General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI was sobered to see some of the details of the revised DSA platform.
Last edited Sun Jun 28, 2026, 12:48 PM - Edit history (2)
I was delighted (am delighted) at Mamdani's success. But I was sobered to see some of the details of a recently revised DSA platform, items like change ownership of large corporations to public ownership, and close prisons (whatever that means in practice.) If that sort of thing gains standing in the Democratic party it's like putting a target on our back for Republicans to shoot at.
EDIT: People haven't been able to find "closing prisons' in the document. I saw the document scroll by, but may have only got that "closing" from the commentary. It certainly caught me up short. I think post #20 below may explain this.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
efhmc
(17,303 posts)
WhiskeyGrinder
(27,384 posts)I found this in the Program about public ownership, but didn't see anything on closing prisons.
Bluetus
(3,339 posts)And hell yes. The USA has an incarceration rate about FIVE TIMES HIGHER than "Communist China". The ONLY countries with higher incarceration rates are Turkmenistan, Rwanda, Cuba, El Salvador. And about 10% of our prison capacity is for-profit corporations, and that is growing. Incarceration for profit, WTF? If we can't make that case, then we don't deserve to win any elections.
WhiskeyGrinder
(27,384 posts)H2O Man
(79,488 posts)were unable to find it is due to it not existing, other than perhaps between some people's ears. Thank you for advocating that people post true things, rather than nonsense.
RandomNumbers
(19,339 posts)then we are fucked in November.
The shills on the right will be all over this and we need to shoot it down wherever it crops up. If that is not our platform we need to be loud and clear that it is not our platform.
MichMan
(17,644 posts)https://cbs12.com/news/nation-world/mamdani-backed-house-candidates-deleted-posts-called-for-abolishing-police-borders-democratic-socialist-nyc-adriano-espaillat-primary-blm-bernie-sanders-aoc-joe-biden
WhiskeyGrinder
(27,384 posts)Prairie Gates
(8,674 posts)
RandomNumbers
(19,339 posts)she needs to be clear that her position changed, and her previous statement came from good intentions but she has grown in her understanding.
WhiskeyGrinder
(27,384 posts)RandomNumbers
(19,339 posts)
yardwork
(70,006 posts)It's up to her constituents in her district in NYC to elect either her or the Republican.
We must retake the House. We must support all Democratic candidates in the GE.
If you live far from NYC and somebody in your district expresses concern about this candidate in NYC, perhaps because they've seen something promoted by Republicans or trolls on social media, I suggest gently redirecting the conversation. It could go like this:
"I heard the Democrats want to close all the prisons and let criminals free!"
You: "I've not heard that. I'm going to vote for (insert name of your Democratic congressional candidate). They believe (summarize what your Democratic candidate is pushing).
Simple redirection. Allay fears by bringing things back to the local candidate.
MichMan
(17,644 posts)It will have no consequences in regards to retaking the house
yardwork
(70,006 posts)There's no such thing as a safe seat in these days of billionaires controlling social media platforms, the news media, and the federal government.
In any case, the concern raised in this thread seems to be that beliefs held by some Democratic candidates will hurt Democrats running in other races and other regions.
The only way to prevent that is to enthusiastically support ALL the Democratic candidates, in all districts and up and down the ballot.
Show pride for the Democratic Party. Show support for all our candidates. Be a rainbow party. Love all our candidates and all their differences and all the ways they reflect their communities.
That's not something our party has done well in the past. Time to change.
Elect Democrats.
RandomNumbers
(19,339 posts)Luckily it is very easy to truthfully point out that my own candidate's positions are nothing like that.
If I lived in her district I might go with something along the lines of "I haven't heard that ... but did you hear about the F15 getting shot down in the war of choice the Republican party started? Or that many retirees will lose 25% of our social security starting around 2035 unless something isn't done? And the Republican congress wants to take away even more of our Social Security that we paid into? That's why I'm voting for the candidate that will protect Social Security, rather than defunding it!"
yardwork
(70,006 posts)We have facts on our side. We can also make a much stronger emotional argument.
LAS14
(15,591 posts)
Quiet Em
(3,247 posts)Zero about prisons or anything in your post.
Yeah, she said a lot of dumb and offensive things on social media in her 20s. She has disavowed it all. She has said she regrets it. Anyone who spends anytime on X, Bluesky, TikTok or wherever knows there are young people posting stupid things all the time.
MorbidButterflyTat
(4,967 posts)can accept hers. 
LAS14
(15,591 posts)Unknown: There is no publicly verified date for when the deletion actually occurred. The deletion could have happened well before the campaign became national news, but the available evidence does not establish when.
ChatGPT
At least by 6/1/26
Wiz Imp
(10,851 posts)This is the DSA "political platform" as listed here:
https://precariousstate.com/dsa-political-platform/
Our Platform
Deepening and Strengthening Democracy
Abolition of the Carceral State
Abolition of White Supremacy
A Powerful Labor Movement
Economic Justice
Gender and Sexuality Justice
Green New Deal
Health Justice
Housing for All
International Solidarity and Immigration Justice
You can see it calls for the "Abolition of the Carceral State" which is not the same as calling to abolish all prisons. Here in detail is what they mean by this:
Abolition of the Carceral State
Incarceration, detention and policing are active instruments of class war which guarantee the domination of the working class and reproduce racial inequalities. The origins of policing and prisons and their present-day effects demonstrate that they are are white supremacist institutions. Yet these same institutions, in their prosecution of disproportionate violence on Black, Indigenous and other people of color, have consequences for the whole of the working class — they widen divisions between people, legitimize the expansion of police power, and accelerate institutional incentives to violate and imprison millions of people.
For all of the working class to achieve collective liberation we must constrain, diminish, and abolish the carceral forces of the state — from prisons and police themselves, to their manifestations in all forms throughout society. Each step forward in reducing the size, power, and authority of the repressive forces of the state expands the space for mass, organized, and collective action of the working class, and clears ground for us to build the institutions of a society to serve our communities with real justice and equality.
DSA nationally endorses the 8 to Abolition demands, which are a basis for our own.
I assume people aare jumping on this statement:
It should be obvious to anyone with any amount of reading comprehension that this is not the same as explicitly calling to abolish all prisons and police.
LAS14
(15,591 posts)....swear that I saw that reference rather than heard it commented on.
orthoclad
(5,205 posts)enough and you fall on your face.
1/3 of eligible voters did not vote. This is the population we should look at, not appeal to republicans.
bottomofthehill
(9,455 posts)I don’t believe that the 1/3 that did not vote are the socialists. I believe they are already punching well above their weight class. The middle can’t turn to us because we look crazy and can’t tint to the republicans because they look dangerous thus, they stay home. When the middle stays home we are fucked.
WhiskeyGrinder
(27,384 posts)RandomNumbers
(19,339 posts)that platform sounds crazy.
IF that belief is out there and it is false, then we need to change the belief, not harangue people for their attitude that it's a crazy idea.
Most people in this country (not talking about Vermont or NYC here) do NOT think socialism is a good thing, and if the national Democratic party is espousing "socialism" as the majority understands that term - and when you use the word socialism, what people hear is how they understand it, not something else that you think you mean - then it is relatively easy to paint Democrats as crazy, and against everything moral and right in this country as that person thinks of it.
Talk about shooting ourselves in the foot. (Remember "defund the police"? How fucking well did that work?)
RandomNumbers
(19,339 posts)We ARE crazy if the national party supports that person.
I am a big-tent person. If there's a place where "abolish prisons" sells, fine, let that candidate say that. If that's what THEIR constituents want, great. That is what representative democracy is all about.
FalloutShelter
(14,751 posts)We keep handing the GOP gifts here.
Bluetus
(3,339 posts)Dems have had no real platform for several generations. They have become free agents with every campaign telling a different story, and few of the candidates even try to articulate anything specific they would do if we elect them. In the Age of Trump, that has gotten worse because now Dems are almost entire an "anti" party. We are all Anti-Trump and Anti-Fascism, but "anti" is not a plan.
It was not that long ago that 50% of the public identified as Democrats. Now that number is 25%, and that is entirely because much of the public doesn't even know what we want to accomplish, much less trust us to actually fight for it.
The DSA platform is very action-oriented. I understand that can appear jolting when we have become so used to candidates that say nothing actionable. So this really boils down to whether we are afraid to fight for real actionable plans because Republicans will say bad things about us?
I know it is scary, but we will never have a governing majority without actually fighting for progress. Being against Trump and Musk and AI is not enough. We must offer a forward-looking plan. We must tell the American public where we want to go. If the Democratic Party can't or won't do it, then they will be replaced. And at the moment, it seems that the DSA is beginning that replacement process. It will be much better if the Dem Party writ large embraces many of these forward-looking, actionable ideas of the DSA platform.
QueerDuck
(2,194 posts)Claiming that 50% of the public recently identified as Democrats and that it has dropped to 25% is completely detached from actual polling history. Decades of Gallup data show Democratic party identification has consistently hovered between 25% and 35% for over twenty years.
Furthermore, the assertion that the DSA is "replacing" the Democratic Party is a total fantasy. The DSA's membership has actually plummeted significantly from its 2021 peak down to under 58,000 members nationwide due to severe internal budget deficits and factional infighting. They aren't replacing anyone; they are struggling to maintain their own infrastructure.
To claim that generations of Democrats have had "no real platform" ignores the massive, monumental legislative achievements passed under Democratic majorities—from the Affordable Care Act to historic infrastructure, climate, and manufacturing investments. Loyal Democrats have very clear, actionable plans focused on lowering costs, protecting reproductive rights, and defending democracy.
Predicting the "replacement" of the Democratic Party because mainstream voters reject fringe branding items like abolishing prisons, open borders, and nationalizing major industries isn't strategy ... it's just factional wishful thinking. Pure fantasy.
The fact of the matter is this: We win majorities by building broad coalitions, not by cheering for the replacement of the very party ticket we are trying to elect.
Bluetus
(3,339 posts)But if we go back just one generation, Gallup measured 33/33/33 for Rep/Ind/Dem. And today it is 27/45/27. That is a HUGE loss in support. Denial is not a strategy.
You mentioned some legislative achievements, namely the ACA. That has been almost completely dismantled now, and Medicare is on its last legs too. This has all happened without the Party or any of the primary candidates for leadership or POTUS ever proposing ANYTHING specific the public could attach itself to. We had 12 years in the White House where administrative things could have been done to constrain Advantage, but nothing was done, and it was barely mentioned in any campaigns. We can go through everything we have lost over the last 40 years, but that's so depressing. Can you identify anything major we have achieved that has not largely been dismantled by the Republicans?
I'm not trying to be a downer but the simple truth is that major things only happen when there is a clear mandate and you don't get a mandate by running on "big tent" and no policies. If you do win an election, you find there is no agreement on what to do next -- because nothing was ever presented to the electorate.
H2O Man
(79,488 posts)do not see any connection between their daily lives and "politics." I agree that is one area that Democrats at the grass roots level can and should focus on. Party leadership cannot, because the vast majority of those people do not listen to them. Yet that is not the #1 group the Democratic Party should be appealing to.
Unlike in the past, there are more independent registered voters than belong to either the Democratic or maga-republican party. We cannot afford to present the "less worse" choices, thinking that independents will have no choice but to vote our way. That has not worked out well in two of the three last presidential elections, when attempts to stretch our arms out of socket to reach those across the aisle.
orthoclad
(5,205 posts)which gave stats on about a dozen reasons people didn't vote. Some were various blockages. I wish I had bookmarked that.
Here's a newer source:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/195874/reasons-for-not-voting-in-the-us-presidential-elections-2008/?srsltid=AfmBOoqflgHr2-EEWA-DrEjnW6T3eJaui9nnGgD7M8c4Qwe0iNUBRtJK#statisticContainer
Reasons for registered voters not voting in the presidential election in the United States in 2024
In 2024, 14.7 percent of non-voters said that they did not like the candidates or campaign issues, and therefore did not vote in the 2024 U.S. presidential election. A further 19.7 percent of non-voters said they did not vote because they were not interested.
I couldn't link the pie chart, but about half of the chart boiled down to barriers of various sorts.
About 90 M people did not vote in 2024, a larger number than either T or H got.
Using rough figures,
.15x90M= 13.5M
.2X90M = 18M
Either one of these numbers coulda swung it.
leftstreet
(41,378 posts)LAS14
(15,591 posts)RandomNumbers
(19,339 posts)I'm assuming this is the legit website. You may be interested to explore it. (You have to click on the squares to get the more detailed bullet points).
There are at least 2 items there that I strongly believe would spell big trouble on the national Dem platform. But I will let others explore for themselves.
Reading this solidifies my view that I won't be likely to vote for a DSA candidate in a primary. (of course it depends on there being a better candidate on the ballot). But I will 100% vote for the Democrat in November - even if they are a DSA candidate.
It is sad, because some of their positions are spot on and great. But the idiotic ones will be the ones that get highlighted in a GE campaign.
Bluetus
(3,339 posts)Me must fight for things that are important, even knowing that Republicans will take cheap shots. The alternative is to do nothing, which is what we have been doing for 2 generations.
There is nothing in that platform that is radical. I have listed the platform below. (See https://platform.dsausa.org) While Democrats speak in vague platitudes that mean nothing and inspire nobody, the DSA platform is very actionable. Americans want action. That's why they voted for Mamdani. Maybe some of these ideas are challenging, but tell me which of these ideas is just plain wrong. IN a country that can allow one man to accumulate a trillion dollars, which of these things should we have to give up?
=================
MEDICARE FOR ALL: Universal healthcare with no premiums, co-pays, or deductibles. Guarantees for reproductive and gender-affirming care.
END THE WAR ON DRUGS: Treat drug addiction as a health issue, not a criminal one.
FIGHT MASS INCARCERATION AND POLICE BRUTALITY: Abolish mandatory minimums and cash bail, and demilitarize police departments.
COLLEGE FOR ALL: Make all public higher education tuition-free with no out-of-pocket cost for room and board and cancel all student loan debt.
HOUSING FOR ALL: Establish universal rent-control and the guaranteed right to counsel for all tenants. Public investment in building quality multi-income social housing.
SUPPORT WORKING FAMILIES: Expansive paid family leave for all workers, and free public universal childcare and pre-K.
32-HOUR WORK WEEK: A 32-hour work week with no reduction in pay or benefits.
FREE PALESTINE: An immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, an end to military and economic aid, and weapons sales to Israel, respect of the authority of the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice, and national sovereignty for the Palestinian people.
END THE U.S. WAR MACHINE: Greatly reduce the U.S. military budget, close overseas bases, and bring troops home.
NO MORE ECONOMIC WARFARE: End economic sanctions that impact the sovereignty of countries whose governments act independently of the United States, such as Cuba, Venezuela, and Iran.
FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT: Allow workers to freely migrate between countries to seek employment without restrictive immigration controls. Demilitarize the border, end all immigrant detention and deportations, immediate amnesty for all immigrants regardless of current immigration status, and provide access to jobs, labor rights, and social services to all immigrants.
UNION POWER: Protect all workers’ rights to strike and form a union, make it easier for workers to join unions, and invest in the National Labor Relations Board.
TAX THE RICH: Raise taxes on the richest earners, for-profit corporations, large inheritances, and private colleges and universities. Establish a wealth tax for the wealthiest in society.
GREEN NEW DEAL: Massive public investment to transition away from fossil fuels toward a green and sustainable economy. Guaranteed support for workers in the fossil fuel industry, massive infrastructure and jobs programs, and public ownership over major transportation and energy infrastructure and natural resources.
UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE: Extend full voting rights to people with criminal convictions and noncitizens and establish statehood for Washington D.C.
A REPRESENTATIVE CONGRESS: Replace the two-party system with a multi-party democracy through proportional representation elections. Expand the number of seats in the House of Representatives and end the Senate filibuster.
POPULAR VOTE FOR PRESIDENT: Replace the Electoral College with a national popular vote for President.
REDUCE THE POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT: Limit the Court’s power of judicial review which it uses to effectively create and abolish laws outside the legislative process.
mike_c
(37,197 posts)Bluetus
(3,339 posts)Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Netherlands, Canada, New Zealand, France, Portugal, Iceland, Austria, Belgium, Spain, and Great Britain.
The US is now ranked 24th on the "happiness scale." Other than France, Spain, and Portugal all those countries are happier than the USA.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/happiest-countries-in-the-world
mike_c
(37,197 posts)...of market economies and state ownership of some public services. I think the soviets poisoned the term "socialism" by forever associating it in American minds with a centralized, command economy. Markets can work in a socialist context too, and that's a part of what makes it "democratic" socialism. Keeping a market economy in a socialist context is another way of saying regulated capitalism, i.e. capitalism that benefits the majority of citizens without creating extreme social class divisions.
RandomNumbers
(19,339 posts)I think there is a group of political activists that prefer the term "socialism". But that will not sell in most of America, largely for the reason you mention - it is associated with a command economy.
mike_c
(37,197 posts)A more equitable and just society is the goal, no matter what we call it.
Bluetus
(3,339 posts)What we have today is a failing economic system. It is late-stage crony capitalism that is becoming dominated by fascism.
We should not be afraid to say that out loud. Americans know it. According to Gallup, there hasn't been a single day in the past 21 years when Americans have felt we are on the "right track". Americans get this. They are really pissed. We need to tap into that, not run away from it.
RandomNumbers
(19,339 posts)Americans also understand "regulated capitalism".
Sadly, most Americans do not understand the nuances of the various phrases using the word "socialism".
Another thought - based on conversations I've had, most people I know who aren't hard-core left liberals, believe that there should be reward for merit and effort, and that the communist idea of "from each according to their ability, to each according to their need" is a terrible and immoral idea. So another option might be "Merit-based capitalism" - and then go on to show how today's system is definitely NOT that, and how we make it better. (but that may leave out the disadvantaged. So how about Humane Merit-Based Capitalism?)
Bluetus
(3,339 posts)I would go with a positive like "Ethical capitalism" or "Capitalism that works for the people."
mjvpi
(1,947 posts)
wnylib
(26,837 posts)parties instead of different wings of the same party.
If people who identify as DSA are a separate party, why are they using the Democratic Party's structure and identify in campaigns and elections? Is highjacking another party's ID and structure the same as cultural appropriation, claiming to be or to represent another ethnicity/culture that someone is not a part of?
I support many views and policies that come from socialists, so I am not trying to discredit socialism. But I am noticing that, among voters and candidates who identify as socialist, there are some widely varying views on what socialism is and what the general policies and programs are. So how does the voting population know what or whom they are voting for if they want to choose socialism?
I know that there are differing views within any party, but there are usually some identifying characteristics or a consensus of a party platform that people can look at. The DSA seems to lack agreement on a platform. Is that because, instead of launching themselves as a separate party, the DSA is using the Democratic Party's structure as a springboard or as a party to take control of and transform into their own image?
I realize that there are some people wealthy enough to not look at price tags before making a purchase. That is not me. I feel the same way about voting. I want to see and hear what I am choosing, but the DSA appears to be split among themselves about what a socialist is.
You have posted a platform, but there are candidates who identify as socialist and promote different policies than the platform you posted. In Buffalo, a socialist candidate for mayor on the Dem ballot was defeated by a write in vote because she promoted abolishment of police and had no political experience in governance.
Your post says that there is nothing radical in the socialist platform. But I can see some radical views in it. I also know that the views among socialists vary considerably regarding Palestine. I fully support the right of Pakestinians to their own state and government. But for many Palestinian supporters, the goal of a Palestinian state means dissolving Israel as a nation and establishing a Palestinian country through the entire former British Mandate. That is just as bad as Israel denying Palestinians a state and I would never support that.
There are a few other items in the platform that appear radical to me, but that's for another post. This one is long enough already.
Bluetus
(3,339 posts)I would much rather see the values, plans, and energy of the "DSA" become mainstream in the Democratic Party of 2026 and beyond.
There is noting in their platform that is more challenging than what FDR brought forward, and this thread reminds me of his phrase, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself".
We might quibble at the margins on some of these ideas, but the DSA platform is a real plan, and we have already seen elements of it enacted very quickly in NYC. I don't care if we ultimately rename the Democratic Party as the Democratic Socialist Party. That's not necessary (or helpful, IMHO). But what is EXTREMELY helpful is offering some real unity behind ACTIONABLE plans that will truly improve the lives of hundreds of millions of Americans.
And we cannot get there with the people currently in the key leadership positions in Congress and the DNC. They are locked in the past and will not change.
wnylib
(26,837 posts)for work without any restrictions of any kind? I seriously doubt that.
FDR was not a socialist, despite several posts at DU claiming that he was. He was a mainstream Democrat who implemented some socialist programs. He also saved capitalism through regulations. I strongly favor regulations on capitalism and have opposed the RW deregulation policies. But I do not believe that capitalism is an evil to be abolished. Unregulated, raw capitalism is evil. It promotes oligarchs and authoritarian control. But regulations against business monopolies and fraudulent or excessively risky practices on Wall Street are absolutely essential in a nation for a stable economy, general prosperity, and to avoid the kind of wide income gap that exists in the US today. Such regulations are essential in maintaining a democracy. No need t9 abolish capitalism. Just regulated it and enforce the regulations.
Socialism can exist side by side with capitalism as a mixed economy in democratic nations. It does in several European nations. Mixed economies in a democracy is even included in definitions of socialism as a distinguishing trait in comparison with communism.
You are OK with a splinter group highjacking a political party? Like MAGAs and the earlier Tea Party did with the Republicans? They pushed out moderates who became Independents, then anti Trumpers, and eventually allies of the Dems in the common cause of preserving democracy. Pushing moderates out of both major parties is a bit like throwing out the baby with the bath water.
As most DUers know, we are at a very critical stage in the US, with our future as a democracy vs. a fascist dictatorship or a throwback to the robber barons or earlier, to Medieval Europe in wealth and power, being very real threats. We need strong leadership to oppose the destruction of democracy by dictatorial oligarchs. So I agree with most DU posters that we are beyond politics as usual.
Working and middle class Americans need strong representation that the Trump regime and its backers completely lack for us. There are some Dem moderates who are not taking strong enough positions and actions on our behalf. But there are also moderates who are working hard for us in actively fighting for the preservation of democracy and the rule of law over personality cults and the corrupt rule of millionaires and billionaires who use their wealth to control the government. Thise moderates are currently fighting to maintain the integrity of the midterm elections in November. I am grateful to them for the work they are doing for all of us, so I do not demonize all moderates across the board. But I am seeing that view being expressed by some socialists in DU posts.
For many decades RW politicians equated governance with economics and some said outright that business interests represented true democracy. The latest and worst example was the push for a well known "businessman" to become the R candidate and president. Aside from the fact that Trump's promoted image of a successful businessman was a complete lie, there is more to running a country than a commercial business. Economics certainly are a thread that runs throughout governance, but it is not the sum total of governance. Even if Trump had actually been a successful businessman, that would not have not qualified him as a leader in areas of international diplomacy, civil rights, Constitutional law, epidemiology, immigration, and many more areas in the best interests of a nation's people.
Socialism, like capitalism, is primarily an economic policy. As I said, economics permeate and overlap in many (most) areas of a country and its government. But economics are not the sum total of governance. They are important for the funding of numerous governmental departments and policies, but nations are not businesses and cannot be run as businesses.
Socialism is also economic policy, but not the sum total of governance. Employee ownership of businesses is not the only way to ensure a good working environment and pay, although it can be a choice for employees and businesses where that is preferred. Collective bargaining through unions is another way. Regulations against monopolies and actual ENFORCEMENT of them promotes more opportunities for smaller businesses to develop, while also preventing conglomerates that support excessive wealth at the top and political control by the wealthy.
But employee ownership of businesses, small or large, is not a guarantee of a well run business. There are some behaviors that are intrinsic to human nature. Persuasion is one of them, and is the basis of democracy -- persuasion vs. dictatorial force. Yet a persuasive employee or group of employees within a business can choose to promote practices through peer pressure and persuasion that end up harming the business and employees in the long run. Employee ownership can work well, but it depends on the integrity, skills, and knowledge of the employees. An enclosed group like that can also slip into various discriminations. That's where governance comes in as an aspect of democracy apart from economics.
Some universal laws, e.g. universal health care, are beneficial to everyone regardless of income. They allow people to change jobs and not be dependent on employers for health care or on their own income for it. It also allows employers to save on operations expenses.
But universal laws on rent, as in the post that cites the socialist platform, can infringe on owners' rights and won't necessarily solve the problem of inadequate housing and high rents. Other solutions could include building more affordable housing and anti monoply laws against large companies buying up property and fixing prices in a housing market. Helping small property owners to obtain mortgages on available rental properties, with limits on how many they can own would help. So would low interest loans for people to build small rental properties or renovate old houses into apartment units. When larger real estate and construction companies build rental properties, they want them to be high rent in order to yield high profits for their investment. Smaller property owners, like people who own a large one family building converted to apartments, are mostly looking for rent to cover the mortgage and provide some income for retirement. They are not seeking the high rents for exclusive apartments that real estate developers want from their projects.
A mixed economy under a democratic constitutional government allows a variety of solutions to problems under a governing system that protects civil rights, individual rights, and freedoms.
Bluetus
(3,339 posts)and politics is mainly the art of negotiation, if you want to accomplish a major change, then you need to start with a bold proposition that shakes up the old status quo thinking.
I do not expect to see everything in the DSA platform becoming reality in my lifetime, but I think that platform is full of very tangible ideas, most of which are much more valid than clinging to the status quo. I am thrilled to see some of these ideas being discussed seriously (not just here but broadly, as a result of the successes AOC, Mamdani, Hogg, and Platner are having).
Until now, the mmarketplace of ideas belonged to a) the Republicans and their think tanks, the corporate wing of the Democratic Party (aka DNC), and the legacy media. That is changing and that is a good thing, IMHO, because the aforementioned have brought our society and economic system to the brink of collapse. I can't guarantee that the DSA ideas are better, or good enough to save us. But I do notice that most of the successful democratic countries today are much closer to democratic socialism than the late-stage crony capitalism that has consumed the US.
yardwork
(70,006 posts)MichMan
(17,644 posts)Under Joe Biden, the United States has prioritized funding a massive military budget and expanding oil drilling. Democratic elites are embracing Trump’s racist immigration policies and — most abhorrently — are supporting Israel’s genocide in Gaza, all while brutally cracking down on student protests. This undermines the trust that many placed in Biden and the Democrats.
Without a working-class alternative to the Democratic Party, capitalists, Democrats, and the far right will continue to perpetuate violence and injustice at home and abroad.
https://platform.dsausa.org/program/
Bettie
(20,012 posts)the OP claims.
Actually, it all sounds pretty good, though something that would be spun as exactly what the OP says, because the media will just scream SOCIALISM over and over.
Bluetus
(3,339 posts)he/she did not attack the DSA platform as such. The OP simply said that it is easy for Republicans to twist this around and make it sound scary. That is true, but they do this 24x7 anyway. We cannot run and hide because Republicans are meanies. The good thing about the DSA platform is that it is a tangible set of actionable ideas. Maybe we won't all agree on all the ideas (or maybe we will -- they are not radical). But it gives us a framework for talking with Americans about the future and what kind of country we want to be.
We want to be a democracy, which means that if there is not a strong consensus for some of these ideas, then they will not happen, and that is how democracy works.
yardwork
(70,006 posts)Conflating DSA with the Democratic Party is incorrect, though.
Bettie
(20,012 posts)that's what R's did....they put a bunch of stuff in their platforms that they couldn't get at that time, but now, it's all happening.
So, we need to put stuff into our platform that may not currently be attainable, but it gets people used to hearing it, to seeing it out there in the world. Eventually, it stops sounding radical through continual repetition.
So, put that wish list out there, eventually, it won't sound radical anymore.
yardwork
(70,006 posts)Bettie
(20,012 posts)I mean, a Democrat could say "Good Morning" to one of them and the lead on the news would be "Democrats want to abolish afternoons and evenings!"
Our platform could be a copy of theirs and they would disagree with all of it.
We cannot be timid just because we think Republicans will be mean to us. Americans hate timidity. They almost always vote for the candidate that offers a plan (even a terrible plan) and presents it with a fire in the belly.
Igel
(37,694 posts)If everybody agreed with you, then we'd clearly have one party that routinely won and one program or agenda with nobody seeing a need to dissent.
I don't see that happening.
Response to Bluetus (Reply #7)
MichMan This message was self-deleted by its author.
patphil
(9,344 posts)As per the website, it has about 100,000 members.
Yes, the republicans could try to link the two parties, but they are most definitely different.
Has DSA's agenda changed that much? I thought socialism has always called for public ownership of the means of production.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism
As far as closing prisons is concerned, I've not read anything from any Democratic candidate that advocated that. Some have called for ending private ownership of "for profit" prisons. This is a good idea, since this type of prison is rife with abuse.
These prisons should be folded back into the public state and federal prison systems.
WhiskeyGrinder
(27,384 posts)These prisons should be folded back into the public state and federal prison systems.
RandomNumbers
(19,339 posts)of
* all prisons should be abolished
* some people belong in prison
The majority in most if not all voting districts would be for "some people belong in prison".
"Abolish prisons" is the new "defund the police". It's poison on a national platform - and maybe everywhere.
WhiskeyGrinder
(27,384 posts)RandomNumbers
(19,339 posts)but I am quite certain it hurt Democratic candidates.
betsuni
(29,455 posts)Cori Bush was the last holdout, going on "The View" in October 2022 specifically to defend "Defund the police."
Unfortunate. Definitely used against Democrats.
QueerDuck
(2,194 posts)The DSA officially endorses an "Open Borders" stance. This policy position is arguably the most severe branding liability facing frontline Democrats in competitive districts.
Opponents do not need to invent hyperbole when a faction associated with the Democratic ballot line explicitly publishes and amplifies the words "Abolish Borders". It provides an endless stream of content for devastating campaign commercials.
National polling repeatedly shows that the vast majority of independent and moderate voters favor a secure, managed border system. Pushing an open-borders narrative alienates the exact working-class voters Democrats need to secure a majority.
betsuni
(29,455 posts)
AZProgressive
(30,094 posts)The Republicans are actually easier to debate. It is the centrists that say "x" policy is going to cost Democrats the election are more difficult.
I actually own a book titled "Utopia for Realists" by Rutger Bregman which advocates on the cover "15-hour workweek", "universal basic income", and "open borders".
The borders are actually open, people travel to Mexico for business and people cross into the US for business. Happens every single day. We also have people that come here looking for a better life and I don't see an issue with that.
Nanjeanne
(6,855 posts)Link to Platfrom - https://platform.dsausa.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/DSA_WDM2025Program_v2.pdf]
Re publicly owned or conglomerate type corporations - most countries have this in various forms typically in the utilities, banking, transportation, natural resources. Examples are Australia, Finland, Norway, Albania, Canada, Belgium, Italy, France, China, Netherlands, Mexico, Spain, Portugal, New Zealand, Japan and more and —- even the US!!
Typically when certain private corporations are taken over by the public (nationalized), citizens benefit through guaranteed equitable access to essential services, lower costs, and profits being redirected into the public treasury: State-owned or publicly controlled enterprises can guarantee service delivery to all demographics, including rural or unprofitable areas that private businesses might ignore, pricing based on affordability and need, protecting citizens from monopolies and price gouging. That is why publicly owned broadband, transportation, electricity can be very popular.
yardwork
(70,006 posts)Some Democrats belong to the DSA. (I think total DSA membership nationwide is about 100,000.)
Some Democrats agree with some or all of the DSA platform. Others do not. That's ok.
Vote for every Democrat on your ballot this November, even if you don't agree with everything about them.
MichMan
(17,644 posts)yardwork
(70,006 posts)DSA - Democratic Socialists of America - is an organization. Anybody can join it. You don't have to choose between being a member of the Democratic Party and belonging to DSA.
You won't see DSA as a political party on a ballot. There are socialist parties and they often run candidates but DSA is not a party.
Bluetus
(3,339 posts)"Vote for every Democrat on your ballot this November, even if you don't agree with everything about them."
But most of them are not presenting any real ideas other than that they are not happy with Trump. What is good about the DSA is that they are presenting a clear set of ideas that CAN be implemented. We have already seen some of that in NYC. Democrats will be wise to embrace that kind of thinking, even if they don't actively embrace every single sentence of the DSA platform.
RandomNumbers
(19,339 posts)in accord with what they actually believe.
Most of this country has absolutely fucking had it with Trump. That is probably the strongest COMMON sentiment out there. So yeah, you are going to hear a lot of anti-Trump from our candidates, because it is a winning message.
Usually is not too difficult to find more substantive positions and plans for candidates. If they are an incumbent, look to their votes and speeches and press releases. If they are not, certainly they will have something on their website.
Also,
I don't want a detailed plan - for example, I want someone saying PUBLICLY that they support taking care of the natural environment, in words showing they understand the importance of it with respect to human quality of life, and some of the components of that.
Note that the MOST IMPORTANT vote any member of Congress will take in the next session, is the vote for the leader of that chamber. (Speaker of the House, Senate Majority Leader). Holding the gavel is the most important thing because it means Democrats set the agenda for what happens in the chamber.
yardwork
(70,006 posts)The majority party is given majority control of every committee in the House and Senate. Because the Republican Party holds the majority, a Republican chairs every single committee. Every committee is majority Republican.
Democrats can't even get a good idea onto the committee agenda, much less move it out of committee to a floor vote.
When people complain that the Democrats aren't doing anything, I'm not sure that most understand how little procedural power we have.
Vote for Democrats in the fall. If we retake Congress we can get a lot done.
RandomNumbers
(19,339 posts)betsuni
(29,455 posts)Republicans make government dysfunctional and do everything to make Democrats appear to be incompetent or not to care or want to do anything, then loud accusations and the Blame Democrats parade -- Where are the Democrats? don't fight cave do nothing ignore turn their backs on weak not progressive "They stand for nothing except 'We're not as bad as Republicans, vote for us'" -- the usual garbage dump.
QueerDuck
(2,194 posts)Spot on, LAS14. You have hit on the exact reason why so many pragmatic Democrats get deeply anxious when these fringe platforms gain institutional standing.
There is a massive difference between winning a safe, deep-blue district and trying to hold a razor-thin majority in a purple or red competitive seat. When DSA-branded platforms start demanding the public nationalization of large corporations, closing all prisons, or calling for immediate federal halts on technology infrastructure, they hand the opposition an absolute gift-wrapped playbook for attack ads.
Whether it is the baggage of "Defund the Police" or the recent pushes for government sovereign wealth funds to seize corporate AI stock, these proposals put Democrats in an impossible position.
We win majorities by building a broad, center-left coalition ... something that appeals to independent and swing voters in Middle America. When ideological purism and DSA extremes takes precedence over basic electoral math, it doesn't just hand weapons to the opposition... it makes it significantly harder to actually govern.
Bluetus
(3,339 posts)* more accessible health care at a lower cost
* lower cost day care
* billionaires paying their fair share
and so on. I agree that some elements of the DSA platform will take more of an education period in some districts -- maybe even 10 years or more. But more than half the DSA platform is popular ALREADY if only a candidate will have the courage to get out there and talk in specifics instead of riddles.
yardwork
(70,006 posts)There must be local races that need a Democrat with good ideas. Please jump in and run for office. Canvass your neighborhoods. Talk to your fellow citizens. Learn what's on their minds.
Bluetus
(3,339 posts)I do canvass and phone-bank for candidates. I do work with the school board. I do contribute to campaigns. But being in my 70s, I think it is much better for the leaders to be the ones that have more of a stake in the future than I do.
mike_c
(37,197 posts)Get those kids off our lawns and into office! 
Bluetus
(3,339 posts)That very intentionally subjects everybody to a 24x7 firehose of messages, literally from the moment of birth, intended to DISCONNECT them from civics.
"Root for the football team, but don't ask any questions about how much of your tax money ends up in the owners' pockets. Entertain yourself with guns, but pay no attention to the gun deaths. Drink lots of beer, but don't ask if there will be health care when you need it. Buy that new $1000 smart phone and don't worry what it means for all of our major manufacturing to move the China, along with much of the R&D. Just don't worry your pretty little head. Leave that governing stuff to us. Would you like another beer? It is your right."
This is what we have to overcome. The good news (whoch is also very bad news) is that we are at the breaking point, and that is why there is now open discussion of the DSA ideas and the need to get a new generation of leadership in teh Dem Party.
QueerDuck
(2,194 posts)Every single Democrat in every district wants lower healthcare costs, affordable childcare, and billionaires paying their fair share. Those are mainstream Democratic platform staples, not radical proposals. I have not suggested otherwise.
The issue isn't the popular economic goals... instead the issue is the specific DSA platform items I actually noted, including the public nationalization of large corporations and closing all prisons.
Those extreme proposals are what hand the opposition a gift-wrapped playbook for devastating attack ads in competitive purple seats. Frontline candidates shouldn't be forced to spend a campaign defending or "educating" swing voters on the nationalization of industry when they need to be focused on winning basic majorities.
We saw exactly how this worked when candidates were left trying to explain, or distance themselves from things like "Defund the Police"... or wasting time trying to clumsily explain that "when they say defund they didn't literally mean defund, and that it was symbolic" only to deal with the extreme advocates chiming in "no we literally mean defund".
In the end, if you're explaining, you're losing.
Bluetus
(3,339 posts)Are you just repeating Trump talking ponts?
Yes, every single for-profit prison should be closed and we should find ways to lower out incarceration rate, at least to CHina's levelm which is still way too high. There should never be a profit motive for putting a person in prison. There should never be a profit motive for denying health care.
These are not radical ideas. I bet 8% of Americans would agree with those statements. The problem is that most Democrats will never make any such specific statements. They talk about "affordability", but rarely say what they would actually do.
Platitudes are not plans., and platitudes motivate no voters. We need specifics. So tell me why you think for-profit prisons should be part of our system.
QueerDuck
(2,194 posts)Accusing someone of "repeating Trump talking points" doesn't erase the actual text of the platform. I am talking about literal policy documents, not campaign hyperbole.
The official, published Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) platform explicitly calls for:
👉️ "Social ownership of all major industry and infrastructure"
👉️ "The nationalization of businesses like railroads, utilities, and critical manufacturing and technology companies"
👉️ "The abolition of prisons" --- specifically endorsing the "8 to Abolition" framework.
It's one thing to be talking about mainstream Democratic goals like closing for-profit prisons and lowering healthcare costs, which I already explicitly stated I agree with. But it's a mistake for anyone to use those popular, mainstream goals to obscure the actual, radical platform items that the DSA publishes under its own name.
As I said before, when a platform demands the nationalization of industry and the abolition of prisons, it forces loyal Democratic candidates in competitive districts into an impossible defensive crouch. When a mainstream Democrat in a purple or competitive-red district is trapped into explaining those extremes of DSA branding to independent swing voters... or when time is spent trying to distance themselves from those extremes... they are losing.
Bluetus
(3,339 posts)But it is a hell of a good start compared to the jumble of empty words we have been hearing from many Dem candidates for along time
I do believe every for-profit prison should be nationalized immediately. That doesn't mean we cann't put panagement services out to bid by Marriott or whoever thinks that they can do the job more efficiently. But there should never, ever be a profit motive for locking people up, just as there should never ever be a profit motive for denying health care.
There can be legitimate reasons to limit health care, for example a hip replacement for a 95-year-old. But that should be based on an objective standard with no company or individual profiting from that denial of care.
adam_vermont
(39 posts)DSA might want to own a media company rather than what Trump bought with our money…can’t remember was it Nvidia he extorted so they could sell their chips in China?
Why do Dema have to react every time like a child? Start calling if Trump Socialism or Stupid Socialism or Trillionaire Socialism. Dems want to have grocery stores and medical care and postal service and social security with our Socialism, thank you.
Instead we get some pledge from the centrists saying you have to swear you’re a capitalist not a socialist. How useful, thanks for bringing the party together.
mr715
(4,883 posts)
David__77
(24,901 posts)There is always a target on our back for Republicans to shoot at. They would call us Communists if we adopted the Eisenhower era Republican platform.
Don't do their work for them.
Defund the police state and abolish the prison system does not mean murderers can run wild.
The Madcap
(2,177 posts)there are many more Nazi Republicans than Communist (or even full-on Socialist) Democrats.
We all know where Nazism leads, so we need to focus on preventing that from ever happening here.
in2herbs
(4,673 posts)suggest the platform be re-worded so that the status of profit and non-profit of corporations making decisions involving basic human rights or political decisions involving basic human rights are subject to revocation upon any infringement of human rights breach.
orangecrush
(31,878 posts)Wiz Imp
(10,851 posts)I believe they would consider this their platform as the URL for this list includes the word platform. Most of these goals would appear on a list of the most called for reforms on DU.
https://platform.dsausa.org/
MEDICARE FOR ALL
Universal healthcare with no premiums, co-pays, or deductibles. Guarantees for reproductive and gender-affirming care.
END THE WAR ON DRUGS
Treat drug addiction as a health issue, not a criminal one.
FIGHT MASS INCARCERATION AND POLICE BRUTALITY
Abolish mandatory minimums and cash bail, and demilitarize police departments.
COLLEGE FOR ALL
Make all public higher education tuition-free with no out-of-pocket cost for room and board and cancel all student loan debt.
HOUSING FOR ALL
Establish universal rent-control and the guaranteed right to counsel for all tenants. Public investment in building quality multi-income social housing.
SUPPORT
WORKING FAMILIES
Expansive paid family leave for all workers, and free public universal childcare and pre-K.
32-HOUR WORK WEEK
A 32-hour work week with no reduction in pay or benefits.
UNION POWER
Protect all workers’ rights to strike and form a union, make it easier for workers to join unions, and invest in the National Labor Relations Board.
TAX THE RICH
Raise taxes on the richest earners, for-profit corporations, large inheritances, and private colleges and universities. Establish a wealth tax for the wealthiest in society.
GREEN NEW DEAL
Massive public investment to transition away from fossil fuels toward a green and sustainable economy. Guaranteed support for workers in the fossil fuel industry, massive infrastructure and jobs programs, and public ownership over major transportation and energy infrastructure and natural resources.
FREE PALESTINE
An immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, an end to military and economic aid, and weapons sales to Israel, respect of the authority of the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice, and national sovereignty for the Palestinian people.
END THE
U.S. WAR MACHINE
Greatly reduce the U.S. military budget, close overseas bases, and bring troops home.
NO MORE ECONOMIC WARFARE
End economic sanctions that impact the sovereignty of countries whose governments act independently of the United States, such as Cuba, Venezuela, and Iran.
FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT
Allow workers to freely migrate between countries to seek employment without restrictive immigration controls. Demilitarize the border, end all immigrant detention and deportations, immediate amnesty for all immigrants regardless of current immigration status, and provide access to jobs, labor rights, and social services to all immigrants.
UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE
Extend full voting rights to people with criminal convictions and noncitizens and establish statehood for Washington D.C.
A REPRESENTATIVE CONGRESS
Replace the two-party system with a multi-party democracy through proportional representation elections. Expand the number of seats in the House of Representatives and end the Senate filibuster.
POPULAR VOTE FOR PRESIDENT
Replace the Electoral College with a national popular vote for President.
REDUCE THE POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT
Limit the Court’s power of judicial review which it uses to effectively create and abolish laws outside the legislative process.
MichMan
(17,644 posts)Under Joe Biden, the United States has prioritized funding a massive military budget and expanding oil drilling. Democratic elites are embracing Trump’s racist immigration policies and — most abhorrently — are supporting Israel’s genocide in Gaza, all while brutally cracking down on student protests. This undermines the trust that many placed in Biden and the Democrats.
Without a working-class alternative to the Democratic Party, capitalists, Democrats, and the far right will continue to perpetuate violence and injustice at home and abroad.
mike_c
(37,197 posts)The political direction of this country needs to be changed, not further entrenched. Democrats comfortable with the status quo need to be replaced by real progressives or they need to become more progressive. The current political baseline has encouraged democrats in congress to work for a conservative, regressive system.
In addition to the list of DSA objectives listed elsewhere in this thread, I would add creation of a true multiparty system along parliamentary lines, so that we can be less polarized between two extremes.
RandomNumbers
(19,339 posts)Just as they are anti-American worker and anti- global cooperation in defense of democracy. And pro "open borders" (there is no other way to read their "Freedom of Movement" points).
When they run as Democrats it is only to take advantage of the Democratic base, because we have an entrenched two-party system.
Thus these ideas get associated with the Democratic Party.
It would be to the benefit of the Democratic Party to help retire the two-party system to allow DSA candidates to run as exactly what they are - and use ranked-choice or other solutions to give voters a real voice in selecting between Democratic Socialists and Democrats.
mike_c
(37,197 posts)First, from a personal perspective, I am a lifelong democrat in my seventies, yet I am usually disappointed by the Democratic Party because my personal politics have always been very much in line with the current DSA "platform." I'm a socialist, and have always been a fellow traveler with the Democratic party. So I'm part of that dem base, but not satisfied with the status quo that has emerged from the party.
However, the Democratic party doesn't have to be static. It can evolve, and should. It has already evolved quite a bit during my lifetime, unfortunately in the wrong direction, IMO, becoming less progressive and moving to the right. I think we will all be better served if it evolves in the other direction.
That said, I do agree that a real multiparty system would be much more beneficial for all political perspectives, encouraging diverse political ideas to flourish. Our current two party system marginalizes too many good ideas and leaves too many people feeling unrepresented.
betsuni
(29,455 posts)If their theory that Americans are secret socialists disgusted with Original Recipe Democrats is true, they will win. Oh wait, if they lose it's never because voters prefer someone else, it's AIPAC DNC bewitchment, so baseless attacks against Democrats will never end.
Blue Full Moon
(3,802 posts)Klarkashton
(5,523 posts)For govt ownership stakes. Spending taxpayer money in exchange for what?
walkingman
(11,308 posts)than divisions in our party. Unless we win, which will require UNITY, then all this divisive talk will just ensure that the status quo continues. ☮
yardwork
(70,006 posts)Mad at the Democratic nominee on your ballot for (choose one or more reason)?
Argue with them after the election. We MUST regain control of Congress, state legislatures, and governor's houses.
Vote for the Democrat.
dave99
(622 posts)Only look to shitstain with ALL the help he has gotten from the REPUBLICANS at every level.
So can a few DSA thinking Democrat Reps CHANGE anything than the conversation on process ?
Be real.
God the apparent stupidity.
OutNow
(919 posts)I'm 75 years old and remember what the Democrats stood for in the past. Hubert Humphrey, as mayor of Minneapolis in the 1940s helped form Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) that had a distinctly democratic socialist orientation and worked within the Democratic Party. For many years (decades) the national Democratic platform called for the repeal of the anti-worker Taft Hartley Act. In particular, the Humphrey - Hawkins legislation called for public ownership of sectors of the economy. It's really not the case that the DSA is "too radical". Instead, much of the DSA platform is the current attempt to bring the Democratic Party back to where it was 50 - 60 - 70 years ago. I support that effort.
And yes, the Republicans labelled Hubert Humphrey a socialist or communist back in the day. While Humphrey will always be known as a supporter of LBJ's disastrous Vietnam War escalation that tarnished his reputation forever, his economic programs were excellent.
Nanjeanne
(6,855 posts)AZProgressive
(30,094 posts)The US has the highest incarceration rate in the world and it has gotten worse with immigrants being incarcerated for often long periods of time. The US actually incarcerates more people than China even though China has more people. I favor less prisons. Also our justice system is biased like with the Prairieland defendants getting stiff prison sentences while the J6 insurrectionists are pardoned and at least 1 is given a sensitive government job.
There are a lot of things that I disagree with when it comes to the moderate or conservative Democrats but I still vote for them if the other option is a Republican. Especially when it comes to Trump. I wasn't a huge fan of Hillary Clinton, Biden, or Harris but I still voted for them because the other option was Trump. I don't agree with every single DSA policy but I will still strongly support a Bernie Sanders, AOC, Zohran, or similar Progressive candidates even if they identify solely as Democrats.