Many activists are worrying about how to build a more effective movement against the war. The weakness of the current movement is highlighting long-term weaknesses of the radical left. There needs to be not just more or bigger demonstrations against the war, but a real look at the crisis of orientation in the radical left.
A recent exchange on this on Marxmail highlights this point. Dennis Brasky posted an article by Dan La Botz, a long-time labor activist, calling for the DSA, as a large organization, to seek to lead this movement. He backed this up by pointing to the problem that the movement is currently led by organizations, such as the Workers' World Party, PSL, and ANSWER, which hold that fighting US imperialism requires supporting, to this or that extent, reactionary regimes and opposing the liberation movements in those countries.
In response, John Reimann of Oakland Socialist pointed out that DSA itself had some of the same problems as these groups. He pointed to the need for a struggle, not only against the war, but for change in the radical left. He puts his finger on various sore points that must be considered, such as the weaknesses of work in the unions and the ingrained top down structure of the present movement.
I don't fully agree with either La Botz or Reimann about how the anti-war movement should be structured. For that matter, I don't think it is something that the radical left can simply shape at its will. But Reimann's reply is a breath of fresh air in that it brings out some really important issues that are usually ignored. -- Joseph Green
DSA Should Attempt to Lead the Struggle Against the War (March 17, 2026)
by Dan La Botz
The Democratic Socialist of America (DSA) with 100,000 members nationally and important experience in organizing campaigns, should put itself forward as a leader of the movement against the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. In fact, for the good of the American anti-war movement, for the good of the Iranian people and the people of the region, it is important that DSA take the lead.
The war, now a regional war affecting the entire world, has already claimed thousands of lives and it will kill many more. Many of the victims are civilians, like the 150 children killed by an American missile at a girls school in Iran. U.S. soldiers have also been killed. The war will lead to rising prices for gasoline and everything else, affecting the entire American and the economy worldwide. Working people here in America and around the world will pay the price, in fact they are already paying with their lives and their well-being.
The groups now attempting to lead the anti-war movement—the Workers World Party, the Party of Socialism and Liberation (PSL), and ANSWER—will make it impossible to build a strong, healthy movement that can attract the American people. All of those groups have for years supported the Islamic Republic of Iran, a theocratic totalitarian state that has killed tens of thousands of its citizens for participating in pro-democracy protests. The American people will not want to march against the Iran war under the flags of the Islamic Republic.
Those groups argue that because Iran has been an enemy of the United States and Israel, and because it is now fighting them, that the Iranian government is an anti-imperialist nation that deserves our political support. Their position of support for the Iranian state made it impossible for them to rally or even to offer full-throated support to the “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement in Iran in 2022 or the reform movement protests of 2025-26.
Some in DSA want to join with Workers World, PSL, and ANSWER to build the antiwar movement. That would be a grave political mistake. DSA members should consider how their association with pro-Iranian government groups will affect their electoral campaigns and their elected officials. Zohran Mamdani’s mayoralty and the campaigns of other DSA members will be jeopardized by such an alliance. The New York Times and other news media will conduct investigations that reveal such connections. The New York Post, Fox News and other rightwing media will publicize the association in an attempt to discredit DSA
Rather than joining the small, existing anti-war movement with its current leaders, DSA, with its large numbers, talented members, and organizing experience, should put itself forth as a leader of the movement. It should enter into a coalition with the groups that have organized the No Kings protests, most of whom are liberal democrats and independents, and many of whom are progressive activists, while some are democratic socialist. DSA should organize with them. As all good organizers have always done, DSA should organize those to its right, not those like PSL who falsely claim to stand on the left. There is nothing leftist about supporting the authoritarian governments of Iran, Russia, and China as those groups have.
Rather than joining the small, existing anti-war movement with its current leaders, DSA, with its large numbers, talented members, and organizing experience, should put itself forth as a leader of the movement. It should enter into a coalition with the groups that have organized the No Kings protests, most of whom are liberal democrats and independents, and many of whom are progressive activists, while some are democratic socialist. DSA should organize with them. As all good organizers have always done, DSA should organize those to its right, not those like PSL who falsely claim to stand on the left. There is nothing leftist about supporting the authoritarian governments of Iran, Russia, and China as those groups have.
DSA, unlike Workers World, PSL, and ANSWER, should at the same time demonstrate a consistent anti-imperialism, opposing the imperialist wars of Israel and the United States, but also opposing Russian imperialism and supporting Ukraine. Support for Ukraine means defending its right to sovereignty and self-determination, including its right to get arms wherever it can.
When an organization campaigns, whether for a candidate or for a cause, it changes itself and it changes its relationship with other groups and with the public. A serious DSA anti-war campaign, based on democratic socialist principles, calling for ending the war on Iran and self-determination for the Iranian people, will bring out the best in DSA, clarifying its politics and unifying its membership.
DSA has the numbers and the wherewithal to play a leading role in the anti-war movement with allies like those in No Kings, and it should step up now.
Full text at https://www.counterpunch.org/2026/03/17 ... r-on-iran/
Reply
by John Reimann, of Oakland Socialist (https://www.oaklandsocialist.com)
Posted on Marxmail on March 18, 2026 at https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/41160
Dan La Botz is correct in his criticism of the "revolutionary" groups to the "left" of DSA - groups like PSL and Answer - which he says correctly have for years supported the Iranian regime. For whatever reason, La Botz doesn't mention one of the most influential "peace and freedom" groups to the right of DSA - Code Pink - who have played a despicable role regarding Iran. They organized several Iran government coordinated tours of Iran which that government used to try to legitimize itself domestically. Nor has Code Pink ever spoken up to support the Woman Life Freedom movement. The same is true of the Green Party.
But La Botz leaves out an even more crucial fact: DSA itself is guilty of the same failing. "Silence means assent" and in all the years prior to this war, DSA has never spoken up on behalf of that same struggle against the Iran regime. The DSA international committee has been handed exclusive power to issue statements on international issues. That committee has taken a soft Putin apologist position time and again, for instance regarding Ukraine. On February 26, the International Committee issued a statement denouncing the US-Israeli imperialist attack on Iran. To my knowledge that is the first statement DSA has officially made concerning Iran. I have been unable to find anything from DSA during the Woman Life Freedom movement or more recently when the Iran regime was slaughtering people in the streets again. That approach seems to reflect a general attitude among many members. I have posted a series of articles and comments on the DSA internal discussion bulletin board. This was prior to the US-Israeli assault. The response has been a uniform lack of interest in supporting the Iran revolution. An open internal struggle against DSA's campist approach in general and towards Iran in particular is necessary. Unfortunately, La Botz leaves that part out.
La Botz calls for DSA to reach out to and work with No Kings and similar groups. He is right, but again the matter should go further. All of these groups organize from the top down. There should be democratically-run organizing committees established for all the events. Within agreed-upon parameters, all different points of view should be allowed representation on the speakers platforms. That includes open socialist views, so long as they aren't of the campist variety. The problem is that at least in my area - East Bay DSA - DSA itself is not democratically run. General membership meetings are run like cheer leading sessions. The agenda is set up in such a way that there is almost no opening for democratic discussion and debate.
There is another power that La Botz neglects to mention. That is the labor movement, which has been missing in action for many, many years in almost all protest movements. Starting with the protests against the police murder of Oscar Grant in Oakland and continuing to the George Floyd protests, the unions were missing in action. I was in Ferguson a couple of days after Michael Brown was killed. I talked with one member of the UAW there. He told me that his local union president told him "this is not our battle," and in fact despite the fact that it seemed Ferguson's entire black community had mobilized itself the unions were totally absent. Even in the much ballyhooed so-called general strike in Minneapolis, the participation of the unions was minimal at best. The same is in general true for the No Kings protests. Here and there we see a few union signs or a tiny union contingent. Symptomatic of the union leadership's approach is that their web sites completely ignore the whole threat to democratic rights posed by Trump. Again, the problem is that DSA is closely linked to the same union leadership. In fact, representatives of that leadership - paid union staffers - often play a key role in DSA. Those staffers will do everything they can to divert any tendency to launch a campaign to change that direction of the unions. That's what the staffers are hired and paid to do.
So, from every angle, for DSA to play the role that Dan La Botz poses, an internal struggle within DSA is required, just as it is within the unions. Let's hope that this time Dan La Botz won't shrink from that struggle! <>
What's happening in the anti-war movement
Re: What's happening in the anti-war movement
There's a typo near the end of the next to last paragraph: “and HE ingrained top down” should be “and THE ingrained top down”.
Re: What's happening in the anti-war movement
Thanks. Corrected.