Reason.com
Alphabet Soup
In the piece Chuck cited, Josh Marshall writes that the Socialist Party "split in two in 1972, when the Cold War wing refused to endorse George McGovern's antiwar presidential platform. Liberal academic [Michael] Harrington led the left-wing group's left wing into a splinter that became the Democratic Socialists of America. The right wing, led by teachers' union chief Al Shanker and others, regrouped as the Social Democrats, USA."
That's not exactly right. The 1972 split was between the Social Democrats (who favored Scoop Jackson for president) and the "Debs Caucus," which favored People's Party nominee Benjamin Spock and reformulated itself after the breakup as the Socialist Party USA. Harrington's circle favored McGovern but stuck with the Social Dems a little longer, before splitting to start the group that later became Democratic Socialists of America. All three organizations still exist.
I am such a nerd for knowing this stuff.
Anyway, it's interesting that Chuck would say the Social Dems want "to exert influence, neocon-style, on Democrats." The Social Democrats USA veer close to being the quintessential neoconservative organization, given that the neocons trace their origins to (a) Scoop Jackson Democrats disturbed by McGovernism and (b) ex-Trotskyists disturbed by the New Left. The Jackson connection I've already mentioned; I should only add that the Socialist Party had, since 1960, functioned more as a group within the Democrats than an actual third party. (They endorsed Kennedy, Johnson, and Humphrey for president rather than field candidates of their own.) The Trotskyist connection is Max Shachtman, whose tiny Trot group -- the Independent Socialist League -- had joined the Socialist Party en masse in 1958. It was Shachtman's crew that eventually became Social Democrats USA.
So is there a difference between the Social Dems and the neocons? Well, the former never dropped their ties to the union movement, retaining a '50s-vintage labor liberalism along with their hawkish foreign policy. Still, their membership roster has included such prominent neocons as Elliott Abrams and Joshua Muravchik, along with folks who lean further left. (I should add that the group is still a part of the Socialist International, though by now that says more about the International than its American affiliate.)
Did I mention that I'm a nerd for knowing all this stuff?
Most Popular Stories
- 5 Classic Teen Sex-and-Drug Freakouts: Rainbow Parties, Butt-Chugging, And So Much More (By Which We Mean Less) (5.27)
- Government Beneficiaries and Other Fairy Tales (5.26)
- Are We Headed for a Fight with China? (5.28)
- Do Organic Consumers Shop Exclusively at the Jerk Store? (5.26)
- Lessons From the United Fruit Company (5.28)
Reason RUPE: Public Opinion Survey
- Reason-Rupe: Wisconsinites Favor Increasing Public Union Retirement Contributions to Address Budget Deficit (5.25)
- Reason-Rupe Poll Finds Support for Public Union Reforms (5.25)
- New Poll: Obama Leads Romney In Wisconsin, But Gary Johnson Could Impact the Race (5.24)
- Wisconsin Recall: Walker Leads Barrett 50-42 Among Likely Voters (5.24)
- Reason-Rupe Poll: Walker Leads Barrett 50-42, Obama Leads Romney 46-36 (5.24)
advertisements
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsSite comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.
anon|5.22.03 @ 4:18AM|#
all the trials and tribulations of collectivists! as interesting as listening to a sheep on the genologies of his herd!
david f|5.22.03 @ 4:39AM|#
anon,
huh?
baaahhhhh
|5.22.03 @ 5:05AM|#
We must fight our real enemies!
The Judean People's Front?
david f|5.22.03 @ 5:08AM|#
no. the popular judean front (he's sitting over there).
:)
Croesus|5.22.03 @ 5:29AM|#
Hmm, why not just call them LBJ democrats or Great Society Hawks?
thoreau|5.22.03 @ 5:33AM|#
I thought the enemy was the People's Front of Judea!?!?
|5.22.03 @ 9:02AM|#
uh, death bed.
Warren|5.22.03 @ 9:02AM|#
SPLITTERS!
Pedro|5.22.03 @ 10:51AM|#
What's a death bead? Sounds like some kind of ancient Ninja weapon...
|5.23.03 @ 1:07AM|#
Exactly, Pedro. Hang out with Ninja's long enough and you'll know a death bed soon enough.
|5.23.03 @ 5:58AM|#
Whoa! wait a minute, wasn't Debs gaoled for opposing Wilson's "War to end all War", but then the Dems used to be for "State's Rights" and the Reps for "Civil Rights of "Negroes"". All this change, I can't take it, I'll just have to go back to Tasmania.
|5.23.03 @ 10:54AM|#
Yes, JW, you are such a nerd.
BTW: where do I go to find a definition of "Trotskyite/ist". That term is bandied about incessantly in no pattern from which I can detect a consistent meaning. Is it the same as "Judean People's Front/People's Front of Judea etc."?
|5.23.03 @ 10:59AM|#
Trotskyite = followers of Leon Trotsky
nowadays, Trotskyite = bad people
E.g. Neocons are Trotskyites
david west|2.16.04 @ 1:10AM|#
read what real trotskyists think.