Democratic Socialists in a Post-Occupy World with Kevin of Regrettable Century

Journey with us as we sit down with Kevin from the Regrettable Century podcast to dissect the fabric of leftist politics and the Democratic Socialists of America's energetic surge post-Bernie Sanders. Our conversation with Kevin peels back the layers on generational political engagement, providing perspective on the importance of seizing the moment and learning from the organizational shifts that continue to shape the DSA. As we reflect on Bernie's unwavering international policies, we also pay homage to influential thinkers like Michael Brooks, whose insights remain crucial in effectively maneuvering through the political terrain.

Stepping into the intricate dynamics of leftist organizations, we analyze the rise and fall of various socialist groups and the DSA's strategic pivot towards electoral politics. The discussion takes us through the post-Occupy era, touching on the internal challenges and external opportunities that leftist movements face in a rapidly shifting political landscape. Kevin offers a candid take on the role of opportunism in achieving political relevance and the intricacies of aligning with power to enact real change. The narrative of this episode brings to light the complex balancing act between maintaining progressive values and pragmatically engaging with the political system to foster transformation.

Concluding this thought-provoking exchange, we delve into the broader political climate, looking at the intersections of international dilemmas and the direction of left-wing organizations. Kevin shares insights into the evolving nature of labor politics and the interplay between identity and class struggle, all while considering the American political party landscape's influence on left-wing momentum. Our discussion closes with a critical assessment of the challenges and pathways forward for a left that not only champions correct ideologies but also seeks to implement tangible, impactful policies. Join us for this riveting episode that promises to illuminate the complexities and potential for meaningful change within leftist political engagement.

Transcript

C. Derick Varn: 1:35

Hello and welcome here to VormBlog, and today I'm talking to the third of four members of the Regrettable Century podcast and Fritamy of the show Actually, not really Fritamy, fritamy is reserved for people like Doug Wayne.

Kevin : 1:52

I'm gonna leave that in.

C. Derick Varn: 1:58

I would say, kevin, you and I've had a long dialogue where you were way more optimistic than me and on a recent, I've listened now to all the five-year plan episodes of the Regrettable Century. So you guys over there regrettable at the end of the year, go through and do your year review and you are the least blackpilled, to use the colloquial of of said Regrettable Century, and you tend to be more optimistic than me. But I have seen a very substantive shift in your politics in the last five years. And then, listening to these shows, I listened to year five first and I went back and like listened to all of them, going through the archives and I did see a pretty profound shift in your politics.

C. Derick Varn: 3:00

And yet you are the only member of the Regrettable Century collective host and host or dumb, I don't know, how the general, the general executive board of the non-party of four which, hey, it's probably larger than some chart groups these days who is still in a DSA. And I wanted to talk to you about the kind of profound shifts in the DSA in the last year, because I think you view them slightly more optimistically than I do, but actually I see some of the same things you do. And I wanted to talk about the kind of for lack of a better word dialectical tension and a lot of these movements, because I think there is there is a space where some people and these organizations could really learn something right now and whether they probably couldn't a year ago. And the question is for me, what is going to be conditions that are optimal for them to learn something? Because that's going to be, I think that is the right question.

Kevin : 4:20

I think, so just a sort of top-level frame frame my my own position on it.

Kevin : 4:30

I would say that.

Kevin : 4:31

So Chris has talked about DSA at this point being a whale fall, where it was put, you know, potentially like a large growing organism, and now it's a teaming ecosystem that's thriving on the, the carcass remains of what used to be a large, growing, thriving organism, and so that's the signs of life that we see currently is that sort of the, that that very temporary ecosystem feeding on the corpse, and it's soon to be no more.

Kevin : 5:11

I don't think that that's necessarily wrong and I don't have a counter metaphor necessarily in mind to propose, but what I would say is that's not. I don't think that that's guaranteed, and even if it is guaranteed, I think that the best hopes for pivoting into something worth having will come from organizing the best elements of DS, that DSA, into whatever comes after it, even if it is a dead, you know, dead on arrival currently. So I, I suppose, when I, when I speak up in defensive DSA or sound optimistic about it, I don't want to overstate that optimism in the sense of presenting myself as thinking that DSA is assured or even probably going to be successful or are, you know, or the a useful, good, productive use of any of our time or energy in the future, but rather that there is at least a kernel of hope in there, and I don't know what else to do well, it's interesting to me to think about this a little bit.

C. Derick Varn: 6:42

Let's focus in on the figure Bernie Sanders, because finally there's been a realization of the implications of some of Bernie Sanders is international politics. Now I think those international politics have been the same since, like 1984. Oh yeah, they're remarkably consistent. He's always been iffy on anti-zionism. He has flirted with supporting radical-ish movements abroad, but always step back.

C. Derick Varn: 7:15

I mean that you know, ask him about his relationship to the Sandinistas to this day and he'll start sputtering and get mad at you for asking the question, and that you know that is not something. Weirdly, it's only centrist to point that out, but I've always thought that was an interesting like development, like we just don't talk about that. His relationship to the military industrial complex got him in trouble with with the more radical end of the Vermont West which, admittedly, was booked tonight's in the 80s, but still in the 80s. And there's also a thing that I think Chris Catron is right about is Bernie actually is a representative not of one generation back, but two. I mean, he is basically the last remnant of the reformist end of the new left. That's young enough to still be alive.

Kevin : 8:11

I think it's true. I don't think it was ever. Well, anybody who entered the, the Bernie moment, with their eyes open, I think, with clear head, I don't think regarded Bernie as as a figurehead in the sense that we think of you know, cult leaders or you know great leaders of parties or something. He wasn't. He wasn't Chavez, he wasn't the, the figure who was carrying every, you know, carrying the party to the left. He, what he? I think he was an opportunity, he was a moment. He, he embodied a real something that was actually existing and not just in our imaginations, but but something that was a real possibility, with an actual break with with the world spirit. At the moment, that proposed to us the opportunity to go down a different road, in a different path, and we could talk about our, we could harness that moment to the best of our abilities, or we could just sit on the sidelines and lecture everybody else for their imperfect imperfections, and I think the right thing to do in that moment was to ride that. You know. You know, ride that wave.

C. Derick Varn: 9:49

I was of two minds about that. I was very much of the lecture people for their imperfections in 2016, although I am shocked to hear that you would do something like that with.

C. Derick Varn: 10:03

A funny thing for me was that the 2016 ironically illustrated to me that it was a substantive break, because my initial response was just like and in someone of my defense, I was not on the ground in the United States, but I'm like I've heard this before. I was in the Gravel campaign. I remember the Cassinage campaign. I remember I remembered it the Jesse Jackson campaign, which is an August. Do it actually?

Kevin : 10:30

that one, I think, is more now this year.

C. Derick Varn: 10:34

But my initial response from my seat at the time in Egypt was just like well, this is going to be probably bigger than Gravel, our Cassinage, but not a lot. And it ended up being huge. The irony for me is when I moved on to team like okay, let's what's, let's see where we can dialectically push this because we know it's gonna hit a wall. And people get mad at me for saying that, but I'm like we should, we should endorse it, we should go along with it, but it's going to hit a wall and you should point.

Kevin : 11:06

That's the whole point of our diet, or? Forgive me if I keep interrupting you, I just know, that that's the whole. I think that that's like the whole point of our the regveral centuries. Harping on about dialectical pessimism is the whole point of this is not to be black-pilled cynics, but rather to say that we are going to hit a wall in our best hopes and our best possible moments. It's, we're going to hit a wall, so let's plan for and prepare for it.

C. Derick Varn: 11:36

Let's enter into anything that we enter into with why, eyes wide open and be aware of what the fuck we're doing yeah, and I think I think for me, with the boning moment, that the 2020 burning moment was an hour and a minute of our flying at dusk, so I was not really here to fill the energy in 2016. I did fill the energy, legitimately fill the energy in 2020. But, ironically, I do think there's something to the to the critique of Bernie ism that by 2020, even if he never, you know, really truly joined the Democratic Party that he would, he had lost some of the appeal, not all, but some of the appeal as an outsider to this system. In other words, like that break with, with the movement of history that he represented in the left, even if it was a callback to an older left, was real but also already being reacqu recuperated in the likes of people like, I would say, the more opportunistic end of the squad, like I mean, you know, we'll give Riseda to leave credit into a lesser degree, a Han Oma credit for being consistent in ways that have been punished, but like, yeah, those were not the two people.

C. Derick Varn: 12:57

People were were initially super hopeful and it was Akashiyo Cortez, it was, to a lesser degree, cory Bush, it. In a very strange way, I felt like we were realizing the truth of 2016 for someone like me was actually something that I saw only in its dissolution in 2019-2020. But that led me in an interesting scenario because I just want to talk about, like, what I can figure out for the objective numbers of the DSA, which the DSA used to be very good at being open about. They are not anymore, for obvious reasons. You can kind of figure it out if you look at like insider documents that are not, that are not hidden, but they do not advertise.

Kevin : 14:02

Yeah, yeah that yeah, there there are people in leadership who are all about like openness and if you find that what they convey about the, their access to internal numbers or whatever which they do, but they don't get like spread around and publicized or collated into graphs and all that kind of stuff, yeah, right?

C. Derick Varn: 14:23

yeah, exactly so you can find it. It does exist, just like I found. It took me forever to find it, but I found, like, what percentage of dues go where? Like, like, dsa is actually a somewhat transparent organization for a left organization, frankly yeah, one of the huge frustrations about left organizations is like you you see one and you're like no one even knows how many members you have. Like like you know it might be five, it might be five thousand, we have no idea.

Kevin : 14:52

That's not true for the DSA, but operate like the Bolsheviks who were operating in under you know, zaris Russia well, and robbing banks to fund themselves. Like you know, we're trained robbing trains or whatever to fund themselves like we're not in those conditions, guys, we have freedom of speech.

C. Derick Varn: 15:09

I mean it is funny because when you read, like what Mark suggests you do, where, like Bolshevik style sells there's not something Marks would have forbidden, but he's very much like when you can be open like in Switzerland was always his example at the time you should do so and I'm like we can be open, like like look, you know it's not like that the contest sun grooms aren't swarming with feds anyway, so like it's just, you might as well, but the DSA will still claim to have almost a hundred thousand members and what was interesting about that in the context of 2019 is the grew it felt like. It felt like they were growing exponentially for a while because when I started following them in the first inbreeding campaign we went from, you know, they had 5,000 members effectively. That was largely in New York state political group that had achieved things in the 80s of significance. Actually, that was frozen at that 5,000 level for 30 years. Then the Jacobin reading group start just to recount the history for people who are a little bit younger.

C. Derick Varn: 16:24

After Occupy, people are frustrated with the grave right end of Occupy stagnation and you start seeing this build. And so you start seeing the there's debates in the larger left about where should we go now that these sectarian organizations are dying? And by that we saw the ISO fall apart. But people could see this cracking after Occupy like the way the old sectarian left of the 90s couldn't really deal with.

C. Derick Varn: 16:55

Occupy was another indication that there was something new coming. You saw socialists alternative being exported from the UK here, explode in your region actually and then quickly die off because they couldn't figure out how to handle it's going through and yeah, yeah, basically how to handle the Bernie moment and how much discipline of their old Trotsky's party cadre organization what they're going to maintain. There were lots of us who had hoped that the IWW and not the DSA was going to be the rallying cry, because the IW had no prior history of working with the Democrats. It was, but we lost out. I mean like we lost out partly because the IWW was kind of poorly run at the national level.

Kevin : 17:51

So the DSA explodes, but it doesn't truly, I mean- I think in that moment people were looking toward direct political involvement specifically as well. That was part of that explosion was people. I think if it has any, if it's gonna stick around, it's gotta pivot to labor and labor organizing. But that moment was a moment of direct electoral political involvement and that's why I think DSA was the home of the explosion rather than IWW.

C. Derick Varn: 18:23

I would agree and I would actually even go a little bit deeper. Some of the things that are still the structural flaws of DSA are also its ability to house this in ways that other groups work. It's, very ironically, very both centralized and confederated simultaneously, so much so that there's not really regional or mid-tier organizational strata to handle things. That's why this whole quasi-sectarian caucus system became so important and the Auteans, because there was really no way to organize the difference between the locals and the nationals. Nor was there a clearer way to like talk about ideological differences in tendencies within the organization, where there was actually another organization, actually born at the same time, another one that I thought maybe would have taken off and for a moment looked like it was going to and didn't, which was the SPUSA, the Mimi Solzhek.

C. Derick Varn: 19:29

Mimi died recently, so pour out a little bit of COG0 for him, but the Mimi Solzhek led SPUSA had multiple tendencies. It came from the same split. I mean it was the corresponding organization to the DSA, but also it could not drop I'm not quite sure because it's not quite right to say a sectarian but they wouldn't get on the burning campaign. They actually ran somewhat in opposition to it, I suppose because they refused to work with Democratic electeds, so this led to them not being able to really do an insider-outside strategy, and so they also I mean they more or less actually collapse in the burning moment. There's a lot of groups that almost seize up to the DSA and fail. That's all deep history now, in terms of the last, although for me this is all relatively recent history, but it's it doesn't seem that long.

Kevin : 20:34

Whenever you just said for all the young listeners. I was like, oh damn, that's right, I'm getting old.

C. Derick Varn: 20:40

Yeah, I know, I mean that's the funny thing, cause for me it's like well, you know, I entered the left around 2005 to 2007. And I felt old then, yeah, yeah, because I was 27. And I was.

Kevin : 21:02

You are old for a leftist who's not senior citizen Right.

C. Derick Varn: 21:05

Well, I mean, that was the thing we used to joke about it, Like you're either 18, and this is in the odds are you're 70 and you're lecturing us about what you did in SNCC and like how you joined a Trotsky-Easter Marxist-Leninist group depending on your orientation in the 70s, and then, like you just been holding out and maybe joined the DSA because you know they had a group locally and they met once a week.

C. Derick Varn: 21:32

That was true in a lot of organizations, I mean. The slight exception was the ISO, and from the 90s to the mid-oughts the ISO grows and collapses too.

Kevin : 21:47

But yeah, I think it. The ISO succeeded in gathering the campus left and so that necessarily involved, you know, grad students and like adjunct professors, that sort of thing. So I think that's where you saw the middle age group actually appearing in left organization there.

C. Derick Varn: 22:07

in that sense, yeah, Well, I mean also, when you say the campus left, you mean third campus left, because the campus left.

Kevin : 22:15

Like C-A-M-P-U-S is what I meant, but yes.

C. Derick Varn: 22:19

Oh, campus, okay, yeah, but yeah, they did effectively. They came in and grabbed up all the the remainders of the campus organization movement. They were the you know, I mean, and your co-hosts come out of this time. They were really the only game in town that was an anarchist in any sense.

Kevin : 22:40

Yep, that's in fact. That is my radicalization. As I, you know, I was a young person who I almost dropped out of high school, went to community college for one semester and flunked out and delivered pizzas for a few years and worked some odd jobs, sat around on the internet reading things, watching documentaries reading Howard's Inn, watching Noam Chomsky documentaries and keeping up with like Democracy Now and just sitting there being bitter and angry and having absolutely no idea what to do with my life or how to express any of these thoughts or ideas. Eventually, I end up going back to school for my undergraduate and the second I got to campus. I was looking for the organized student left that I had become familiar with through, you know, histories of the new left and that sort of stuff that I had encountered and where I was, where I went to school, there was, there were two organizations, there was SDS and there was ISO. Sds was where the anarchists hung out, even though nationally on that campus, even though nationally SDS was a front group, for I think it was Friso.

C. Derick Varn: 23:58

People don't get. There was this weird Anoco-Mauus thing that was really super weird.

Kevin : 24:03

But locally the anarchists they housed themselves as SDS and there wasn't anybody else but anarchists in that, and so I was like, well, I don't really know what my politics aren't necessarily. But you know, the Leninists are organized and functional. The anarchists sit around and talk to each other about how everybody should be super radical or whatever. So I hung out with the ISO and got educated as a Marxist because they were the ones who actually got organized, you know.

C. Derick Varn: 24:42

Probably around the same time for me. I was in Georgia. I'm looking for any left organization and there at the time were literally none. Yeah, even the. The SID didn't even have a chapter in my state, despite Atlanta existing like that was where we were at, and this was particularly in regards to the my immediate recognition of. I'm gonna say I think a lot of the narratives of candidate betrayal are greatly overstated. Actually, I don't think, for example, atasio Cortez portrayed us. I think we betrayed ourselves and believe it either.

C. Derick Varn: 25:25

I mean I'm saying we, because it was most of my friends. I never did and trust her, but I don't think. I mean I think like there's a there's like a recognition now of mutual opportunism, but I don't think she betrayed us in, even though she adopted the rhetoric and she wrote that line. But I mean like that we kind of had to know, as some people.

Kevin : 25:51

I think so. Here's one of the mistakes that I think even the best of the left continues to make is is in trying to make pronouncements about what figures or movements or moments are going to turn into. Everybody sort of like, picks a position aside or whatever, and then pronounces this is what's going to happen, and I'm correct. And then, whichever way it sort of comes out, everybody gets to be like well, see, I was correct, so my theory is the right one, or whatever, when I think it is a mistake to engage with political opportunities like that. I think the world is radically contingent, or at least from our perspective. Before dusk, before the owl, the nervous, the wings, everything at least appears contingent, and we must engage with a radically contingent world and we have to recognize that any given moment is full of possibilities. It is a human body that is full of germs that one or the other may end up killing that person, but to pronounce upon birth which of those germs will be its death is premature. I think we need to recognize the possibilities, good or bad, and engage with a political moment in full awareness of those things. I think even AOC represented a moment that could be useful, could have been. I think it was very obvious. Like I'm not even super involved, I don't even really know that much I became aware of her after she got elected, and so as soon as I became aware of her, I was like, oh wow, that's pretty great for DSA. This is a hell of a moment. Dsa really is having a hell of a moment right now.

Kevin : 28:09

Then it was as soon as she got into office. I think I had heard that she was heard that she laid off half of her staff and hired on a bunch of Democratic party operatives, justice Democrats and stuff like that, and it was in that moment that I immediately knew like, okay, I know where this is going. I know which way she's chosen to go with this she is going to. I think she's an artist. I think she believes herself to be helping to make more progressive policy and enact more progressive change or whatever, and be the left wing of the possible, like what DSA used to say it wanted to be and all that sort of thing. But the reality is she's made her bed with the leadership of the Democratic party and will not rock the boat when necessary, such as in moments like this.

Kevin : 29:06

I think, however, to sort of maybe circle us back around to the original topic of this is where I see the importance of engaging with the moment and not just pronouncing what is going to happen which very likely is going to happen, is DSA is just gonna spiral into a relevance or whatever but also see the possibilities, see the different germs that exist in it, and, I think, to continue to relegate ourselves to a relevance by making pronouncements on the sideline about how AOC and whoever else is an opportunist and betraying the working class, et cetera, it's like okay, well, sure you're right, sure you're pure, you haven't been touched or sullied by the sinful impurities, but you're not doing anything, you're not helping anybody. I think, though, that if the DSA could potentially have the possibility to harness this moment to capture a visible and at least tiny bit potent bit of political power and turn itself into something that actually matters and can assert itself against its elected representatives not against, but over its elected representatives start to act like a political party, even if its only elected representatives are elected representatives. They're not elected representatives Even if its only elected representatives are members of the Democratic Party. The United States political system, party system, is very different, and I may start to sound like the dirty break folks here, but it is a functionally a radically different party system in this country than in other countries. And if DSA could organize itself in such a manner that it started to operate like a party and start to assert itself over its electeds in a manner that is well finessed enough, it could do.

Kevin : 31:25

It's a delicate operation, but it could turn itself into something that actually matters instead of just saying from the beginning, a priori, we won't solely ourselves by being associated with these bad people. You know, the left could really benefit from some serious opportunism. Some people who actually give a shit about winning and putting their hands on power. Yeah, there are dangers in that, yeah, there are risks in that, and we need to look through the history of the left to learn those lessons and see what we can do to avoid them as we grow and develop and become more influential and actually start to matter in the world. But right now, the dangers of opportunism are not our problem. Those are not our problem. Our problem is absolute and utter impotence, irrelevance. We do not matter.

Kevin : 32:33

There are no opportunists around because we don't matter and the future is not on our side.

C. Derick Varn: 32:44

That last bit is important. My point in starting with Obama is that actually, I do think was a betrayal, not of the left, actually, but of an antiwar center, even though I'm also going to say Obama didn't misrepresent his positions. But what made it a betrayal was that he campaigned as an answer to a decaying democratic establishment and ultimately, what he endorsed and re-empowered it in a very well, I mean, obama didn't bring anyone else up with him. I mean, that's the irony of the like. When we talk about Obama Democrats, we're talking about one man. What he endorsed, in his coward's way out, was to re-empower the old Clinton Atari Democrats, going all the way back to Carter establishment.

C. Derick Varn: 33:41

Now, jumping forward to what you're talking about today, I have gotten frustrated with the purity mongers too, for somewhat different reasons because, for example, when they talk about Occupy, like always doomed to fail, and I was like well, we, honestly anyone involved who was half serious knew it was doomed to fail. The thing is, it mattered how it failed, it mattered where it went, and to just shed on it now, to remove it from its process of collective awakening, is to actually miss a certain point, and it's easy to do that with the DSA today, which is something that I have struggled with. I'll give you an example. I'll tell you an opportunist that I was supported, that everybody loves and they're not going to like when I call him an opportunist, but he was and I was Michael Brooks. I learned a lot from Michael. Because he was an opportunist, because it was a time period where at least I had someone to engage with and that did have an effect, whereas before it was someone like me going like you know who am I going to fucking engage with? Some Obama, you know, or even a justice Democrat?

C. Derick Varn: 35:10

Because during the Brook years, yes, I mean like I used to tell him to his face and I'm like it's going to be interesting the moment when you betray us, but he's like I'm not going to do that. I'm like it's not going to even be your fault, dude. It's not a personal failing here. But at the same token, we are in a world right now where our options seem to be and I'll get a little brimmy to where you and I have some An interesting thing about what could happen in this current moment. We're looking at a situation where even what we might call the rad lib left on certain issues, internationally and in some of the dumbest frameworks I can think of, has still arrived at a decent position Right Like look, comparing the Israeli Palestine situation to indigenous situation in the United States is both kind of apt and also very stupid simultaneously, right.

Kevin : 36:18

There's big differences.

C. Derick Varn: 36:19

There's big differences, but, at the same time, it's such a monumental shift from even where we were a year ago. I mean, like the BDS commission and the DSA was getting its ass kicked every round. You know, despite the fact that it's one of the few issues where the majority of the DSA whether you're left, right or center of the DSA, I don't know people like there's a right of the DSA, yes, that's what the squad is are worse. There is actually worse in there. There is A lot of it's in New York and LA, but this, that's one issue where the majority of youngish people people under 40, 35, were united and it was still getting its ass kicked.

C. Derick Varn: 37:21

Now there's an irony here and I talked about this in 2020, that, look, you know, during the high part of the 50s, when the CPUSA was truly being persecuted and dying, although I'm going to say something that's slightly controversial. Yes, the Red Scare is part of that. Yes, it started at the States, but the way that they organized the popular front did not help them at all in the 40s and 50s, and by that I meant like they did hide their position. So when people were like, oh, you were operating secretly in the union movement, they were. They did seem completely incoherent and beholden to USSR's politics, even when it didn't make sense domestically. Yes, there was. Yes, they did. They also had over focused on the same kind of things we over focused on. Now, I mean, like a great, a great section of the leadership of the CPUSA and the 40s and 50s have come out of the campus movements. That was new then. I mean, to be fair to them, like that's after the GI Bill, there's all these formerly working class people entering the universities. Like it is a kind of a different move than it is today, but it opened them up to being purged in a very real way, particularly when the AFL-CIO combined.

C. Derick Varn: 39:00

But all that aside, like, yeah, they didn't help themselves. But again, if I was a leftist in the 40s, would I have opposed the CPUSA? I have no idea actually, I don't know. It became easy to do in hindsight in the 60s and 70s, even from the Marxist-Leninist perspective. So to talk about how that's related to now, though, during the 50s there's two things that happened.

C. Derick Varn: 39:36

One, the CPUSA did basically a deracialization campaign that was kind of noble but ended up in the 50s going to what we might call woke purges. Today they started going after people off of any inclination of having chauvinist orientation, and it was not led by black members of the party. Two, the CPUSA started seeing its way to survive was to be the safeguarder of a minority arts movement and whatnot, which was not. If you were a black intellectual coming out of the 1950s you probably got CPUSA money and a very real sense Like you go through, like Lorraine Hansberry, james Baldwin, at one point Richard Wright.

C. Derick Varn: 40:30

Now all those people eventually break. But there's a real nucleus there and one that I think is utterly defensible is one of the better things that they did. It did make it seem like after they got purged from union leadership that they just didn't have any relationship to the working class at all. And so during this period is when they start taking very radical positions on foreign policy but at the same time doubling down on the popular front strategy. And one of the things I've always found interesting and this is where I'm going to give normal nemesis of the show Seth Ackerman nemesis of the show, not because of the dirty break plan, because I just think Ackerman's usually kind of economically wrong and everything, but when I think, though, the worst of the name that the dirty break gets is from people propounding it and then sort of backing away at every opportunity to start enacting it.

C. Derick Varn: 41:46

Right, exactly and fair enough. Like that does look bad. The Eric Blonks and the Seth Ackerman's of the world do kind of do that. They're like what do you mean? We're going to build our former agenda? Why are you saying now's the moment? We need to actually do this thing?

C. Derick Varn: 42:09

But I want to give Ackerman and Blonk credit for this. They are right that the popular front strategy was a dead end, partly because it did not recognize the difference between a parliamentary system and the American congressional system, because there was no way to really do an inside-outside strategy from the CPUSA standpoint without just making itself just completely adjunct to a party that was actively hostile to it in the main. So they took more and more radical positions internationally but they took less and less substantive positions at home and that was a sign eventually of their irrelevant, which hits in the 60s when you start seeing the new communist movement and all these malice. I mean some of this is because the sign of Soviet split is happening. There's internal divisions within the Marxist-Leninist movement, themselves trying to deal with the legacy of Stalin.

C. Derick Varn: 43:13

All this happens and the CPUSA doesn't know how to handle it and it's also getting attacked. The other thing is it's getting attacked successfully by the left and right during this time period. There is a way in which, though, that time period is the analogous time period for us to look at for what's happening right now, because, on one hand, I think we're like internationally speaking, I think the DSA is finally taking some chances that I think are defensible, although there are some things that are going to break his mind, like this current stuff in Guyana between Maduro and like I don't know how they're going to handle that?

C. Derick Varn: 43:55

I don't know how anyone's going to handle it. Even I don't have a good line on it because, like, like listening to Marxist-Leninist and Venezuela say like, hey, we should be calling for peace, and then Marxist-Leninist in the United States like endorsing the Maduro machine, it's just a really weird place to be in. But and I think a lot of that kind of stuff is coming and this is where your inclination like hey, if you try to call this and just try to like gloat on where it is, the easiest call is that it's going to go bad.

Kevin : 44:21

Right, because that's almost guaranteed You're going to be right.

C. Derick Varn: 44:24

Like, like you know, like it's absolutely true, but what do you? That does not put you in any position. And this is where, you know, I said to you privately or well, I'm not totally probably isn't one of the discord forms. I thought that your position has really matured because there's a recognition of this, like, yes, it's probably going to go poorly, but if we don't engage at all or we just sit on the sidelines, we, we maintain our purity, we maintain looking correct, I guess, but we don't have any grounds to interact, not even with the DSA. I mean, to some degree. I don't so much care about that, but for example, the DSA, for good and ill, has been heavily involved in Union bureaucratic struggles. So they've been engaged in the MacAvery stuff which I think has overled people to enter unions as staffers, absolutely. But there has been a real interest in shifting from primarily electoral work to primarily labor work. In a way, the DSA's leadership's own shenanigans around Biden and the railroad strike actually force people to look at realistically Now. Are we in a moment of labor resurgence?

C. Derick Varn: 45:59

For me it's hard to say, because clearly there's militancy there. Clearly the UAW is actually doing something. Clearly that's where the movement of the left is going to be. However, for the past two years, a lot of these same people have basically been making public pronouncements that were just objectively false, like that unions were growing. They aren't. That there's a real battle in the NCLB there kind of is, but how much that's actually mattered has been very unclear that we were seeing a wave of unionization in the service industry. I'm not going to say that's false, but it hasn't produced contracts that have mattered yet and it's just been a wanting to declare wins.

Kevin : 46:56

The Amazon labor union of historic, incredible, cannot you know be able to say how amazing the one victory was, but has not yet been replicated anywhere else One warehouse.

C. Derick Varn: 47:13

And I put all that into the thing to say. You know, I actually think dialectically speaking and I know people hate that word because people abuse it. But I'm going to defend the use of dialectics here. I know you are, but my audience is always iffy when I throw the D word around. But in a real sense, like, just as declaring victory too soon is dumb, the tendency for someone like me are some of your cohas over at Regretable Century and I have actually gotten into some arguments where I've actually told Chris in particular that he's too pessimistic, which is wild. Me calling anyone too pessimistic is not on my bingo card. But we also don't know where this ends yet.

C. Derick Varn: 48:08

Like the UAW thing I did not see I've been and that's with me following it and that is with being covered by people who I think are borderline class enemies. You know like I don't necessarily have a super high opinion of the journalistic work of Ryan Graham, but there was something real going on there and in frankly, historically, if you know the history of the UAW, that is the most top down shitting union. That was not one of the guild unions. Like its history is bad. A whole lot of its prior leadership is in prison, like it's, but it looked for a while. There's way to stay relevant was just to go organize TAs, which I mean. Tas need representation. It's not a bad thing, but it's not. That's not a permanent labor base. What?

Kevin : 49:02

is a odd fucking direction for the auto workers union to go Another thing. It's not even industrial unionism, that's just. I don't know what that is.

C. Derick Varn: 49:13

That's. That is, temporary worker guild unionism, of which which, also, if you take the most cynical reading and I'm going to just explain it I don't think it's correct in this case, but if you take the most cynical reading, if your labor leadership, it's great because those TAs are never going to stand in the union long enough to up to create a union opposition to you. But there, ironically and interestingly, ryan, I'm going to give Ryan grim credits. I'm going to give some people I normally shit on credit. Ryan was right that there was something going on in the leadership of the UAW. From actually ironically being one of the worst unions, it created a space for a pushback internally that even more left wing oriented unions had not been able to do.

C. Derick Varn: 50:04

And as much as I don't love it you know because I do it, man, I get a perverse joy on shitting on the DSA that I think the DSA is labor bureaucratic run had some effect on that Now, and that's a good thing, because it does seem like right now, if you look at the purview of US left history. We've been focusing on the wokeness wars for 10 years. All right, and yes, identity politics is super annoying. What has become clear in the Biden years. Is that, even amongst members of, let's say, the petty bourgeois of oppressed minority communities like black, latin and indigenous communities, that that is being seen as, in poll after poll, frankly, white people bullshit of which some of our members can benefit, but if you're not in a university, it's not really going to help you.

Kevin : 51:13

That is where we're at Working in HR or something like that.

C. Derick Varn: 51:16

Right yeah.

Kevin : 51:18

Like so that nonprofit's also, which a bunch of the DSA you know. They become union staffers or working in a nonprofit.

C. Derick Varn: 51:28

That's which is a traditional pathway, that if you look at like something like the DSA, but an actual party in Canada, the NDP, is also something they deal with. All the time, and I think that's always going to be a problem.

C. Derick Varn: 51:49

I think also like union bureaucracy is also going to be a problem, but the fact that in America we're talking about workers militancy at all, because there was a slight uptick in unionization in 2007, 2008, that was completely unnoticed and it was a response to the crisis of the time. That's why it was unnoticed, because it also happened that while that was going on, the auto unions were crushed, just completely crushed. Then there was another uptick in 2017, 2018, 2019, where these quote PMC. I like to think of teachers as labor aristocrats because I don't really think we're elites. But whatever, I'm going to admit I have a chip in this game, but where we had gotten fed up and had started actually like forcing our unions kicking and screaming to do stuff, and that is absolutely true that like, yes, the NEA and the various state EAs and the American Federation of Teachers, the AFT, got on board, but it was kicking and screaming and we made them and that was another wave of seeming union radicalization that, unfortunately, while it won in the short run, it's lost in the long run in so much that, like, no one wants to be a teacher anymore and the unions don't aren't really able to continue their growth except in very specific parts of the industrial Midwest Because they're hampered by old union charters that are written before this happened, etc. They have not had the ability to keep people in the profession long enough to start rewriting these charters.

C. Derick Varn: 53:48

So I say all that like so. Now we have this moment. So Bernie is electorally what these labor moments are, and for me the labor moments are ultimately more important than the Bernie moment. But the Bernie moments where all became obvious that there really was something and the in correspondingly and I'm going to hate to give the platypus affiliated decided credit for this the Trump moment was the other place where it was something obvious. It was like the dialectical negation, but yet also where it showed like there is a real internal movement. Now I'm also going to point out that the great myth of the anti, of the anti Trump left, was that Trump was somehow significantly worse than any fucking Republican Because he, if he was, it's only in the last week of his presidency, which is not when they were really on the game. Right Like so.

Kevin : 54:48

And worse than what I mean. Well, here's I don't know if I'm I've encountered a lot of use of the word accelerationism. That doesn't that sounds. It's about like technology and stuff and I'm not using it in that sense. I'm using it in a sense of like accelerate the contradictions within capitalism. That this is where my acceleration is bent kind of comes out with the whole Trump moment in the yeah. That was like the worst part of his presidency and worst in some sense, but he certainly helped to accelerate the disintegration of the great Satan that is the US Empire. That doesn't sound like a worse condition for the left to be in.

C. Derick Varn: 55:28

You and I. This is where you and I have tensions. I think the US Empire is probably actually in better shape than you think it is.

Kevin : 55:34

Yeah, well, yeah.

C. Derick Varn: 55:36

But like, like. For example, I like I had an argument recently with someone on Ukraine where I was like look, I don't think they ever really thought Ukraine was going to win. I think that was all for public consumption. I think they just wanted to fucking stress test Russia and they succeeded. And now they're going to throw a saloon scan of the bus and all the, all the. You know, the people who thought this was a national liberation game are going to have egg on their face and a whole lot of Democrats are going to have in their face. But the military industrial complex and give a shit about that?

Kevin : 56:08

No, and the Democrats aren't really going to. They're not going to have egg on their face, they're going to be. They get to have felt like heroes for a minute and then move on to the next cause to the shore, and forget about Ukraine. I mean, give a shit about it.

C. Derick Varn: 56:20

And, honestly, the next cause of your is harder for them because 80% of their base, not 50% of their base, um, uh, it thinks they're on the wrong side. I mean like um.

Kevin : 56:34

But you know, an additional benefit of the whole Ukraine thing was, um, making a display, uh, for China. I mean, that's the real. I mean Russia, russia's. You know, the United States doesn't give a shit about Russia. Uh, the United States cares about Russia. Insofar as it is, it is a whipping boy, an example for the rising power that is China.

C. Derick Varn: 56:55

Right, and it also did something. I mean, let's let's also be quite frank on real geo-strategian policy. It wasn't just a symbol. It's fucking accelerated the shattering of the Belt and Road Initiative.

Kevin : 57:06

Yeah.

C. Derick Varn: 57:07

Um, it absolutely did.

C. Derick Varn: 57:09

And so it did, did, did, um. You know, someone's asked me what you know. Clearly there are people who thought Ukraine correct. I'm like I don't put it past the military industrial complex to have people in it who believe they're drunk down Kulay, oh yeah, but I don't, uh, in fact I would maybe even say maybe, like most of them did. But I promise you there were some people in that who, who? This is what they thought the most likely outcome was.

C. Derick Varn: 57:35

Because the thing I have to say about our, the US empire that bugs me and this is something I think the left maybe is kind of beginning to understand Um, maybe Knock on desk Um, is that the center cannot hold, but it holds fine, because the military is like the secret king of our fucking society. Like, if you want to see where innovation comes from, right now it's still from the military. You want to see where, like you know what part of the US government is. I mean, what's crazy is US imperialism, even on the right, is not popular Anymore, and yet the US military, the bearer of that imperialism, has had only a minor down tick. It's absolutely bizarre, but it tells you where our society actually really is.

Kevin : 58:30

Well and beyond just a sentiment, I mean it's a popular sentiment, it's it's structurally embedded in people's lives. It's a good chunk of the the absolutely minuscule unionized workforce in the US south are military people who work for military contractors Right.

C. Derick Varn: 58:55

The irony, actually the interesting thing right now is there's been a lot of left pushback on, like the poverty draft and all that, which is funny to me, because it's like it's like okay, they're like, well, there's no poverty draft, and there was, though that's actually just stopped recently and you know what killed it? The drone program, Like, and they're like, oh well, the military is super right. I'm like you live in a country that's super white.

Kevin : 59:21

Yeah.

C. Derick Varn: 59:21

Like, yes, and in 2051, there'll be a moment where it'll be majority and minority, but there's no minority group by itself. That is, that is not. And also, frankly, it seems like whiteness is being able to expand and incorporate Latin people, pretty okay, oh yeah. So, so that hope is on. If you thought that was your way out, good luck on that. But the military is still actually more of color than the general population, and so it's. It's an interesting dynamic and it also is, like you know, weirdly. Even I trust soldiers more than I trust cops, like, like you know. It's just just a thing, but it's, I think, right now.

C. Derick Varn: 1:00:13

Here's what I wanted to get to when you were talking about Palestine. You're saying the DSA had this great response to Palestine. I actually am going to, I'm going to give you, with some hiccups where they lost the message, most of the people, mostly because they were dealing with the PSL they have had, they have been able to walk a line that has had both a radical position and yet not really draw, outside of one or two events in New York, a big target on themselves, which is, in the United States today, a political victory that we have not seen, because, while, yes, there is some. You know there is some anti-Semitism right now. There is some left anti-Semitism. I've seen it, it's real. It's very rare. It is not the majority of the things that I come in contact with.

Kevin : 1:01:00

I also don't think it's. I don't think it's resulting in anything material.

C. Derick Varn: 1:01:08

No, I mean like when you see leftist yell at someone for posting a menorah on TikTok. That's stupid, but it doesn't actually like like. It's not like right-wing anti-Semitism, which does tend to kill people.

Kevin : 1:01:21

Exactly. That is exactly the point.

C. Derick Varn: 1:01:24

It's just annoying, Although I will say, the interesting thing about right now is there's been this left focus on Christians, Zionists and yes, there are more Christians Zionists in existence than there are even Jews but even on the right, that is a declining minority tendency. Like I was actually interviewing someone on the Israel-Palestine conflict from Strange Matters Magazine and one of the things that we noticed is 56% of Republicans don't support us fully backing the Israeli state. Now, some of that anti-Semitism, absolutely, but I don't think it can all be.

Kevin : 1:02:07

Not all 56%. No, probably a good like. I don't know. There's a chunk of it. I don't know how big that chunk is, but self-aware anti-Semitism is that's so. It's so small, it's so minuscule.

C. Derick Varn: 1:02:21

Right. And so this moment is a moment where we've seen people really grok the situation in Palestine, israel and what the current world imperial system means. And I'm going to actually and it's been good for a lot of things because it's also hurt campus, because we're like like Russia and by campus I mean SIT, not US Gotcha, yeah but it's also hurt campus in so much that like, yes, russia has taken decent-ish positions on Israel, china is still not touching that with a 10-foot pole. And I think it's been very clarifying of like, oh, this multi-polar world system theory is not actually as anti-imperial as we may have hoped it was. So now we're going to have to really look at it and figure out how do you move it in one way or the other. So I think all that's actually good. I really do think it's good. I think it's good that the DDSA can like do something with BDS. Do I think BDS is going to work? I don't know. I am slightly skeptical, not because of the morality of the activism, but because of the nature of the Levantine economy being mostly military exports in a lot of ways. So I don't know if it's harder to have consumer movements affect that. But it is really important that there is clarity on this issue, clarity for and you expressed it very well Like, if we want to talk about the Hamas situation, yes, it is stupid to like endorse Hamas actively, or, in my case, there are leftists who pretend that they can win, and I think that's silly.

C. Derick Varn: 1:04:14

They don't have an air force. But I do think in a very real sense, though, israel internationally, even amongst people who have it's going to be operating in a world where, despite how valuable they are to the arms industry and despite the fact I don't see the great powers giving that up, it's going to be a lot harder for people to get into this broad Netanyahu-led coalition, and I think that's a very important thing to note in the future. And it's also made certain kinds of contradictions in, not just the American left. I mean, like the Espay Day, for example, has gone so anti-Dutch that they actually wouldn't deal with Bernie because he was true pro-Palestine, which is absurd. But that is clarifying to the left in Europe to not get their hopes too bent on whatever I mean, I think, the Russian-Kranzen kind of did that too.

C. Derick Varn: 1:05:13

But on these old legacy parties in continental Europe. They don't really have a clear international stance and in some ways they actually seem more pro-NATO than like the US. It's bizarre.

Kevin : 1:05:32

I mean they benefit from not having to invest in their own military spending. They can retain their tax expenditures, focus on domestic spending, preventing domestic class conflict and labor unrest, while not having to divert funds to their own military spending. They get protected by NATO.

C. Derick Varn: 1:05:55

And this is one of those things where, like I hate to say it, but like paleo, conservatives have been pointing this out for 20 years and I've actually been kind of like well, they're not wrong. Like there's a whole lot of Europe benefits from empire but doesn't really pay that much for it.

Kevin : 1:06:14

Because of NATO, because of the unipolar hegemonic power, the unipolar international system under the hegemonic power of the United States. It's exactly right. That is exactly right and the paleo conservatives aren't much of a movement, but I mean whatever impact they had on politics through the person of Trump starting to elbowing his way into NATO and saying that other countries need to start paying their own fair share and reducing the contributions from the United States. That's good. That was a good thing. Well.

C. Derick Varn: 1:06:54

Trump is an unalloyed good.

C. Derick Varn: 1:06:56

We're going to talk about the moment right now. Trump is an interesting figure on that because on one hand, I agree people like Ben Burgess that Trump's anti-war credentials is always overstated. On the other hand, it is still fucking amazing that since Reagan, you had a Republican who was even slightly hesitant to empowering the paleo conservatives. He did, ultimately John Bolton, and they betrayed him too. But because Trump isn't a paleo conservative, what always amazed me about the? I had the unpopular opinion during the Trump years that it matters kind of downstream that you oppose things that Trump is rhetorically empowering, but it really kind of doesn't matter that much. And unfortunately the Biden years have made it clear that if anyone's paying attention, all those, we're not gonna normalize Trump. Well, you didn't normalize Trump, but you normalize all those fucking policies a hundred percent of them, Yep like, like.

C. Derick Varn: 1:08:05

That's exactly right, except for the ones the courts got rid of, like the Muslim ban, etc. They, like, they.

Kevin : 1:08:12

They, they complicated it slightly and put a couple of barriers in its way, and then and then permitted it after it was challenged several times.

C. Derick Varn: 1:08:24

I mean, like I said, like it's and yet ultimately didn't really change that much. I mean, that was my point. There is a, you know, even someone like Robert Brenner, who I Think gave Biden too much credit in his seventh thesis, is on Biden. I bring this up. But even he's like, yeah, a lot of the stuff that Biden did, that we're calling neo-progressivism which, by the way, what they were wrong out at, biden was gonna be able to continue doing it and like, no, he's not.

C. Derick Varn: 1:08:51

But Most of that stuff began in a Trump and moments of crisis that was forced, that was forced on everybody by crisis. That like and it was only ever admitted to be temporary and it was actually somewhat very similar to the insanity in 2007 that people forget about, where, like Lindsey Graham was calling litter and people forget this because no one Wants to deal with it, but like Lindsey Graham was calling for the nationalization of the banks, like, like, you know, like, and we've just a way stat from our collective memory. This is something to think about when we see the way these things move and we get really and the Democrat, and we know the Democrats in the next year. I can tell you that I think another Clarifying thing and this is I'm gonna pivot, let you talk is the Democrats are gonna play up their anti-left-right or more and more.

C. Derick Varn: 1:09:48

I think that's going to become clear. We're already seeing that, with even squad members beginning to distance the, something like AOC is not just distancing herself from the DSA, she's distancing herself from the justice Democrats like. So even the progressives are seen as a liability. I Think we're going to see calls for for unity, all hands on deck because of of Trump plan 2025, about going against the deep state and which, like, I can't tell how serious he is about it and if he is, you know my, my very unpopular cake, as we might be under a military hunter anyway, then people like what I'm like, if he actually tries to do that, then you might actually see the joint use of staff Actually do something which is unheard of in the United States. But it's gonna put the, it's gonna put liberals in a real weird position Because they're gonna be like ever we have to do everything to fight fascism and you're including, maybe supporting a military Like and that. I still think that's in the far-fetched, not likely to happen prediction. I don't think so.

Kevin : 1:10:59

Yeah, but it's a positive fact that it's even a conceivable Possibility to me is true, it's more on the table than it would have been prior to, prior to, prior to Trump right, and that would be like well, you want to see the contract contradictions get real clear, real fast.

C. Derick Varn: 1:11:16

It's like you, you got the contradictions baby. You got your end of democracy and it's gonna come in this in the guise of protecting democracy from Trump.

Kevin : 1:11:28

But all that and the left will not be in a position. Should that happen, the left will not be in a position to have any, any impact on where things go or how it develops, or to harness the moment, the revolutionary moment that that would be.

C. Derick Varn: 1:11:45

So, I think, I think, Back to you because we, we should yeah, what, what do you think? I mean? There's two. I'm gonna leave you with pity a few things that we have this international stuff. The other thing I think we have to deal with, though, is that there is a sense and I made Carl Bayer really mad by pointing this out that, like, if you look at who the Republicans are, yes, republicans have a lot of support in the over a hundred thousand dollars year crowd, but if you look at who the Democrats are right now, the Democrats have their most support in a 250 to $500,000 a year crowd. So, oh, yeah, so. So, in a very literal sense, there is no party in the United States, either by identification or by Policy, currently representing US worker interest in a way that, I mean, that's been true the entirety of our history, but in a way that it's like the most undeniable, yeah, and it's been true in the most sort of a un Uncomplicated way.

C. Derick Varn: 1:13:00

Yeah, right. So it seems like the two questions that we have to ask ourselves right now is how do you connect this Good moral position and good political positions without any effect, because we haven't seen this effect. Politics yet, on an international stuff, and yeah, like we said, there are areas where this breaks down, like Maduro, and Guyana is gonna be one of them. But At least right now we have clarity on Palestine in the sense that we all agree, or at least 80 to 90 percent of us, even of like rad libs and normie Democrats agree that the apartheid, it's unjustifiable and that at least the military actions need to stop and we can deal with whatever's happening with a mausoleum. And we can't get that position Even in the most progressive parts of the Democratic Party, like despite the fact that that is almost universally agreed upon in not just the DSA, but like the entire Democratic Party base. You know, 10 20 percent of a very old boomers disagree with us, but everybody else it's pretty much on that. They might. They might have different ideas. What you do after that, but to me that's a clarifying moment about where power is in the Democratic Party. And then the other thing, though, that I think we have to deal with and this I don't yet see on the horizon in the essay is that it has always gotten into this. We're gonna move and and and spread out into these areas where Social Democratic policies are, on paper, popular, on poll after poll they're more popular in red states in some ways, and even our blue states, frankly, but that we have no traction with those people and it always seems like like in 2016 there was a movement to go out and like run stuff municipally in these areas, but by 2020 we're back into doubling down on New York in LA, and that's really where we're focusing.

C. Derick Varn: 1:15:07

Um, do you think that the DSA or what comes out of the DSA because I think, I think we both agree and I know our cosmonaut compatriots are not gonna agree with us on this, but but you know, I want them to hear it that, like, the most likely outcome is that the DSA is either gonna shrink and become kind of a sectarian organization that can't survive off the bloat of its dead whale, yep, or or it's going to split. I got I'm not predicting which one. Like I'm not in the for reasons, like you said, I'm not in the prediction game anymore one when I make predictions they're usually right, but it doesn't do me any good. And to when they're wrong, they're spectacularly wrong, and I just would rather not have egg on my face by trying to play profit anyway.

Kevin : 1:15:55

Um so, I think I'm sorry, I think that's the right attack to take. I want to say, and I think that what, what matters, is identifying the factors that in flu, that are feeding into Whatever potentialities exists. Identify those factors and maybe suggest which ones you think are weighing more heavily and why the? And why is the the most important part? Because that tells you what you need to do about it, what you need to do in response.

C. Derick Varn: 1:16:28

So what do you think can be done in this? I'm gonna give you the. I'm gonna see the last 15 minutes to you Without playing the prediction game. What do you think can be done in response?

Kevin : 1:16:40

so here's. Here's. What I would have to say is that I think that Maybe I'll surprise you with this, but I think that you're right and identifying that it is the Dwindling of DSA and it's increasing irrelevance that is the causative factor in giving rise to the fact that it's Able to take more good and correct positions on international politics, and one at in. You're not only just right. I don't want to just say that you're right because, like, oh yeah, I agreed with that, that's, that's a good point, and I don't think I'd actually even considered that. So but what I would say in response to that is that doesn't actually change my position.

Kevin : 1:17:32

I don't care very much that that DSA take the correct, nuanced position on Pretty much anything. What I care about, what, what does matter to me, is whether DSA Enacts Certain positions that have some sort of Implication, some sort of material playing out in some manner. So, for example, I don't care if DSA has a sufficiently sophisticated position on Hamas and October 7th and the Palestine question. What I care about is there is a moment that appeared on the, you know, on the national stage here, where Political actors needed to engage on one or the other side of this question and DSA Engaged on the correct side of that question and it did so in a manner that was more coordinated and concerted Then I think it generally has in the past, despite it being Significantly larger than any other left-wing organization in the country at this moment in time, I'm here as you, while you're collecting your next thought and agree with you on that and actually say like the correct new unslide is something for people to fight within the left.

C. Derick Varn: 1:19:18

It is not something to fight in larger society, right exactly like I do think there has to be some message discipline on, like, like I'm I gonna go after even a group that I objectively, objectively and skeptical of, like the party for socialism and liberation, because, you know, because there's some assholes in it who says some stupid things once at a at a rally, not publicly I'm not right, like you know, and not because I'm scared of them, but because, like, I think ultimately like To expect everyone to have the right position Coming out tonight. Yeah, it's just great, and it never happens that way.

Kevin : 1:20:00

Yeah, that's not how the world works. That is not how the world works. I've got some news for you. If you think that we have to have everybody Holding the correct position before we can change the world, then if you think that's how the world changes, then you know, buckle in for a long wait until you die, because it's never gonna change. That way, most people are incredibly stupid and and and and, don't understand anything and get everything incredibly wrong. And that's the world that we live and operate in. And if you want to Change the world for the better, you use the human material that we have, not the human material that you wish we have and I'm gonna even add even something to that.

C. Derick Varn: 1:20:42

They're incredibly stupid and yet they're somehow probably smarter than you. This is my, this is like my, my whole weird Like I have. I have a dialectic of intelligence from like an, any individual. Most individuals are kind of dumb and yet somehow, collectively, if I was to take and I'm not even talking about left opinion If I want to take any position and just pull the entire the United States, there is actually some truth that I'm likely to get to a position that's actually probably slightly smarter than mine, despite the fact that's made up of people who, at least 50% of assuming I am dead average are dumber than me.

Kevin : 1:21:19

Yeah, specifically so.

C. Derick Varn: 1:21:21

So I just think, like, like the, the perfect position is both it has an unrealistic view of people, but also has an unrealistic view of yourself. Well, but anyway, to let you go. I just wanted to agree with you on that.

Kevin : 1:21:35

So, uh, we're finding surprising common grounds here. So here, I think, so in, you know, given given that position that I have about, it doesn't matter about the correct position, it matters about what actions does the organization take and how does it? How does it organize to affect its, its position when it takes a stand on one side or the other, when, when a moment is presented to it? Um, so I think dsa did acted correctly and nobly in Reaction in response to the Palestinian question when it arose. I, I don't think that dsa is necessarily going to, I don't think that that means that dsa is necessarily going to Blossom into, you know, this wonderful, thriving home of the left that we've, we all hope and pray and uh and root for. But I I it. To return to my original position, um, I think it's got more of a hope of being that than anything else Currently, and I don't know what else to do. So I think here, I think what the, the, the moment in history that we exist in, is one where, uh, the analysis of capital that marks rendered was one where, uh, the primary contradiction existed, uh, domestically, between the, the domestic ruling class and the domestic Working class, because it was at the burgeoning, you know, beginnings of capitalism. Capitalism, I'm gonna, I am, I'm basically a third world is at this point, uh, and you're about to hear it. But Uh, the reality is uh, after the great the, the world wars, capital shifted. It shifted its dynamics to uh where rising prosperity equally benefited all layers of society domestically, and it did so through uh Imperialism, through shifting, through extracting resources from the global south and using that to buy off its domestic Uh working classes. That is the world that we lived in up until uh neoliberalism. Neoliberalism is threatening that stable global order. Uh, and so the the greatest Threat to international proletarian movement is the existence of the us empire, by my lights.

Kevin : 1:24:26

So that is the most important thing for any, any of us to do any, anything about um that said, uh, I, I don't, I don't know what we can do about it really Um. So, for example, whether dsa should have Uh a perfectly nuanced and correct position on maduro versus giana, uh I, I, as you said, I don't even know what the correct position necessarily is, but I do know the correct uh stance that has a material impact on the world. Uh, for us uh socialists to take is to oppose us meddling Uh in uh, venezuela, us should get the fuck out of it. Our position should be always Uh, revolutionary, defeatism, um.

Kevin : 1:25:17

If we can find a way to plant ourselves in um Um um in the domestic working class as neoliberalism continues to rise, despite all the declarations that it's dead, then we will increasingly find ourselves in a position where the primary contradictions have returned to the conflict between the domestic working class and the domestic capitalist class, while we work to undermine the hegemony of the US empire from within. I can't speak to what position, what more nuanced positions socialists in other countries, other parts of the world, might need to take because they're not within the US empire. But we've got a very simple position, that is, we advocate for the defeat of the great Satan, the US empire.

Kevin : 1:26:17

I think, the only way to act that out is. So. We've seen DSA acting nobly among its membership but not acting out any form of discipline on its elected representatives in Congress who are not. What part does?

C. Derick Varn: 1:26:35

it have to do so.

Kevin : 1:26:36

It doesn't. It doesn't at this point, but if DSA is going to be something worth being a part of, it will move to position itself such that it is capable of asserting discipline over its elected representatives who actually have seats in office, whether in Congress or elsewhere. I see here, this is where I am a big advocate for Cosmonaut, as the it's not. They don't call themselves Cosmonaut Marxist Union. You see, the group yeah, I'm a big advocate for them because I think they're the group that is most well positioned within DSA to affect this which is to gradually move DSA into this position, without doing it in such a manner that it is such an internal shock to the organization that it just sheds all of its membership and all of the right wing of the organization and any attempt to assert control over electeds is just met with those electeds leaving the organization saying fuck you, I don't need you anyway.

C. Derick Varn: 1:27:56

Which is currently happening.

Kevin : 1:27:58

Yeah, well it's. It's. That has happened with some of the worst members that never should have been endorsed by DSA in the first place and didn't have any, you know, involvement from DSA in the first place. These are people who were just bog standard progressives and their local decided to endorse them or whatever. Aoc might be the exception, but she hasn't left DSA, she's just.

Kevin : 1:28:26

It's in response to the Palestine question, where there she is, facing incredible pressure within the from the leadership of the Democratic Party in Washington and DC to, you know, distance herself from DSA and the wider base on this question.

Kevin : 1:28:44

She's started to say some critical things about DSA. We'll see what happens and I'm not saying that anybody we can, you know, I can predict one way or the other. It will or will not happen, but if, but I do see the possibility of of people coming into leadership in DSA and having handling this very delicate situation with appropriate delicacy, to move it in a positive direction, to finesse it in such a way that it can begin to assert control over its electives without shedding whatever membership that it does have. So it moves itself into a position where it starts mattering what that you're a member of DSA, which I would hope would move it in a direction of actually starting to increase its membership again. And also it's mattering in, in, in, in the sense that it's not just giving more money to the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, but it's mattering in the sense of actually starting to form the basis of a working class political party in the.

Kevin : 1:29:56

United States.

C. Derick Varn: 1:29:58

Well, you said a lot there at the end and I am going to address it with one statement. You manifest the world spirit of the left right now and we'll see how that goes. But in in in some sense, you and I would argue to the Cal's come home about what actually happened from 1950 to 1970 and from 1970, 1990.

C. Derick Varn: 1:30:35

I think that there is both agreement in some of the the statements of fact and disagreement on both how it happened and what it represented. I can almost promise you that we probably also have a different view on what electedness is possible in the near future. But where I would say that I would agree with you is two points. One the post war social compact is over. It was dependent on imperialism. How that imperialism work does a different matter, but we're not getting into that here. Two neoliberalism.

C. Derick Varn: 1:31:23

Weirdly, this is where I'm actually. I actually just I feel like third world just fell down in the game of analysis and not because they were wrong about, well, I mean, I think they're wrong about the mechanism, but that's why they fell down in analysis. But they weren't wrong about like hey, the seemingly shift has moved outside of the course of capital and the. The issue that I would say that I would have with that is like, well, interestingly, neoliberalism correlines with the actual moment of uniparality, because it because, unless you are a Maoist, you don't actually believe, like an old Maoist from the 60s, you don't actually believe the USSR and the US were on the same side in 1960, 1970, which third world just actually did. So to bring out some of this, some of the contradictions in that historical movement.

C. Derick Varn: 1:32:29

All that said, though, right now I mean for me it's important to oppose the US empire. I don't know that I have a that's the only thing we need to oppose, or if I didn't think it was the primary thing we need to oppose, but I agree with you that, for example, they'll be as long as, ironically, the popularity of stuff like MMT, which you know is correct for imperial powers, but as long as you're pro imperial to support those programs and why they were, why they are imperial, is you have to have the ability to leverage the US dollar with nothing backing it over other countries.

Kevin : 1:33:13

For that, to work, except military, yeah, I mean it's right work.

C. Derick Varn: 1:33:18

There's a reason why, like it's the English speaking countries, in the few countries that got integrated into, like Japan got integrated into the American world systems where you can do that, like I think we have to get beyond those, those dreams and those really easy answers that I think also are over. And the other thing I would agree with while I don't necessarily I am, I have a more conflicted view of cosmonaut than you do and the Marxist Union group, but where I think that in the United States is not this different from Imperial Germany under Prussia? And one key way, a Marxist party that would emerge should not be interested in being a coalition running our bourgeois government in his empire in so much that we could ever be elected. We actually would have to learn from the fucking right and just be like we're abstentionist. We're abstentionist for the working class as opposed to for like pet petit bourgeois interest, which is what the right really kind of represents. But we're abstentionist. We're here to fuck you up and to help labor and that's all we're doing.

C. Derick Varn: 1:34:44

Like electorally we'll do other stuff, but like that's got to be our electoral mission because we don't want to end up being the party that has to like manage capitalism from a left perspective, because that's not going to go well for us. We're going to hit walls, we're going to hit, we're going to be undermined by the donor class, like, and we just should be realistic about whatever role we're going to have is basically just I mean, like I hate to say it, but like we are electing people. The reason to run elections in the Socialist Party is to prove that we have popular support into fuck shit up. That's really the only reason to do it. Like we're not going to get a positive program through. Like you know and it became very clear to me that that was even the case on reforms that would be good for capitalist, even like so, for example, medicare for all would say capital money.

C. Derick Varn: 1:35:44

They would just fuck up one sector of a bloated, dare I say, parasitic cap sector the bourgeoisie that is not just in the working class, is per se other elements of the bourgeoisie.

Kevin : 1:35:57

Yeah, exactly.

C. Derick Varn: 1:35:58

Yeah, we can't even do that.

Kevin : 1:36:00

Well, yeah well, we couldn't do that. The US Empire is so decadent, it is so decayed at this point that it couldn't do that for itself. And so, you know, the, the United, there are international credit rating systems that recently downgraded the United States as a creditor, not because of its fiduciary incapacity or incapability to make payments on debts, solely because of its political inability to do anything. This is a recognition that the political, the, the, the American political, the United States political system is decayed. It is decadent, so decadent that it is not capable of doing the things that are in capitals own interest as much as it used to be. That said, you know, the United States is still a very highly rated, you know, creditor on the international stage. It's.

C. Derick Varn: 1:37:11

But but we used to literally just go standard.

Kevin : 1:37:15

Exactly exactly the international credit rating systems, downgrading the United States below some global corporations like Microsoft is a higher rated creditor than the United States government. So like that, like this, is this is the position that we're in? Is we are? No, we are not at the moments where Rome is being invaded by the Goths and and burning, but, yes, we are at the beginning stages of a decaying empire and our role as Marxists is to insert ourselves into the acceleration of that decay as much as possible, in my opinion.

C. Derick Varn: 1:37:57

There are some caveats I would have that I agree with you that revolutionary defeatism is part of our car, although I would also say that revolutionary defeatism, historically speaking, also says you don't endorse any other gradually powers, ever Sure, yeah, well yeah, that is the classical position.

Kevin : 1:38:15

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, sure. So this returns me to you know the the thing that I, you know, I think we agree on earlier, that was, which is that I don't care if people have a sophisticated or nuanced, sufficiently sophisticated position on these things. What matters is where do you come down in in, in actions, in terms, here's where I think there might be a slight difference between us.

C. Derick Varn: 1:38:46

I care if you're leadership, I do not care if you're some asshole out of protest.

Kevin : 1:38:53

It does matter. Revolutionary. You know, you're right, you're right, I'm maybe I'm stating my case here. But, yes, no, I don't want to undersell the importance of revolutionary theory, of having a correct understanding, analysis of things and actually having a correct position ultimately. But I, you know, I, I think these things matter less than we oftentimes like to think they do.

C. Derick Varn: 1:39:17

Well, I mean, even in, even in the case of revolutionary defeatism, in the case of Lin and Lin, and got lucky that both Germany and Russia lost.

C. Derick Varn: 1:39:24

Yeah, like, like in a real sense, like because like, if, if, if, if, if, if he had taken the revolutionary position position and Germany had still won, that may actually have, you know, condemned revolutionary defeatism and a strategy for all of history, the, the and so in some cases the reason I bring that up is is not to like discredit anything. It's actually to say like some of this is beyond anyone's control. But I do think there's a tendency right now on the left and whenever someone says on the left, now I'm sort of like that makes my hackles go up because I'm like, who are you talking about? But to find, like the asshole on Twitter are even where, like somebody who in general has a good position says something fucking stupid and focus on that and my pace is always like you should talk to those people. But you should not go and make a whole fucking podcast series about how the left is stupid, off of what is likely to be some 20 year old's first encounter of politics and saying something inopportune are accidentally exosinterest or maybe even sincerely exosinterest, but it's one person Like that shit drives so much of left media.

C. Derick Varn: 1:40:49

Yeah, and I don't know what it helps Like. I don't even know that it helps our enemies. I don't know that it helps anything Like.

Kevin : 1:40:55

It's just like it's just like Because people spin in their wheels.

Kevin : 1:40:59

Man, I think that probably my the optimism that you see in me I think I would identify where that comes from is the fact that I've kind of given up on creating my own personal identity out of being on the left, that being a communist and being an informed and well-read Marxist who understands theory or whatever, is a part of who I am.

Kevin : 1:41:31

But I've shifted myself to the point, disabused myself of the idea that it fucking matters at all Whether I do X or Y, whether I think A, b or C, it doesn't matter. I instead have to recognize that this is the one life that I have, the one life that I have to live. So I'm just gonna make the most of it while I'm here. And if I'm so lucky as to live through an important historical moment and partake in that history, I will be very delighted. But otherwise the only thing that's left to me is to try to contribute to the building blocks of something that might matter in the future, and otherwise I just live my life. And that makes me a lot less worried about all the internecine bullshit on the left and it just doesn't get to me so much. I don't care, it doesn't matter.

C. Derick Varn: 1:42:37

This is actually. You said this one on year five to go back to where I had you on, and I was like, no, this is the beginnings of wisdom, whether or not we agree on everything. Because for me too and I don't talk about this as much, but giving up the idea that I was going, when people are like, oh, why don't you have varnism, I'm like, for one thing, like I don't wanna be another fucking guru, because the last thing we fucking need is another fucking guru. But the other thing is like why have they mattered? Like even the people who go on these anti-guru crusades on the left, they're like have you changed anything by doing that? Like did it change any part of the world?

C. Derick Varn: 1:43:17

Did you even get rid of the guru that you were so worried about, did it? No, I mean, and some I guess, like my dialectic now is the dialectic between touch grass and also still being, still being engaged in the world, because I do think we have that responsibility. But I also think, like add another way, like if your entire identity is being a left-wing political actor, that's really just a manifestation of your own alienation and it's not gonna help you. It's not gonna help you and it's definitely not gonna help the world spirit advance to socialism or whatever the fuck ever. Like that's like you gotta get over yourself and that's and I think for me it's also just like that was why, for whatever disagreements we have, we do agree on certain things, like participating in it, like invest in these moments. Don't totally set on the sidelines, like there's not. There's a reason, like for every little bit.

C. Derick Varn: 1:44:20

Yes, I like this blur of sharing with the USA. If they do an action here even though I'm not giving them money right now, particularly in my but if they do an action here, I'm likely to engage. If a group that I like I said I am very skeptical of does an action here, if it's something that I care about, I might be out on the ground with them and not just to be like, oh, look at these dirty opportunists. No, it's like, actually, even if I really disagree these groups, if I have to prove that I care about the same shit, that I think it matters, but also not so much that it's my entire identity, and that's all that I do, because I don't know, I think that's personally destructive, even of quote pro-revolutionaries.

Kevin : 1:45:11

It's destructive of your own personal wellbeing as an individual, is destructive of what possibilities you could create out of the left. I think it makes for bad people, non-virtuous individuals and non-virtuous individuals constituting the left is just. It's. That's. One of our main problems is we can't. We consist the left consists of. The left doesn't matter, it is irrelevant. And so it concentrates people who are attracted to embracing their own marginality, their own irrelevance, their own alienation from society. It is a concentration of people who reject society and define themselves in opposition to it, rather than what it needs to be, which is an expression of, of the ambitions and self-awareness of the broad masses of the world. And we can never get to that point unless the self-organized, self-aware left is may constitute in people who are leaders in their community, who are well respected and well integrated in their neighborhoods and their workplaces, not people who are the weird freaks that everybody hates and doesn't want to be around. You know.

C. Derick Varn: 1:46:36

But yeah, I, yeah, I used to think about this and this, emma, I think that's a great point to end on. I just always thought like we have to get beyond the normie, not normie dialectic, that like that. Like if we're integrated in a community, we know that we're gonna have weirdos, but they're not. And some of them might be important, but like, oh yeah, the most part, that's not all we're gonna attract. And right now, man.

Kevin : 1:47:03

Go to any workplace in any neighborhood and you will. Oh yeah, there's rules. There are weird people, there are dumb people. There are weird people, the world is made up of them, but the thing that we need to do is not to organize the weirdest and most, you know, make ourselves a body constituted in nothing, but the world is just as dumb as people.

C. Derick Varn: 1:47:27

Yeah, Like yeah, um, absolutely. And I think that's a great note to end on, because I think, like, if anything that's where you and I agree is that a vibrant left in America that was relevant would have, I mean one, there'd be tons of disputes even if we had, even if we consolidate around the right questions and we agree on certain things figuring out how to dismantle US empire, empowering working class, obstructing certain kind of functions- that help the bourgeoisie, et cetera, that even if we did all that and had unity on that, 90% of the stuff that the left does we'd still fight over.

C. Derick Varn: 1:48:18

And that's not. And I've always actually said we just need to accept that that's not bad, because rightists and centerists and liberals do that too. That's one of the things that's not unique to us. If anything's unique, because we complain about it and then try to stomp it out and really don't ways that actually accelerate the problem.

Kevin : 1:48:38

I agree.

C. Derick Varn: 1:48:40

And that moral purity weirdly and I say moral purity here weirdly doesn't breed moral people, and I do like my politics is somewhat amoral, like I don't take political positions based on my morality, but I do actually think the left as a subject should care that we have people that, not on sexual issues, which I just frankly don't give a shit about in a lot of ways, but unlike how we treat each other, what we who we're willing to attack, how we're willing to attack them, what we're willing to do to each other and even to some enemies who we could incorporate once we defeated them, like that really does matter.

C. Derick Varn: 1:49:28

That you have moral subjects or virtue I'm not gonna say moral, virtuous subjects who are more interested in living lives that are compatible with other people than in having good relations in those in that area than with, like, abstract ideas that really are manifestations of their inability to maintain relations at all, and that's a super important thing to end on. So, thank you. The weirdest thing about and I say this all the time because the longer I do left-wing podcasts, the more this strikes me as weird I have to do the plug thing where I'm like well, we're all picked, particularly while we're in GAs now, and I just wanna call attention to it because like people should think about that when they get over-invested in podcasts. But where can people find your work, evan?

Kevin : 1:50:20

I'm on Regrettable Century. Wherever you find your list of your podcasts. Check that out. Otherwise I'm not. I just I'm a petite bourgeois affected individual who just does this as a hobby. So I'm not producing a whole lot of work otherwise, but yeah.

C. Derick Varn: 1:50:39

And that is where you're a good person to have on All right, and on that note,