Proposal to Amend the Constitution of the Young Democratic Socialists, USA
Proposal to Amend the Constitution of the Young Democratic Socialists, USA
For the 2008 YDS National Convention
The YDS Constitution will be amended as follows:
Article 1 will remove:
The name of the organization shall be the Young Democratic Socialists, USA.
Article 1 will add:
The name of the organization shall be the Campus Democratic Socialists of America.
Note well: This goes will the understanding that if passed, we change any reference to Young Democratic Socialists and YDS to Campus Democratic Socialists of America and Campus DSA, respectively.
This would not go into effect until August 2009.
Why I am proposing this amendment:
There are several reasons why the name Campus Democratic Socialists of America (or Campus DSA) is preferable to the Young Democratic Socialists. First, the Campus DSA instantly and publicly connects the youth section to the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). Second, it is a more honest indicator of who makes up our activist base. Third, it recognizes the current organizational needs of DSA and YDS.
The first point needs some historical background. YDS was once called the Democratic Socialists of America Youth Section. Because of tensions between the youth section and DSA, along with a general sentiment that the term “youth section” was too pejorative, the youth section’s name was changed to Young Democratic Socialists, USA. For some, the name change was also an intentional move to distance YDS from DSA.
Now, nearly all of the name change proponents are no longer active in the either DSA or YDS. YDS and its members, which have an increasingly friendly and cooperative relationship with DSA, are stuck with a name which origins no longer reflect our collectively feelings towards DSA. Without a background in American left history or an excellent campus organizer, many YDS chapter activists could go through college without knowing they were in DSA. It is poor marketing to separate one brand (DSA) from another (YDS) and assume the consumer (ie student activist) will do their homework to discover the connections between DSA and YDS. The current name places an unnecessary and unfair burden on leading activists to explain a complicated history.
Secondly, we need to be honest about what constitutes our organization’s base (by-and-large students). Outside of the current New York City YDS, which meets at the DSA office and works hand-in-hand with the national office, no “metropolitan” YDS chapter has lasted in recent memory. There was a time when YDS leaders pushed off campus members to start “metro” YDS chapters instead of building DSA locals. This strategy did not yield notable success. This is because we are primarily a campus-based organization. The bulk of YDS-led activism is located in schools, even if YDS members as individuals are active in their communities.
It’s important to remember most youth activism in the US is and has taken place on campuses. Also, there has also been a strong connection between radical professors and progressive students in campus activism. It makes more sense for us as an organization to be connecting professors who are DSA members with students to start Campus DSA chapters.
While, there are many non-student leaders in YDS, this is more reflective of our prior weaknesses (barely five chapters two years ago) and nascent student leadership. Our non-student leadership does not represent a large and/or active non-student base. It is not healthy for an organization that is primarily student oriented to have so many non-students at the top. We need students to play a stronger role in and command more ownership of YDS. I believe a name change will encourage a movement in this direction.
The third point encompasses the first two and more. DSA (and that includes the youth section) needs this name change for organizational reasons. DSA and YDS need each other. Without YDS, there are few future members of DSA. Without a functioning DSA, YDS cannot get the support it needs. Right now, we need to get our younger members identifying with the DSA and the democratic socialist project earlier on. We also need to push young members to start DSA locals. Young folks have historically run DSA locals and there is no reason to not revive that tradition.
The time is now to bring DSA members closer together. Both sections are growing stronger and will do better working under the same banner. Although the name Campus DSA will not solve all our problems, it will be an important symbolic effort to making us more effective as organizers and bring YDS members closer to more seasoned DSA comrades. I welcome your questions and comments.
Written by David Duhalde, YDS National Organizer
As one of the most senior members of YDS, I have serious objections to this amendment and to the reasoning behind it. In order to keep the discussion orderly, I will arrange my objections point by point. (1) The proposed name change is elitist and unnecessarily exclusionary. By changing the name to Campus DSA we automatically exclude non-campus youth. As low-income, working class, youth of color tend to be over-represented in the category of non-campus youth, this is extremely problematic for a organization that understands itself to be socialist. While it is true that we have primarily been a campus based organization, we have fought and struggled alongside many youth beyond the university yard. These youth can be (and often are) socialist too. We shouldn’t change our name because we aren’t good at community organizing…we should just get better at community organizing. (2) It isn’t hard to figure out that YDS is the youth section of DSA. In fact, it should probably be the second thing we say to any prospective recruits after we explain our membership in IUSY. The reason YDS don’t graduate to DSA is because there is a widely held perception that DSA sucks. I know that is a bit unfair, but that is nevertheless the perception. The reason YDSers don’t graduate to DSA is simply not because they don’t know it exists. Even the suggestion is a bit unbelievable. Again, the issue here needs to be addressing why people don’t join DSA after YDS, not simply making YDS DSA and hoping for the best. It simply doesn’t make sense to give up our autonomy unless forced. (3) It makes more sense that DSA should charter campus chapters. If there are radical professors who should be connecting with YDSers than they should feel free to charter a campus chapter. IT makes far less sense to alter the entire constitution of YDS in order to cater to what in all actuality is probably a really tiny percentage of campus DSA organizers. Now, I know that this amendment was proposed with the best intentions. And I agree with David that our organization should reflect the work that we do. However, this amendment is extremely radical and would entirely change the constitution of YDS. Having a lot of campus chapters is great–that is how I became involved in YDS. However, we simply have to recognize that it is our obligation to organize all youth not simply those privileged enough to attend university (which is really what we are talking about). In other words, we must be able to be constructive and critical about the fact that our membership historically tends to be privileged white male university students. Changing our name won’t fix this…it will institutionalize it in our constitution. If YDS and DSA are chummy these days, great. Let’s ask DSA to make themselves more attractive to our alumni rather than change our name altogether. Like many alumni, I have remained loyal to YDS throughout my twenties with or without involvement in a campus chapter. It is true that I have not paid membership dues in some time but I have assisted the editors of this magazine, contributed a few articles, and even met with prospective YDS members on an as-needed basis. I can even proudly say that along with my CC cohort I recruited David to the position of international secretary. I have a reputation for being cranky, and I bet that comes through a bit here
I simply want to say that I am very…very opposed to this amendment, I think the reasoning is insufficient, and I feel that the very foundations and principles of our relationship to democratic socialism is at stake. Lets think real hard on this one.
I fully agree with this. (In a more perfect world, YDS could be changed to SDS — Students for Democratic Socialism — but some other group called dibs on that acronym…)
Thank you David for drafting this amendment. I do agree with many of the issues that it attempts to combat and recognize the virute in drafting this amendment and I would love to hear more in depth discussion on how it has related to some of the problems that you have faced as the national youth organizer. But, at this moment I do not feel that this amendment is the best for our youth centered organization. I would first like to cite that I agree with many of the objections made by Matt, and then secondly I would like to criticize and deconstruct the usage of the name “Democratic Socialists of America” , which I feel is chauvinistic. Thirdly I would like to suggest that this organization is currently in need of youthcentrism and that this name change would affect some of the passions that are sturred at the youth level. Many of the students that participate in this organization come from lower socioeconomic positions. Many of the individuals that participate in this organization have joined because they have a deeper understanding of what it means to be a part of an oppressed group, whether this means that someone has worked with a low income community that is in need of assistance, or that some have a mother who has suffered the pains of patriarchy, and this is one that I know for certain- some have even felt strong urges to combat their own oppression by some hegemonic social structure (whether that be heterosexism, capitalism, sexism, racism, or etc). I am truly inspired by a socialist epistemology (and I signal my mentor on this who writes on Feminist Epistemology: see Alison Jaggar’s work ). I am inspired by a socialism that doesn’t limit it’s guidelines to a continual exclusion based upon ideological boundaries. I am truly inspired by a socialism that asks that all anti-capitalist youth are welcome to join together and to actively participate in dialouge. I am inspired by a socialism whose name does not give unearned privilege to certain individuals that are already climbing the social ladder. I am inspired by the process of moving toward a non-violent socialism, whether this means discoursively, epistemically, metaphorically, deconstructively, or physically. This amendment does not show my any powerful drive to combat any of the afformentioned concerns, nor does it suggest to me any empowering force to create an inclusionary organization. Metaphorically speaking- can you imagine an organization called White Women Feminists? It is one thing to be an organization of feminists with few women of color, but it is another to change your organization name to that label because that is your current constituency. It sounds racist, feels racist. This name change feels classist, elistist. Moving to the second critique. I grew up in a community in North Denver that was represented by a majority of folks who identified as Mexican, Latina/o, or Chicano/a. In third grade a new friend came to class as an immigrant from Southern Mexico. He could barely speak English, but I remember vividly what I asked him: “Are you excited to live in America? Do you like your new home?” His Response, “Yes, I am from Central America.” It took several years and several geography courses for me to finally realize what he meant and what it meant that he was responding in that way. In fifth grade I found out that there was such a thing as North, Central, and South America. El Norte is only one section of America. the U.S. of A. only one countryIn an essay by Dennis Childs, he writes, “Throughout this essay, whenever I use the term “America,” I use quotation marks. I do this to highlight the fact that the common attribution of this designation to one country within the Americas is an indicator of U.S. hemispherical chauvinism.” Read the works of Keorapetse William Kgositsile. On another note, still on solitary word America, I do not think that DSA should use this word in solitary either. Indeed there is a history of socialism in the South, but our organization does not sum up those movements or their youth. I remember voting a little under a year ago in opposition to the amendment took out the International Coordinator position. This move not only signals the problematic consciousness of that move, closing off from international unity, but also the ignorance that constructs the hegemony of naming. Naming rights should not be appropriated or insensitively utilized by an active socialist organization. The last and short note that I would like to suggest is that this organization recognizes that the youth often need a space to act with the passions that move the wheels of the movement. The heightened involvement of university professors in our campus organizations may reflect the authoritarian pedagogical styles exemplified in their practices. I know that a number of voices are going to be shot down in the presence of an authority figure. We do need unity- DS(US)A is a good place to unify, not YDS.
Matt says: “I feel that the very foundations and principles of our relationship to democratic socialism is at stake.”
I believe that this is called “hyperbole.”
Matt says: ” The reason YDS don’t graduate to DSA is because there is a widely held perception that DSA sucks.”
Well, if DSA does, in fact, “suck” (in what way, precisely? In its political positions? In its ability to have functioning, activist chapters? What?), the obvious answer is for YDSers to take over DSA locals or form new ones, and thereby decrease the degree to which DSA “sucks.” This is what should be happening, rather than the creation of “metro YDS” chapters. Youth not on campus should be joining DSA locals or forming new ones where locals don’t already exist. (Matt says “Let’s ask DSA to make themselves more attractive to our alumni rather than change our name altogether.” By doing what?)
I too agree that most of the arguments against the name change stipulated thus far are hyperbolic (not to say that they aren’t well articulated or completely without merit). A name change now would be timely. YDS is building into an organization that can effect change and better help accomplish it’s stated organizational aims—as a youth/student contributor to the push towards a society based upon solidarity rather than exploitation.
The fact is that the vast majority of YDS members are campus based. The United States has a rich history of student activism and campuses are the area where the organization can most easily expand and start to build a brand and an organization that can better effect social change.
High schools and universities are where YDS has the charge of helping to build the democratic socialist project. After their time working within YDS activists working within the youth section of the DSA, which is what YDS is.. it is a youth section.. should be joining/starting DSA locals.
Why would you build parallel locals within the same organization. It doesn’t make sense, is the Left in the United States (not to affront the sentiments of the people of the United Mexican States, who I am sure are reading this blog and are concerned with what a small left-wing youth organization is up to) so fragmented that the DSA and it’s youth should have competing locals? This kind of thinking is the reason why the YDS needs to be reconnected with the DSA.
I’m inspired by the idea of an organization that can project progressive values on a broader scale to a wider audience; this name change is a logical part of the progression towards this.
In all seriousness though I don’t particularly like the use of “America” in DSA either, but we are Democratic Socialists living in America (a part of the Americas), and to thing that this name change is a pressing issue is ridiculous. This issue is a non-issue, its minor, its rhetorical and it’s not relevant to the pressing tasks at hand. I don’t see how it excludes people who would otherwise consider being involved in the progressive campaigns we take part in would shy away from an organization because it’s constitution has the word “America” without stating which part of America we represent.
Campus DSA will presumably in all but official documents operate as “Campus Democratic Socialists”, which doesn’t have the “Youth” label, which is indeed, like David said, unintentionally pejorative.
Great arguments for and against thus far…
I ultimately agree with the name change; because I do think there is a need to better integrate ourselves with DSA (for all the reasons David already mentioned). I think people are getting stuck on the name “Campus DSA”, which to me seems a minor detail. There were some preliminary discussions about potential names to be proposed for this amendment and that one simply sounded better than the others (“YDSA” for example which sounds more like a question than anything else)
I think a concern people have is that “Campus DSA” implies exclusion of non-campus youth activists from conferences, activities, etc. I really don’t think this was the intention in the proposal (If it was, then i am no longer for the amendment).
While non-campus youth would be encouraged to build DSA locals, i don’t see a reason why youth members could not partake in Campus DSA activities. Perhaps the final version of this amendment should make it clear that “Campus DSA” remains a place for youth to work together (whether it is on campuses or in communities).
Lastly, I also think that by more closely linking YDS and DSA, both organizations will be more likely to work with ideas proposed by the other. I would like to see YDS or Campus DSA do some actions around DSA’s Economic Justice Agenda for example. And it wouldn’t be a bad idea to see DSA more active in the youth section’s push for student debt relief.
I really appreciate all of the thoughtful responses so far. This amendment has for the most part provoked a great debate–which I think is always healthy for a political organization. I don’t think it is hyperbole to say a campus socialist group is somewhat oxymoronic–which was my basic point. I cannot overemphasize the elitist consequences of explicitly changing our name to exclude non-campus youth. Jason also asks why DSA sucks. My personal experience with DSA is mostly through YDS staff and visits to the national office. Former staff would be in a much better position than I am to explain the common perception that DSA is, at best, an unexciting place for young adult radicals. I suggest those invested in changing the constitution seek them out and get the full story. I will say that Jason’s post is a prime example of the patronizing way in which our adult section has treated its youth members. It is a bit insensitive for Jason to dismiss my argument as hyperbole…when it was made in good faith and therefore without merit. Nevertheless, I feel some historical animosity is creeping in here and I don’t want to digress if that is okay with Jason. I agree with Flavio and other folks who have suggested that DSA needs better and smarter integration with YDS. I strongly urge the membership to reject this particular name change though, because of the exclusionary implications of the word “campus.” We have to realize that although the exclusion may not have been the intention it will nevertheless be the effect.
Ahem. My post was hardly patronizing, Matt. I never suggested that I speak to you as anything other than an equal. There is no historical animosity. It just seems to me that the thrust of your thinking — whether you intend it to be so or not — is that DSA isn’t worth bothering with. Well, if that’s the case, why even be in the youth section, since someday you’re going to be too old a member of it…most of the DSA locals are in such a state that it would be very easy for YDS campus graduates to take them over, which in fact is what most DSAers want, I’m willing to bet…I really don’t believe that there are any elitist consequences to the name change. It simply does away with the idea that young DSAers must stay far, far away from elder DSAers even after they leave the campus. It re-integrates the 20-something members with the rest of the organization. This is something that absolutely must happen to revitalize DSA — it is necessary to ensure that those who join DSA as YDSers remain members for life.
I agree with Matt and Andrew in their assessment of the name change, but honestly, it [the proposed name] does more accurately depict the activities of YDS. In the last few months, I have found myself doing more actions on my own than under the YDS umbrella because I have so little interest in doing campus organizing, which is what the rest of the organization is doing. Has anyone ever told me that I have to do campus organizing in order to be in YDS? Of course not. But so many of our conversations center around it that it’s sometimes hard for me to remember why my activities off-campus are also relevant. So if we are only going to do campus-based stuff, then maybe our name should reflect that. There is something to be said for truth in advertisement. heh
Addendum to my previous post: I do want to second that I do find the new name rather elitist, though.
When I first read the proposal I personally felt a bit alienated because I am a youth who began my relationship with the DSA through the YDS, off campus. I also began to do workshops and events off campus with the name YDS. In our literature we always included the websites of the DSA and the YDS, along with our local information. After I read the reasoning behind the name change I felt a bit better about the intentions but when trying to hypothetically empathize with those non college attending youth, unfamiliar to the YDS, made me assume I would be excluded and does sound a elitist simply based on the word “campus.” For a different aspect of debate, for the proposal, the YDS has name recognition with the active left in America. Changing the name would create an unmentioned issue of creating conversation about the connection to the former name, YDS, when it was the goal to limit conversations about the connection between the DSA and YDS. Granted, that would be an extremely temporary issue, but we are at a boiling point in American politics where the Socialist left needs more solidarity locally, nationally, and internationally than ever before. As we all know Socialism is under attack by imperialism; the restoration of the Fourth Fleet in the South Atlantic, US Aid’s funding counter-revolutionary insurgencies in South and Central America, the proposed S. 1959 Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act in the US are just a few examples of anti-Socialist actions. The actual meat and potatoes of this argument circles around the exclusion of the mention of “Youth” in the proposed name. With the current name, as David explained, excludes administrators who, by most student government standards, are a vital component of any RSO’s existence. The before mentioned “White Women Feminist” group, who have members of minority ethnicity is a callus and oppressive name to said members. We have the same issue, with the proposed name change, for non-campus youth who want to work with YDS type issues (i.e. student debt relief, tuition, campus safety, ethnic and class diversity, etc…) In summation, we have an identity enigma.So, my conclusion is a multi-faceted revamping of DSA organizing and recruiting and the YDS constitution. I am for the name change for Campus DSA, I am also for an addendum to this amendment that omits any mention of age requirements, include a mention of C-DSA members being currently enrolled in school. For non-campus youth who wish to assist in C-DSA work a complementary DSA local group would be in order. In fact, DSA locals should sponsor C-DSA organizations to show solidarity, share economic stresses, and allow for more fluid dialog between the two. This would bring the DSA and the C-DSA even closer to being one organization on a physical, ideological and economic level. For those C-DSA chapters that do not have a DSA local at their disposal an effort by the DSA and YDS national should be done to connect former YDS and DSA members in their immediate area with current C-DSA members, as David has done for me in the past. An additional effort to reach out to the community by the C-DSA chapter would also be appropriate. Connecting with Community centers and other youth centered and non-profit organizations is a method I used in Louisville to spread the word of Socialism. Creating joint projects with these centers that involve public participation may spur some response from the older Left to create a DSA local.
I have to say I don’t really agree with this ammendment. If you really want to change something, I would make the name Young Democratic Socialists of America (YDSA) and just save yourself the trouble. “Campus” makes it sound as though the only work we do is school-related, which is not true. And honestly, it just sounds a little funky. I agree with Matt overall.
also, I don’t really see the point in excluding ourselves from the DSA. I mean everyone in the same cause should be united and not keeping up petty arguments.
The argument is that the current name and orientation of the organization is one of the factors leading to distance between DSA and YDS, so the name change will be one of the measures taken to advance both organizations
We all know that it is absolutely necessary to bridge the divide between YDS and DSA. There are too many of us that have been with YDS for a while now and need to start thinking about setting up DSA chapters. I’ve met a lot of young people at and after conferences who were very active in organizing during their college years and then after graduation just went off to do their own things because they couldn’t find a way to fit into DSA. The name change wouldn’t change YDS’ organizational structure or hinder it’s work, because we primarily operate on a campus setting on a national scale. …here is what is problematic- I’ve been out of school for a year and a half now, most of the key organizers in the Conway chapter are also out of school. We want to start fielding candidates for state office, affecting legislature, building educational cooperatives, suburban and urban agri-cooperatives, start town-hall style educational outreach seminars and recruiting outside of the university setting. I have a good idea about how DSA is organized…but I don’t know many of the people in it and I really don’t hear from any save for a small handful. YDS and DSA seem to be two separate organizations and we need to coax the old people to start involving themselves more with the younger generation and get the younger people to do likewise. The name change is a good way to express that intent. The YDSers who are now moving from campus organizing need to set up DSA Metro chapters- we’re young and we’re hungry and have a lot to say and a lot to do. We give DSA a boost and energize the older people who have the money to pump into campus organization so we could get the funding to actually hire two organizers for C-DSA.
I agree that we must change the name, but I do not agree with the name David has proposed. I think many would agree that there is a particular “badge of honor” associated with the name “Young Democratic Socialists.” That is to say, we willingly inform individuals about our political affiliation and with such vocalization, we allow our socialism (if you will) to transcend the confines of our respective institutions. By changing the name to Campus DSA, it will simply reduce the potency and potential impact YDS has just by articulating the very fact we are a part of YDS. Additionally, the name change does not reflect the status of recent college graduates and, as others have mentioned, youth who are not students. While David’s historical analysis is correct, we cannot forget that during the time before and during the Civil Rights Movement, the Black church, union leaders, and trained agitators fought side by side with students. From a particular perspective concerning today, there are members of IVAW who are 18-22. Through their direct experience with the deeply flawed and egregious foreign policy of the US, they have become palpable disenchanted; consequently, they are looking for a political outlet. The name “Campus DSA” will immediately tell them that since they are not affiliated with a college or university, they must join DSA. This poses a problem because youth are comfortable around youth, and they get comfortable around elders when they are accompanied by youth. Therefore, it may be difficult for someone around the age of 19 to join a local DSA chapter when it comprises of members who are 40-50 years old. That is a gap of two generations when encountering a person of 50. We do need to merge DSA and YDS together. But we must do so in a fashion that respects the comfort zone of others (we know peers are comfortable around their peers). However, David has a point. The name “YDS” does not mean much in the historical context of DSA. If a name change is proposed, I would go with “Young Democratic Socialists of America.” We can, in our mission statement, discuss how we primary focus on getting college students on the ground to make major reforms on their campuses (e.g. unionizing cafeteria workers, increasing the pay of maintenance workers, union made items, etc). But I feel “Campus DSA” is too narrow in terms of the name.
I believe that it is definitely time for a name change, however, I am against the name, Campus DSA. It makes it seem like we are confining the work that we do to just colleges and universities and that is completely false. And I think the name says a lot about a organization. If we want to be connected with DSA, I think that it would be appropriate to change the name to Young Democratic Socialists of America. I think it has a nice ring to it. Campus DSA, not so much.
I thank the previous poster for the eloquent response. Emahunn made the argument much better than I did. I have a simple and honest question: We have been discussing the “name change” as if it were simply that, when it seems as if it would actually abolish YDS and replace it completely with campus DSA chapters. Is this really what people want? To abolish YDS?
I don’t think that the intent was to outright abolish the youth sector. The idea was to encourage the formation of DSA metros instead of YDS Metros. We have two 50 year olds and a 40-something working with us in our campus chapter and when we go to start a metro chapter this year, how useful would it be for me to make it YDS? Maybe C-DSA isn’t catchy and Y-DSA would be good (If anything to keep us from being confused with the YDs- young democrats). However, we still need to make special efforts to build up DSA and make the transition smoother for older YDSers.
It’s good that we are feeling growing pains and have a number of people that have stuck with this through thick and thin. I know that I will be in touch with a lot of you until I succumb to dementia in my later years…and we all know that DSA needs a facelift. It’s got too many jowls and wrinkles and needs some fresh blood. Who says we can’t have whole DSA metros full of 20-somethings? We young adults would then be able to serve as intermediaries and get DSA to commit more to such things as the educational rights movement.
Please shift any further discussion on this topic to David’s response:http://theactivist.org/blog/?p=286 Thanks, the debate so far has been lively and both sides have articulated themselves effectively and respectfully.
I got involved in YDS when it was called the DSA Youth Section. When I heard the name was “changed” to YDS, I was appalled. Not simply because it seemed to separate cognitively and practically the more geographically mobile, younger people from their parent organization, DSA, but also because the acronym is pronounced the same as an anti-Semitic slur. [Among the people who debated the change from DSA youth section to YDS, I guess there must not have been many Jews. But I digress.] I would prefer “Young Democratic Socialists of America” [YDSA]. Or even “Democratic Socialists of America Youth”. [DSAY] Like others, I find the “campus” addition to the name unnecessarily restrictive. And my hat goes off to David Duhalde and the rest of the leadership, who have done so much to build YDS in the last four years or so.
I don’t feel strongly one way or another about the name change. But in general, a shorter initialism (or acronym) is better than a longer one. I don’t really think anybody reads ‘Yids’ when they see ‘YDS’ and I did like that YDS has a distinct identity from DSA. But I’m not the most active member and so I would defer to others who spend more time in the trenches.
Here are a few other possible names:
NYPSL: New Young People’s Socialist League…hopefully pronounced ‘nipples’
DSF: Democratic Socialists of Facebook
WAARIE: We Are Almost Respectable, In Europe
The Rose Pastor Folks
ICHS: i can haz sect?
I also believe in poaching existing names (laying the groundwork for future entryist takeovers). Here are some good ones:
ISO-Youth Section
College Republicans (Debsian Tendency)
The College Board
(PRODUCT)RED
Big Red
Teen People
haha some good suggestions. This debate
should be continued on David’s new post
Three letter acronym are suppose to be said, four letters pronounced. Hence “D-S-A” and “Dee-sock” (DSOC) or “Y-D-S” and “you-see” (IUSY). So no one should be saying “yids” in the first place. Regardless, we should get hung up on the pronouncement of YDS and Judaic credentials of those who changed the name nearly 10 years ago. Numerous Jews, including yours truly, have joined since then.The most important part is whether a name change today would be beneficial to the youth section in the long run. Please continue the debate here: http://theactivist.org/blog/?p=286Please, no more comments on this post.