There seems to be a lot of opinions floating around, and PSL members seem particularly vocal though I’ve heard some rumblings of SA from leadership.

Because of the constant risk of CIA infiltration I know all orgs need to be justifiably paranoid, though I’ve no idea if any are completely CIA captured. If any are I’d assume it’s CPUSA because of their prominence.

At first glance the RCA seems interesting (Edit: misread something earlier, fuck them Trots) but I don’t know enough about their OpSec yet. That’s why this seems a really valuable question to bring to the community. In theory I’d want to join one I can join under an alias in case of infiltration.

  • purpleworm [none/use name]@hexbear.netEnglish
    36·
    13 days ago

    You are correct that CPUSA is captured, and comically so. One of our Admins is an outspoken advocate for PCUSA, though there is (imo petty) disagreement on the board about some of their tactics. I think they’re alright.

    I think PSL is good and the controversy you allude to, while a real issue, got wildly overblown into a way to discredit the whole organization, which I think is wrecker shit. Moreover, that has little to do with branch membership (outside of where it happened), who I’m sure will condemn such reactionary behaviors and not tolerate it in their spaces. Like, I think it’s important to distinguish between an organization that has serious problems versus one that is top-to-bottom owned by the bourgeoisie like CPUSA or fascist like the ACP or a sex cult like whatever group Maupin formed after his old sex cult got disrupted. Or a cult cult, like the RCP (not to be confused with the RCA, which is a Trotsky cult but isn’t half as bad as the RCP)

    I have a hard time recommending the RCA to a stranger, since I think they can do good work but are also likely to enculturate you to some insipid views. At that point, it’s just as viable or more so to go to an anarchist group, who probably spends more time on mutual aid and less on selling newspapers. There’s a good chance also that an anarchist group is ideologically more a group of convenience and humanitarian concern rather than abstract ideological commitments, which should make members much easier to interact constructively with (I would also say this about the DSA, though the odds are lower, and maybe also the PSL).

    There’s also the Freedom Road Socialist Organization, which from what I’ve seen is probably the closest ideologically to places like lemmygrad and hexbear, if that’s a good reference point for you, but I don’t really know and they’re somewhat smaller. I’ve just glanced at some of their articles.

    But I think the more grounded answer that isn’t based on internet slapfights is that you should investigate the local branches yourself and see what they have to say, and they might be worth joining even if it’s the DSA or be a complete waste of time even though they’re PSL. Just stay away from CPUSA, ACP, and RCP; fuck those guys.

    • jack [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
      16·
      12 days ago

      There’s also the Freedom Road Socialist Organization, which from what I’ve seen is probably the closest ideologically to places like lemmygrad and hexbear

      No, I think PSL is closer. FRSO has a very similar line overall, but they’re much softer on settler colonialism in the US context.

          • MizuTama [he/him, any]@hexbear.netEnglish
            4·
            12 days ago

            Unless there is something I’m missing the above isn’t true at all. They recognize Native Americans, Alaskans, Pacific Islanders, and Hawaiians as indigenous movements and call for full sovereignty of those groups:

            https://frso.org/main-documents/immediate-demands-for-u-s-colonies-indigenous-peoples-and-oppressed-nationalities/

            For the statement rejection of settler-colonialism, their position is (or at least the head theorist appears to say) that America is in a state of imperialist monopoly capital which is derived and developed from settler-colonialism. This development has its own sets of contradictions and characteristics, some deprived from settler-colonial basis and others from the transition to monopoly capital in that context, however due to being at the stage of capital development it is not the case in which the multinational working class of the U.S. merely has revolutionary potential in its oppressed nationalities as white supremacist ideology under monopoly capitalism has new characteristics that make it harmful in some aspects to the white working class and this there is a basis of exploitation for them to have revolutionary potential.

            In essence the U.S. is monopoly capitalism with settler-colonial characteristics.

            The article people use for saying they reject settler-colonialism is the following one:

            https://fightbacknews.org/articles/red-theory-against-sakai-settler-colonialism-and-national-question-us

            I think your initial statement was closer to correct unless there is some articles I missed or cadre only lines of ideology FRSO holds that the above user was referring to.