank” ICE for their mass deportation regime.

McKinney sought endorsement from DSA in late spring and was formally approved by the chapter body in June, giving MD-DSA just a few months to build campaign infrastructure capable of beating Thanedar — a monumental undertaking with so little time. The path to victory the chapter saw was not straightforward, but his race had one main factor going for it: significant parts of his district overlapped geographically with Chris Gilmer-Hill’s State House race, making it easy to quickly ramp up McKinney’s campaign work in the area.

Combined, DSA knocked 50K doors for Chris Gilmer-Hill and Donavan McKinney. That, along with critical support from fellow socialists in office, Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib and State Representative Dylan Wegela, propelled McKinney to victory. Early this morning, McKinney was declared the winner of his primary contest, winning by 4 percentage points. In the November general election, McKinney will face Republican challenger TP Nykoriak to become the next Congressman in what is a deep blue district.

Elsewhere in Metro Detroit, incumbent Democratic Socialists, Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib and State Representative Dylan Wegela, cruised to victory. They will face James Hooper and Chris Dobis, respectively, in the November general election.

Michigan is seen as a prime battleground in a proxy war playing out in the Democratic Party nationally between progressives and Democratic Socialists, and the establishment Democratic base. Today, we can now confidently say that Michigan has spoken: DSA is here to stay.

Madeline is the co-editor for The Detroit Socialist and a member of Groundwork.

DSA Has Arrived was originally published in The Detroit Socialist on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

We often think of the work we do to build socialism as a struggle. Of course it is, but could we also think of it as a game? If it is a game, then is there a rule set we must follow? Or are we allowed to make our own rules?

Finally, is it more important to “win” at the game of socialism, or should we be far more concerned about how it is we go about playing the game? Every game is a system, you see. Much like the system that we oppose and wish to deconstruct completely.

Years ago I joined DSA for the same reason many people do. I learned how messed up our world truly is and I felt compelled to do something about it. Joining was pretty easy. I clicked on a few website buttons and eventually I showed up for my very first general meeting. I met a few people, I gave an introduction speech, and eventually I got plugged in to Slack. Before long I learned about our chapter’s basic structure, which revolved around working groups which all had a specific type of organizing in mind. I went to some meetings, and a few socials, and of course also did a bit of canvassing.

All of that was the easy part. It was a path that had already been paved for me, in a sense. But then, after trying out a few things for a few working groups, I eventually had to answer the question that had been lingering in the back of my head. Why am I really here? Or more specifically, what can I as an individual offer an organization like ours? I wasn’t rich, I wasn’t super smart, and I certainly didn’t have tons of connections. I was also disabled both mentally and physically. Disability by definition limits the choices we have for the things we are capable of doing.

I eventually recalled a passage from Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals.” Saul used the analogy of painting a single leaf for a lifetime, to describe the frustration every activist eventually feels. The work we do tends to feel very small and insignificant sometimes. Particularly if we never allow ourselves to step back and view the “tree” we’re working on as a whole. Because what if you weren’t the only one painting a leaf?

If we consider the tree to be DSA as an organization, or better yet the overall cause that is socialism, then there are an awful lot of leaves and branches indeed. It’s easy to see how one might spend a lifetime on one leaf/project or one branch/organization/chapter.

And so I knew then what I had to do. I had to find “my” leaf. I had been wandering aimlessly around the tree looking for where I might start painting. But once I began to consider what I was most comfortable with, skilled at, or passionate about, I immediately considered my obsession with table top gaming. I had amassed a decent collection of games, I had devoted an entire YouTube channel to playing them, and I had even hosted numerous game events in the past for other groups. “Why doesn’t our chapter have a game night?” I wondered aloud. I had found my leaf, and now it was time to start painting.

Have you found your leaf yet? It’s okay if you haven’t. It took me over a year to find mine. Sometimes it doesn’t jump right out at you. And it doesn’t even need to be a unique trail that only you can blaze, or a thing you alone can create. But if you’re like me, you may initially doubt the importance of the leaf you end up choosing. Given the material conditions that we find ourselves in, I legitimately wondered if I was just “wasting time” by trying to sit around and play games with my comrades. I mean the world is literally on fire, after all (among other things). Was I Nero grabbing a fiddle?

BOUNCY CASTLE COMMUNISM

One of the main reasons I’m writing this article is another article that a comrade shared with me. I found it so interesting that I shared it in the membership engagement Slack channel. This sparked yet another conversation and in fact we had an entire meeting revolve around the concepts discussed in this article! It poses a very simple question. Why is the left no fun? We have fun all the time, of course. But how often do we truly consider the relationship between fun and our organizing work? The article wonders why we don’t have “bouncy castle communism.” Why aren’t we trying harder to have truly inclusive communal activities that right-wing groups so often have? What about carnivals, or theater groups, or baseball leagues?

The article makes clear that there was once a time when socialists understood the true power of just… being social. They knew that social activities weren’t just a nice thing to have, they were an essential element of this thing we call organizing. They knew that in order to get the working class to show up, you need bouncy castles for their kids to play on, you need baseball games for them to enjoy, and you most certainly need to show them a good time rather than just have a bunch of meetings and the occasional trip to the bar.

These socialists even started coming up with and continued to refine a hard set of rules for how their socials should ideally be conducted in order to get the most out of them. They absolutely wanted to educate the working class and galvanize them into action, but they also knew they needed to give folks a reason to stick around long enough for any of that to happen. Education does take time, after all. And action doesn’t come from nowhere. We must have a why, and that why needs to be compelling enough to keep moving us forward regardless of the cost.

Would you like to get to know your comrades a little better? Would you like to bond over shared interests? Do you love playing games? There are all sorts of ways to get involved in game night! You could come to one of our events, which are usually on the last Saturday of the month at Pandemonium Games and Hobbies in Garden City around 4pm. If you dig game night after trying it out, there’s a bunch of ways to stay tapped in. We do have a games channel on our chapter Slack, which is a great place to make suggestions or ask questions. You can also just DM me as well of course.

The MDDSA game night will always strive to be a highly inclusive and welcoming event, as any socialist event should be. No matter who you are, no matter what games you prefer to play. Any feedback is always welcome too! And please remember that if games aren’t the leaf you want to paint, then you can always find your own. Or you can help another comrade with their leaf! Just know that it is a part of this tree that we call socialism. Painting this tree may take our whole lives, and our children may need to pick up a brush someday too. But we will all paint it for the same reason. We believe in a better world which is possible. Solidarity forever.

Sean Mullins has been a DSA member for two years and is a member of the Detroit Democracy Coalition. He is a member of the Member Engagement Committee.

Rolling the Die for Socialism was originally published in The Detroit Socialist on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

This July 4th, we will see celebrations from both major political parties in this country. The Republican Party will venerate 250 years by claiming America’s successes, echoing a return to some glorious past, and stating America is greater than ever while millions in this country are desperate to live dignified lives. The Democratic Party will venerate the “endurance” of our institutions and claim we must fight rising fascism as “joyful warriors”, but show no warrior fight against the fascism we see today.

We will see both parties celebrate this major achievement of our country and each party will sum up America in one word. For the Republicans, the word will be “tradition”. For the Democrats, it will be “progress”. For the working class of America, this nation can be summed up in one word; struggle. Struggle is what defines our nation today and it’s time for an explanation why.

Since the founding of this nation, the people of the United States have been in the struggle for true democracy. With America’s gravest and most egregious sin of chattel slavery, Black Americans have always been at the forefront of the struggle for true democracy. For hundreds of years, my people were enslaved to a nation that prides itself upon the words, “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”.

What type of nation prides itself on these words but doesn’t ensure those words are true for all of its people? It’s because the founders of this nation didn’t see my people as citizens; they specified they were 3/5ths of a person, to be exact. As the chains of chattel slavery hung heavy upon my people, we believed we deserved more — and we do. The time would come when chattel slavery would be over for all Black people throughout this land and our time came.

In the US Civil War, it was the North vs the South. Brother vs Brother. Union vs Confederate. Billy Yank vs Johnny Rebel. Many names and reasonings have been given about why the Civil War was conducted but we all know the primary reason — to destroy or maintain the evil of chattel slavery. Throughout the South, states codified slavery into law and they needed the unpaid labor to maintain their slave economies. The Confederacy would fight tooth and nail to “maintain their way of life” and many freed slaves would do their part to destroy this delusion of life. From espionage to entire regiments of Black troops in the Union, freed slaves fought for their liberation and recognized that if they were to win their freedom, they must fight for it.

As the war raged on, thousands of Americans were killed and a chance of true democracy emerged. With the passage of the 13th amendment and the Union victory in the Civil War, Black people had the first opportunity to actually be American. With this opportunity came America’s first chance at being a true democracy. Sadly, even with these efforts, democracy fell through our fingers. Years after the Civil War, the efforts of Reconstruction were never truly lived out. As Black people, we fought for our liberation from one entity to then be in chains by another — Jim Crow. Laws were now made against Black people for everything in our existence, giving us third class citizenship in a land that was made for you and me. Or was it made for you and not for me?

Fast forward years into Jim Crow and the rise of the Civil Rights movement, Black people once again fought against Jim Crow and won civil rights laws that ensured our existence in this country. As time has gone on, we have made great strides for freedom in this country, but in 2026, we are falling backwards. As fascism rises in this country, America has exported its imperial violence throughout the world, from Palestine to Cuba.

As it does so, that imperial violence exported is already felt upon Americans, and most specifically Black Americans. Our rights stripped away, over 800,000 Black women losing their jobs, voting rights falling to the wayside, our children being shot through state violence, new technologies discriminating against us, capitalism alienating us from everything, etc. We are again raging war against a system that was never truly built for us nor by us.

Black people have been this country’s most ardent advocates for a true democratic country. But you might ask: what is a true democracy?

A true democracy is a democratic republic that is rooted in universal emancipation, universal education and universal participation. A true democracy would never take away the rights of a group from participating in the democratic process. A true democracy would never deprive the people quality education to keep them numb from the woes of capitalism and its evils. A true democracy would never work to enslave its population to keep them alienated from everything they deserve. Black people have fought for the struggle for true democracy and we are doing so in every arena we are in. This historical struggle is a liberatory struggle and it is a necessary one, to fight against fascism and its companion, capitalism.

As Black people living in the heart of empire, my people face an interesting contradiction. We live in a capitalist system. We wish all the best for America to be a land for you and me. My people have engaged in this historical struggle for liberation for hundreds of years and on America’s 250th birthday, the answer is clear.

To fight fascism, my people will do so together. To fight capitalism, we will do so with all oppressed peoples under the trillionaire’s boot, with the collective love and solidarity of socialism. I’m proud to be a part of this struggle and I’m blessed to be a Black man fighting for the liberation of my people, which will lead to the liberation of all in this country.

As the 4th of July arrives, celebrate. Shoot your fireworks, cook, barbecue, hug your loved ones and have a good time. As you celebrate, celebrate not because of “tradition” or “progress”. Celebrate because of what could be of America. Celebrate and advocate for the struggle for true democracy. We the people are the inheritors of this historical struggle and it is up to all of us, to ensure the sacrifices of our ancestors are not tossed aside, but uplifted. This struggle is worth it and to make it a reality, we must,

“Lift every voice and sing.

Till earth and heaven ring.

Ring with the harmonies of liberty

Let our rejoicing rise

High as the listening skies

Let it resound loud as the rolling sea.”

Reese is a Democratic Socialist and member of the Membership Engagement Committee. Currently uncaucused and a part of the Detroit Democracy Coalition — a coalition of caucuses dedicated to democracy, education, and participation in MDDSA.

America 250: The Struggle for True Democracy was originally published in The Detroit Socialist on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.