Readers know I don’t talk much about the sectarian left. You know, the kinds of smaller leftist groups based on certain ideologies, e.g., Marxist-Leninist groups, Maoist groups, and so on. I spend a lot of time – both as a blogger and a local DSA chapter leader – discussing strategy on the left. I’ve even posted a couple of times on the DSA caucuses. But I mostly ignore the sectarian left during all this.
Why?
In short, I don’t think it’s very important. Either for this blog or for work within the DSA. The DSA’s sectarian left elements are small, largely unorganized, and not influential. They do have some members who contribute to the work of their local chapters or to national campaigns. And that’s great. I’m happy to have them on board. Other sectarian leftists just want their little Marxist-Leninist or Trotskyist club. That’s fine, too.
Some argue that these people pose a risk to the DSA. But I think that’s unlikely. They cite the history of ‘entryism’ to support their point. But while entryism has been an issue in the past, I think these folks read too much history and spend too little time analyzing the current situation of the DSA.
Given its decentralized nature and high concentration of progressives and Berniecrats without a deep leftist background, it’s very difficult for any sectarian leftist group to win a majority DSA vote. And even most sectarian leftists know what things were like before the DSA. Many aren’t interested in returning to that.
And so, I probably won’t post much in the future about the sectarian left. Unless I find evidence of their influence. Or something worth posting about.
