In Defense of Campus DSA Amendment
This is a response to the criticisms of the proposal to rename the YDS. You can read the amendment draft and the lively debate that followed here, please continue any further debate on this post
I want to thank everyone who has taken the time read my proposal. I especially want to express my gratitude for those who have commented both for and against the amendment. Nearly all the comments have been well articulated and express sincere concerns. I believe no name may please all; many who have expressed displeasure in the name “Campus Democratic Socialists of America” do not like the name “Young Democratic Socialists” either. In this response I hope to clear up what I feel are some misconceptions about what the name change would alter in the constitution, the relationship between DSA and YDS, the claims of elitism, the needs of our democratic socialist project, and the question of linguistic chauvinism.
There are two important misunderstandings that must to be addressed first: the exclusion of non-students and the abolition of the youth section (YDS). As stated in the proposal, the amendment would only change the name of the organization in the YDS constitution. Amendment III of the YDS constitution reads,[m]embership shall consist of members of the DSA who are under 31 years of age or who are full or part time students. Members over 31 years of age may not hold elective office in the organization. This will not be changed. Dues-paying DSA members who meet this requirement will still be a part of Campus DSA. They will still have voting rights at conventions and be entitled to support from the youth organizer, youth section, and national office. I am phonebanking nearly 150 dues-paying members for the summer conference: many are not students or in chapters. I firmly believe that they have every right to be part of the youth section and should not be excluded from our activities because of their educational status.
YDS will not cease to exist if this name change happens. The youth will continue to have a separate, autonomous space within the Democratic Socialists of America. We will still have our own program, charter our own chapters, and elect our own leadership. This right to a youth section is protected in the DSA constitution. Article V of the DSA constitution specifically states that there is a DSA youth section. Article V, Section III further reads that the youth section exists “to provide a forum for communication and to promote the interests and concerns of members of the organization who are less than 31 years of age or who are full-time students.” Not only would Campus DSA, as DSA’s youth section, still be a venue for non-students under 31, it would also be a more appropriate space for older students. Campus DSA would be a more welcoming space for older students in chapters, but the nature of the organization would still be young because the majority of its members are under 25. This means non-student young DSA members will still feel comfortable in Campus DSA.
The relationship between DSA and YDS (or the youth section) seems to be muddled. YDS is a not a separate organization in the sense that we are completely independent from DSA. We do not have our own budget, we do not have an independent legal standing, and we do not keep separate membership roles. We are the chartered youth section of DSA, which makes us an autonomous section of DSA. This means youth have a special space within DSA. Don’t forget we are all DSA members. Being a member of YDS means you are a DSA member who may be 31 and/or a student.
So as DSA members, we have an obligation to help build DSA locals. I strongly feel that non-student young DSA members should be active in the youth section, but that activity should not be limited to a sole identity as a youth section member. By this I mean that I am in favor of pushing young people to build DSA metro locals while still participating in youth section activities (conferences, rallies, actions, publications, etc.). But if folks continually focus their energy only on YDS, DSA will continue to demise and there will be nothing to inherit. As democratic socialists, we have to build a democratic socialist organization not just our autonomous branch within a democratic socialist organization.
I have disagreements about the term Campus DSA being elitist, although I believe the critique comes with the best intentions. First, as stated above, not one will excluded if they are not a student because Campus DSA is the youth section’s name. Just like non-students are active in the current revival of Students for a Democratic Society, so would they be in Campus DSA. Secondly, a point that was not addressed in my original post was the issue of non-students leading a primarily student organization. Andrew Bowe made an interesting critique when he said it would be racist for a primarily white feminist organization called itself “White Women Feminists.” This is a very good point. But I also believe it was problematic when the International Ladies’ Garment Workers Union was run by men and the membership was nearly all women. Therefore, YDS as an organization whose active base is primarily students with substantial non-student leadership isn’t good either.
I have just not been convinced by the arguments and my own experience that this name change would be exclusionary. If we were starting from day one, I would be against Campus DSA because it would seem to excluded non-students. However, I am not convinced the name YDS has gotten non-students more active. In addition, it’s not as simple as to say we should try harder to build non-campus groups. For instance, in my two years only Edward Elam from Louisville and Christina Huizar from Austin expressed interest in starting a city YDS chapter compared to dozens of requests for campus groups. Edward would agree that I was very supportive and his plan did not work out. Building metro groups has not worked in the past decade while building campus chapters has. DSA chapters, however, do work in metro areas. We should be learning from our mistakes not repeating them.
Second, in my experience as organizer, I must contend that many youth chapters activists don’t know they are in DSA and many young dues-paying DSAers don’t know about YDS. The reasons for this are many: we are small, we are not a household name, we have little money to advertise, folks feel they are part of one organization not two, etc. Just because it seems simple enough for that YDS chapter activists should know they are in DSA does not make it so. We should stop making our lives difficult and just have DSA in the name.
As Edward Elam pointed out, the name change would be more inclusive because it would bring in professors and other DSA members of the campus community into one chapter. Campuses are really communities within communities (cities, towns, villages, etc.). To exclude members who have stakes in your community is not beneficial for our organization.
One of our major duties as democratic socialists is to build a democratic socialist organization. In order to have a stronger democratic socialist movement in the United States, we need to build DSA chapters. DSA chapters need young people to take them over or start them where they do not exist. Young people have more free time and more energy. Older DSA members want young people to take over locals. We would be in a much worse place if we were in an intergenerational power struggle.
This is not to say relations between the young and young-at-heart in DSA are perfect. I agree that we need to work to bridge the divide between generations to make DSA chapters more welcoming to young folks. However, intergenerational dialogue means young people need to listen to veterans members as well. That is why I worked hard to bring young people to the DSA convention. The young people brought energy to the gathering and also learned a great deal. We need more of that and less self-exclusionary activity.
With the issue of the name Democratic Socialists of America being chauvinistic, I am not going to disagree. As a latino, I do not like the idea of the United States being “America.” As a member, I actually like the old name (Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee) better. That said, “we are an activist organization.” Changing DSA’s name, however, is another matter and would need to be taken up a DSA convention. If you feel you cannot support this name change because of the word “America,” I respect that and will not argue it further.
I want to reiterate the fact that the name change will not change the inclusive nature of the youth section in the constitution or activity. Campus DSA will still be a space for non-students and older student members of DSA. Nor has the name Young Democratic Socialists proved to create more diversity. The truth is young people join YDS chapters and become DSA members for various reasons and will continue to do so. The name change to Campus DSA brings, as Christina Huizar wrote, “truth to advertisement.”
I am hard pressed to believe that if DSA disappeared, YDS could continue to exist. Members of this organization from different generations have an obligation to each other to continue our work. DSA needs more activist locals. In order to build a strong democratic socialist voice in the United States, we need more young members building locals. While this is easier said than done, each generation must make space for one another. However, young people building DSA locals will always have a space in Campus DSA to work with their young comrades and build a progressive youth agenda.
I hope I have cleared up any misunderstandings. I know I may not convince many of you. I do believe this will go the annual conference and we will decide the issue there as comrades. I hope that this post and others will create more feedback. Having everyone’s say is great and will enhance our final collective decision. I look forward to continuing this discussion.
Written by David Duhalde, National Organizer for YDS
I’ll try to keep this short since so many people have already explored the topic at great depth. I support David’s proposal. It is honest. It reflects the trends of our organizing: we are a campus based organization. It also bridges the perceived gap between us and our parent organization. David’s right, YDS couldn’t exist without DSA, and DSA needs YDS for the new energy, talent, and members it can provide. Unfortunately, YDS hasn’t been providing that for DSA because we don’t keep people after they leave their campus. The name change would make it very apparent for members that once they leave their campus they’re still members of DSA. The arguments that the name change is elitist and exclusionary ignore the fact that young people not in college can still join DSA and start a metro chapter. No one’s excluding them. If a lot of youth dominated metro chapters start springing up down the road we can determine then if we need to change things up. I do have one practical reservation about the name change. What will this cost? So much of our printed material already has the name YDS on it. Has anyone estimated what it will cost to replace all these materials with the Campus DSA name? If the cost is too great, then I don’t think it’s worth it. Another reality for our organization is that we have very little money (by the way, what we do have comes mostly from DSA) and I think it might be better used in organizing. It might be that this is a pretty cheap switch, in which case I say go for it.Lastly, I really don’t think this debate will decide our entire relationship with democratic socialism. Please, let’s not be melodramatic. In solidarity,Seth Hutchinson
Hey comrades,Good discussion all around. Wish I had more time to chime in, but here’s a few logistical considerations related to Seth’s last post. Whether one supports or opposes the name change, any “re-branding” of YDS will entail:1) Costs of reprinting materials (as Seth mentioned… though we don’t have much already printed in storage) 2) Significant time devoted to re-designing/updating aspects of several websites (DSA, YDS, myspace, facebook, CampusProgress, Idealist, Wikipedia, etc.) 3) An even greater amount of time to redesigning our materials (possibly coming up with a new logo, changing org name references in all flyers, info sheets, etc.) 4) And perhaps most significantly, our “rebanding” will raise questions and some degree of confusion with folks both inside and outside the organization. These will subside over time, but if this passes we must expect a period of having to regularly explain to folks that we’re changed our name. Some folks who may be vaguely familiar with us may not make the connection to the re-named group. And still others will want to know why we changed our name at all. If we don’t feel that the narrative of why the change is needed now is convincing to others outside the organization, we might also want to reconsider. Would those in favor of this amendment feel comfortable explaining the name change to coalition allies (where we are trying to project a solid reputation), to potencial recruits, etc.? What would this proposed name change communicate to those who may or may not be members?5) And lastly… David mentioned that three letter acronyms are spelled out.. and that four letter acronyms may be pronounced (ex: IUSY=you-see). C-DSA or Campus-DSA would in fact make the name longer to say out loud. Just an observation.All the above points are just items to consider as we move forward. I frankly haven’t made up my mind yet… but as someone who was on staff and can imagine the extra layer of work a name change would entail, I’m a bit weary. Unidad y lucha, Lucas
I never liked the name YDS but never made a deal about it cause the name is not us. We as each individual are us. A name could never describe us more than the work we actually do. We should be more concerned with representing new age socialism instead what the name is perceived to be about. The name could be Socialist.Hunting.Institutionalized.Traps. for all and if we were doing what we supposed to do it could actually make sense. I think getting closer to DSA is sensible if not obvious. I also agree with who made the statements about how much it would cost. Yet It would not be too hard for me but I would have to update my site to include the new name. I put more thoughts down as they come…hopefully noone said what i did. I ll go with any name as long as it is not S.H.I.T. : )
I agree with the responses that David has made and I am a lot more sympathetic with this decision now. I agree with changing the name to become more solidified with DSA but would encourage that we change our name to reflect grand changes within our organization. I do not support the name change DS ‘A’, and would suggest that we think about changing the name to become USA based. If our organization changes our name to reflect the movement away from “America” centering, I will personally draft a constitutional amendment for the DSA convention suggesting a name change there, hopefully or maybe with the help of others. I think that this would do a lot if we begin to look at inward criticism and to me this would be empowering and symbolic of uniting DSA and YDS.
In response to the earlier criticism that this is a rediculous and a not so important change, I do not agree. Do you know how many struggles MLK had with the Black Power movement based on language? Word choice and language are two ways that we transmit elements of our culture, this change reflects our struggles for cultural and international sensitivity. Other examples of name and language criticisms have taken place in the LGBTQ, Queer, gay and lesbian communities. In particular there is a lot of criticism of folks that continually say GLBT, symbolically placing male homosexuals in front of the other sexual preferences. I think that a large amount of criticism that has taken place within these communityies has been influential and empowering. Because we are an organization that continually seeks criticism and leadership from folks that have been influenced by ‘post modern’ , ‘post and anti-neo colonial’, feminist, and anti-racist work I think that this critique needs to sprout change that corresponds to taking control of coherentist modes of utilizing language.I agree with the truthful advertising – “campus” - criticism and the elitist and class based analysis of that word. I think David’s intentions are very much on target, but I would like a different word. I would say students, but SDS is obviously already taken. I think Youth is a word that somewhat signifies a deconstruction of age binaries. ‘Student’ suggests a deconstruction of ’learning’ because staff members and folks that do not currently learn in ‘educational institutions’ are also in various intersubjective processes of learning and ‘cognitive collaborations’ with communities. I am sure that we can brainstorm some words that would reflect both the criticisms and the truthful advertising. Forgive me if this is confusing, but I would like to see some of these conscious efforts in mind, let me know if it makes sense, does not make sense, or seems like an unnecessary criticism so that we can continue having a conversation on these matters.
The simple point remains the same: the proposed amendment excludes youth who are not affiliated with a campus. It is unrealistic to assume youth who are not on campus would be comfortable in a space explicitly designated for campus socialists. Why should we change our name when there are any number of alternative changes to our organizational priorities that could lead to producing stronger ties between DSA and YDS without excluding a massive percentage of our potential constituencies. If the real problem truly is the lack of integration between the youth and the adult sections, I also do not see why people assume that simply a name change will improve things. It seems to me that people are really arguing that we need a stronger organizing initiative to produce integration from the bottom-up. I agree with this and think that it primarily be the work of the YDS staff and very committed chapter activists. Why don’t we wait and see if the new organizer (with David resigning this summer/fall) and the incoming CC and chapter activist cohorts can actually produce the change in priorities through practice before we start changing our constitution. To me, like all bad constitutional amendments, this one puts the cart before the horse. Furthermore, I want to go back to a much earlier and much harped on point that this amendment does have deep and important stakes for us as democratic socialists. We are committed to organizing all youth not just socialists who happen to be on campus. We are an organization that is committed to organizing around issues of racism, elitism, sexism, and homophobia that are especially deleterious to working class youth who are not on campus. Despite the arguments of long-time academics in this conversation, we need to recognize that campus is only one, incredibly small and privileged, space for socialist organizing and affecting reforms. Without denying the university as an important space for activism, we must recognize the limited scope that this amendment would force upon us. The truth is that if we change our name to CDSA there will be no more YDS, that is, no more young democratic socialist organization built by and for all democratic socialist youth. This, I think, is not melodramatic but a simple consequence of the argument. I deeply and sincerely propose that this amendment be tabled until we can see if better integration can be produced through on-the-ground organizing and activism.
Campus DSA aside: I didn’t resign from my position, the job is a two-year term. This isn’t the first time someone thought I resigned. It’s not a huge deal, but I want folks to know that my term was up and that’s why I won’t be on staff in the fall. I want to make that clear.
I am in support of changing our name to something that includes the full “DSA” in it, and I lean more towards YDSA or DSAY than Campus DSA because of the concern about turning off non-students. However, let’s just be honest about the fact that we’re mostly students (though I, after all, am not a student). The need to bridge the divide between DSA and YDS is so great that I support this change and believe it will strengthen the work that David and the CC have already put into on-the-ground relationship building and work with DSAers. It doesn’t have to be an either-or decision.
Hey comrades! Wow, we’re changing the name again? As one of the folks who advocated the change last time (from DSA-YS to YDS), I should stick to my guns… but I can see the logic in the name change, if only to strengthen ties to DSA. Back when we changed the name last time, I can tell you that from behind the sceens, it was done for the very purpose of distancing ourselves from DSA. I advocated it because that is what my old chapter (JMU) had named itself before we chartered with DSA-YS to begin with. In my intransigent youth, it seemed the thing to do… and YDS has a nice ring to it, though it can be made to be the derisive epitet “whitey ass” as a comment on our persistent problem of diversity by enterprising anarchists, but that is a story for another day. As I have gotten older (geez! I’m 30 now) I can see that the longevity of YDS depends largely on DSA and any chance that we have to make actual change will involve building life-long democratic socialists, not just a gaggle of rebellious youth who want to stick it to the “man” and their parents… until they graduate. Nonetheless, I don’t know about the “Campus” part… because of the reasons well-outlined by others already. Though, it is true that the majority of our successful chapters have all sprung from college and university campuses. I can think of only three instances within the past decade in which we had a functioning chapter which lasted more than a year which was not based in a college campus, and one of those was at a high-school. While my younger self would hate me for this (and probably be perplexed about me enthusiastically supporting a Democrat for the White House, as I do today) I whole-heartedly support the name-change to something which mentions the parent organization. As Lucas mentioned, there will be some logistical concerns, but we have managed it in the past… and it is a good excuse to print new fliers, update the website and breathe some new life into the organization. In Solidarity,-Michael Key (yds_man@yahoo.com)
That said, I just read the old comments and am sad that I am on the other side of the issue from Matt. I was hoping that we could agree to something someday. Also, I am struck with nostalgia and will always think of it as my days in YDS, whatever the name becomes in the future. By the way, YDS-JMU had a reunion recently. As an update on old comrades: Aaron Smith-Walter is working for JMU to solve the transit woes of the campus, Josh Cohen is living in Israel in a commune working for peace, Justin Stolzfus and Crystal Shrewsberry are both living in Pennsylvania, Adam Janzi (former head of Harrisonburg High YDS) is married and living in Harrisonburg, Adam Ferguson just got back from Khazakistan working for the Peace Corps and is deciding what to do next, and I am working toward a PhD in Microbiology at George Mason University in Virginia.
Thanks for your input Mike. Mike sums up many of my points: that we’ve done a name change in the past, the need to create life-long democratic socialists dedicated to a democratic socialist project, and the need to build stronger bonds between DSA and YDS. I do want to point out, however, that Campus DSA is not College DSA. Since we aren’t calling ourselves Students for Democratic Socialism (Jason Schulman pointed out “SDS” was already taken), “campus” seemed like a logical choice. We do have several high school chapters currently (two of which have lasted several years). My own trip down memory lane reminds me that the original group I joined at Bowdoin College was called Students for Democratic Socialism. It’s since gone through several name changes, each reflecting a new group of students ideas and visions for the group.
I am semi-flip-flopping. To proceed in time…