It’s a truly exhausting strategy. It takes so much work and for very little payoff. And often (usually?) it just makes everyone involved mad at each other and burned out, even worse off than before.

There are ways to make “foment a split” work if your goal is to enrich a particular group and then peel them off of a dead-end org to instead do good work. To me this only makes sense if that group basically already exists but is stuck being useless.

Some commie factions in DSA are basically doing this, knowingly or not, and with unclear success. All DSA factions are basically premised on exhausting their opposing factions as much as possible by being a (often fairly insufferable) advocate for their positions. Obviously the libs are the most guilty of this, they tolerate genocide and tokenize etc etc, but this sets the battleground up: keep opposing these libs within that group and tiring them out or go to another org where you don’t have to deal with them, at least internally. If you do the former, you are a hair’s breadtg from an entryist + split position, as you are not going to convince the libs, generally speaking, but you may eventually get them to force a split on some key issue, and when your faction is large enough to either take over the org or leave and form a new one.

Entryism is basically this same thing only less authentic because you don’t even think of yourselves as truly part of the org, and instead try to join and take over as fundamentally external.

Well I used a weasel word qualifier of “usually” because there are exceptions of course. There is no internal standard or political education program in DSA so it really depends on what composes a given local chapter and who their leadership currently are. It ranges from jokers that never win anything and don’t even file for candidacy in time (because they forgot, because life is hard, because Todd was supposed to do it but then he got sick) all the way up to a Mamdani who has been a force for years and has a coalition backing him, not just NY DSA, who are very electorally invested and do have competent people (but overly suffer from electoralism brain and therefore liberalism).

PS you’d hate a lot of NY DSA if you had conversations with them about basically anything regarding imperialism or unions having petty bourgeois limitations or how much to avoid criticizing Iron Dome AOC. Most of them would get themselves banned from this site for chauvinism.

I’ve heard on this site that local DSA can be a lot better than national DSA

What a disgusting comment lol. Zionism is absolutely about Jewish supremacy. Have you read any foundational Zionist text, or any modern Israeli laws or like, you know, read anything that Israeli officials say?

Absolutely horrible to associate recognizing the ethnonationalism of Israel with antisemitism. White supremacists also call, for example, white abolitionists “race traitors”. Are they not racial supremacists?

Zionists aren’t truthful. Them calling people “fake Jews” doesn’t somehow make them not Jewish supremacists lol

Jewish supremacy is a real thing. “Israelis” build it up as part of Zionism and like all ethnic supremacist projects with any foothold it spreads out and becomea diluted in discourse. It is itself tied to white supremacy, as the Zionist project also attempts to erase most cultural aspects of non-Ashkenazi Jewish people and conflates Ashkenazi culture(s) with Judaism, and at the same time, whiteness when it suits them.

In US political spaces, this mixture of white supremacy and “Israeli” Zionist Jewish supremacy is very common and is most commonly spread by non-Jewish Zionists. You get it from, for example, the implication that (brown) Palestinian lives are worth much less than (white) Jewish lives (with the latter ble ded with “Israeli” as well). That is close to what parent is referring to. The constant attempt to redirect from a literal genocide of Palestinians by Zionist settlers to false claims of a dramatic rise in antisemitism in New York is an ethnic supremacist talking point. The comparison of irrational worries about a Palestinian flag being scary vs. thousands of murdered children, and the former is what you are supposed to care about more and what you must answer for, rather than the active supported of genocide, like Jeffries, answering for the latter.

Regarding your last point, you are correct, but also so am I and parent. Jewish supremacists are also antisemitic in that they hate and oppress large swaths of Jewish people and apread antisemitic lies and propaganda. The most heinous being the ubiquitous lie that it is itself antisemitic to criticize genocidal settler colonialism. But they are still Jewish supremacists. Ethnic supremacists have never been particularly consistent. The social construction of races and race hate is defined against “the other” for political purposes to achieve a social end, it is anything but consistent or scientific. For example, white supremacists hate a lot of white people, including white Jewish people. And, classically, these various groups: Catholics, light-skinned hispanics, Irish people, Slavic people, Italians. Extend your thinking to that situation: can white supremacists therefore be described as, “anti-white” because they also oppress and hate other white people? Of course not, they are still white supremacists and they do exist and promulgate white supremacist thoughy that is then repeated by people all across various racial constructions.

Of course, I do want to note that there is important context and I am not conflating white supremacy and Jewish supremacy, particularly in the US. White supremacy is the dominant racial system of oppression in the US and has historically had a large base of support among its large white population (subject to constant redefinition of course, mainly as opposite to black people). The US does not have any similar domestic “Jewish supremacist” base, now or historically - they aren’t built up as part of anti-blackness and the construct serves no direct domestic purpose.

But there is a bridge, and that is why these are connected ideas. In “Israel”, Jewish supremacy is dominant and serves purposes for controlling and oppressing Palestinians and for erasing non-Ashkenazi cultural practice and identity (and even Ashkenazi practices that don’t align with various Zionist beliefs). But this does not float in the US, it would not rally anyone to their cause, not really. So in the US, white supremacy is the bridge. Both in dehumanizing brown people to manufacture consent for the oppression and genocude of Palestinians and in the demand to disproportionately, even within the same thought or sentence, care very much about the worries of white Jewish people in the US, usually irrational worries and exaggerations about pro-Palestinian protests. This is only accepted due to the white supremacist filter.

Zionists are not “Jewish supremacists”, they specifically oppose and oppress a number of different kinds of Jews (including Holocaust survivors and Ethiopian Jews). They also oppose Jews who choose to live outside of Isr*el, or Jews who are theologically opposed to the Zionist project.

I think that “jewish supremacist” applies here perfectly well, what’s a more nazi trait than quibbling over who’s white enough to avoid the camps?

being jewish is fine, being zionist is punishable by death

This is exactly 1 for 1 like saying that calling America a white supremacist state is racist against white people. After all, it’s not run for the benefit of ALL white people!!! Except worse in that anti semitism is a real thing.

I suggest that you should probably not peddle great replacement level nonsense. It’s fucking offensive.

Okay then I retract that, but I’m still wondering how to best describe these bigots? “Zionist” works well enough I guess and doesn’t need extra flavor.

deleted by creator

So you knew what you said was incorrect but said it anyway. You shouldn’t do that, it’s just going to cause confusion.

[fart noise]

Stop trying to justify the genocide in korea to yourself. Its your fault. You genocided the koreans and are trying to cover it up. You are apparently butthurt that korea is still sovereign, even though you thought you genocided them all. Your genocide failed, the koreans are still free and their nukes will protect them from you, neoliberal ghoul.