Is there any veracity to the claim that “the PSL covered up SA allegations”? I hear it a lot in discussions surrounding the PSL. I wanna know if this is a valid concern

  • amemorablename
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Not really the same thing at all. Tara Reade was an individual coming out, risking her reputation to do so, against someone who had a viable chance to acquire immense political power (and who subsequently did so and used it in service of genocide). Someone who also has a detailed past of horrible policies. This is vague “I heard a rumor” language being said about an entire party by an anonymous person on the internet, not even about the PSL candidates running specifically, and for candidates who have zero chance to win the presidency and a party that has virtually no political power thus far. The OP didn’t even provide a case against PSL themself. They prompted a case to be made against them. Whether intentional or born from ignorance, this is one of the most common types of rumor-mongering, while trying to avoid having any responsibility put on the person who does it. “I heard that my neighbor Tom eats babies? Is this true? Just want to make sure if I should keep my children away from him.”

    Like take a step back from this particular issue for a moment and think about the framework of how this is being done. Because even if this is all true and PSL 100% deserves the flack and OP has the best of intentions trying to be a conscientious person, this is also a kind of approach that gets used for dishonest means. This cannot be the best we have for dealing with accountability and consequence, is reactively asking provocative questions on election day and shouting at each other about who is more principled in the face of accusations.

    • diegeticalt (any)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I think you may not have looked over the whole thread yet? It’s understandable, there’s a whole bunch written.

      I’m referring to a specific situation where a specific person alleged that a specific party member SA’ed them, and then felt that PSL ignored their concerns.

      I think, in light of that situation (which darkcalling is familiar with in this thread), their language really does parallel the DNC reaction to Tara Reade.

      • amemorablename
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 hours ago

        I read quite a bit of it. I must be missing something big for it to make any sense at all as a comparison. One is a national imperialist party, one of two parties who holds power in the world-spanning US empire, and is capable of carrying out genocide (and is doing so right now). One is a grassroots organization with very limited reach and influence. That doesn’t change the fact that SA allegations need to be taken seriously, but it does make the timing and nature of allegations different. Also different is the way in which it has been done with this thread. This was not a thread compiling resources and providing sourced information to make a case against PSL for a specific, described purpose. It was a thread asking a leading question and letting the reader fill in the blanks with their imagination. And PSL is not an organization with immense power and a sparkling reputation in the public eye for millions of loyalists, which needs a dose of reality applied to it. It is a (relative to the existing power structures) tiny and struggling organizational effort in the core of the empire. And with it being in the core of the empire, it is especially vulnerable to both infiltration and the various imperialist tendencies in the very population it’s trying to recruit membership from. If it is failing to be disciplined on those fronts, it deserves criticism for doing so; from fellow anti-imperialists and communists who are trying to make better happen. But there is a tendency for people to approach this kind of thing with individualist thinking, to view it not as an “us problem” but as a “them problem” and “I’m not part of it because I condemn it and I don’t support them.” Sexism happens in the most banal, everyday ways in a patriarchal society. The point there is not that it should be seen as normal and ignored—just the opposite if anything—but that, much like being anti-racist, opposing it means more than saying it’s bad and saying people who are doing it are bad and should feel bad and you should be mad at them.

        At some point, we have to actually develop processes of disciplined accountability. I don’t see how anyone would even begin to do such a thing for a party like the democratic party, but it is possible to do so with communist or communist-adjacent orgs. That is one of the differences in comparing. It should be possible to approach this in a way that can get real results in accountability, with organizing efforts like PSL. With a party like the democratic party, it’s more a matter of helping people understand how systemically unconscionable they are and how irredeemably captured by imperialist interests and all the oppressive isms tied up in that. It does us no good to apply the same approach to an org that is meant to have the potential to resist the empire, to only treat it as a hopeless endeavor in need of being putting on blast with tactless dismissal if any hint of bad behavior comes out of it. We can’t afford to give up on orgs like this as victims of poor leadership.

        I don’t know if I’m making myself clear or not, but I’m kind of tangentially getting into a pattern that I see with US “left-leaning” orgs and how people talk about them. “This one is bad for this reason, this one is bad for that reason,” okay, so what are we doing for alternatives then? Where are we leading people if the only options are bad? Is there no way to root out issues in any of these orgs? Is the only solution to tell people they are bad and to stay away from them? What does that accomplish for organizing?

        • diegeticalt (any)
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          52 minutes ago

          I hope you’ll forgive me, my steam is running out for reading and replying here, so I don’t have too much more in me.

          On the difference between the DNC and PSL: sure, it’s not an exact comparison, but does it matter to a mouse if it’s being crushed by a person or an elephant?

          On developing better processes: it seems like PSL is working on something, at least, most of the examples seem to be several years old.

          I really agree with you on not labeling the org as a whole as bad, and that’s what I’m finding so frustrating here. I think the PSL is probably the better of the parties in the U$, but there’s some fucked up stuff that (allegedly) happened at some points. Is it so difficult to say they’re pretty good, but have some faults?

          The Philly thing specifically has been struggled over since genzedong on Reddit, and it doesn’t seem to ever be accepted that it happened and it was fucked up, and move past that. The insinuation that this is some kind of opp really burns me because no one cares about this. No one at all. It pops up every once in a while in these spaces, but it’s not part of some real unified smear campaign against PSL. No one gives a fuck. If this had happened to someone I love I’d at least want it to be acknowledged.