Defend Mahmoud Khalil

The best chance to build a movement to fight Trump's attacks on free speech, immigrants, and universities is to defend immigrants, especially those like Mahmoud

A comrade recently lamented the lack of spaces where strategic political discussions could take place. I don't think they mean physical spaces, because there are plenty of those, but ideological spaces. As in what organizations could bring together a broad range of groups, issues, and organizers to develop a fight-back strategy that brings people into the streets, new people to organizing, and do it in a way that builds power and advances a strategy that works towards a revolutionary vision.

There is a background to this. First, a suggestion on strategy. I think the left needs to quickly form organizing committees to hold meetings and conferences that can start building a united front, city by city, region by region.

We need to bring together people who are good organizers, have an organizing base, are not sectarian or disruptive, and are committed socialists. Of course we need to reach beyond avowed socialists, but the initial structure has to embed revolutionary politics. If we don't, the movement can easily be hijacked into a Democratic Party that is the handmaiden of fascism.

Right now, defense of immigrants combines the greatest threat and opportunity for organizing. Specifically those in academia like Mahmoud Khalil who are being kidnapped, deported, or hounded out of the country.

MAGA is trying to cow universities into repressing left organizing, protests, and ideas. They understand that universities are a hotbed of dissent to their agenda, and they historically provide more intellectual and legal space to organizing, so they are moving to crush higher ed first.

At the same time, millions of Amerians and intellectuals understand Trump's actions pose a grave threat to free speech, higher education, and society. As usual, Democrats are doing Trump’s dirty work for him. They are falsely impugning Khalil for antisemitism while only grudgingly supporting him.

But both Trump and the Dems are giving the left an opening to take a popular principled stand and organize people for a vision beyond defending dying bourgeois democracy.

Now, the background to my thoughts stems from discussions I have had with DSA members. It has a unique capacity to initiate a socialist-based fightback to Trump's rolling coup, but it is not thrown its weight into it. DSA is not an organization structured or ideologically disposed to mass movement building. I have said that to several members, who did not disagree.

DSA is not a vanguard organization. One member who has been trying to recruit me to it says they are hostile to vanguardism. This means the national leadership punts as historic organizing opportunities appear: The George Floyd movement, the Palestine solidarity movement, and now Trump's rolling coup. DSA didn't even hop on Luigi, which was a golden moment to push Medicare 4 All.

When a political organization watches as history whizzes by, clearly this paralysis is inherent to the organization. One member said activism happens at the local level. I know a lot of DSA members in Portland who have done good work in labor organizing and solidarity, ballot initiatives, and fighting fascists. I imagine this type of bottom-up activism is occurring in other DSA locals. But scattershot projects does not a national movement make.

In effect, it’s anarchist-style localism. It makes unified organization and strategy impossible. A national organization exists to mobilize members around the country with a single strategy for the most impact. It also energizes local activism that advances strategy at the base that also builds the national organization. DSA does engage in national work for elections, but this is mobilizing, not organizing and certainly not movement-building.

I am not criticizing DSA. I am merely pointing out it is what it is. It's focus is electoral politics. For example, a lot of people are involved in Zohran Mamdani's run for NYC mayor. I hope he wins. But at the same time I wonder if this is a form of displacement. Anger at Trump and Musk is bubbling up across the country. Rather than engage in wide-open and risky mass movement building than can yield more gains than elections, it’s easier to direct energy into elections that are safe and predictable.

I have been around long enough to know moments of left upsurge can seemingly come out of nowhere, so perhaps Mamdani’s campaign can do that. But I favor building mass movements and revolutionary organizations. When Kshama Sawant stepped down from the Seattle City Council after a decade in office, she criticized progressive and socialist politicians in Congress who repeatedly capitulated to the right-wing Democratic Party agenda.

Without powerful movements there is no way to bring heat on left politicians who once elected are enmeshed in the state and almost always become subservient to capital.

Now, apart from DSA a lot of people are in the streets pushing back against ICE raids, organizing federal employees, protesting Tesla, against social service cuts and scientific funding, and the attack on Palestine activists, higher ed, and free speech. Each and every one is important, but without a strategic focus we will just burn ourselves out. This happened with Occupy Wall Street and the George Floyd movement. I have seen numerous calls for different national days of action. \

Again, this is scattershot and counterproductive. Trying to protest everything all the time invariably leads to low turnout and invites police repression. This will just demoralize people. We need to create rolling actions that can build into something bigger. Then, maybe, we can start to build power that can start to inflict defeats on Trump.