The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) has risen to prominence in a short time, reflecting growing disillusionment with the Democratic party and further radicalization of the American population. However, many leftwing social movement organizations, such as Black Lives Matter and the Women’s March, have risen in the last decade, and groups like MoveOn and the Sunrise Movement have attempted to absorb large numbers of people, influence the Democratic party, and enter public consciousness with lower levels of success.
A Democratic Structure Sets the DSA Apart
Unlike these groups, the DSA is a thoroughly democratically run organization that allows its members to set its goals, elect its leaders, and amend its constitution. Other organizations lack constitutions, relying instead on corporate bylaws and unelected executive boards to maintain their tax status with the IRS. While the DSA is primarily operated and funded by its growing membership, other organizations depend on foundation funding and professional staff. Local chapters of most groups have little control over the national structure, but the DSA functions as a federation where the national office is beholden to its constituent parts.
The DSA is not succeeding because of a good name; it grows because it treats its members like adults capable of managing their own affairs, and they reward it with monthly dues and long-term commitment that supersedes the natural highs and lows of uprisings.
Historical Roots of Membership-Driven Organizations
This idea is foundational to the success of the American project. In the early 19th century, French philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville described membership-driven organizations as the “free schools” of democracy, serving as the bedrock of America’s political system. This model is dying but remains alive through organizations like the NAACP and the US Student Association. The NAACP is over a hundred years old, and the US Student Association will be 80 next year. The DSA, created in 1982, traces its full history as a faction within larger organizations going back over a century.
Comparative Success and Challenges
It is doubtful that the conflict-ridden Black Lives Global Network Foundation will survive the decade. BLM chapters have dissolved, broken away, or become dormant across the country. The Minneapolis chapter reconstituted itself as Black Visions and then sunsetted after years of misalignment and the forcing out of its original leadership. The Sunrise Movement has fared better but faced internal power struggles between paid staff leadership and its base. According to one former member, the organization went from having more than 500 chapters in 2021 to probably fewer than 90 by 2023. It made efforts to become more democratic but could only muster 700 votes for an internal decision, despite counting more than 80,000 members years prior.
While some attrition is natural, the DSA has clear mechanisms for its membership to change the organization’s direction without backroom schemes and internal coups. Clashes still happen, but they are facilitated by clear guidelines allowing factions, called caucuses, to vie for power, and leaders have clear term limits.
The Impact of Democratic Participation
Participation in a thoughtful deliberative process increases satisfaction with outcomes and trust in institutions. The author joined the DSA after realizing their voice mattered, without needing to become a staff member or be appointed to the board. According to Harvard sociologist Theda Skocpol, grant-funded, staff-run, low membership participation models became popular in the 1970s. Foundations force organizations to become constant money-chasing machines, adopting centralized control that maximizes efficiency, but this can lead to temporary or paper members with no clear role in determining the organization’s future.
The DSA is growing not only because it reflects frustration over the status quo but also because it gives people a voice within a vehicle that promises to change that status quo.
