Official Member of the Democratic Socialists of America

I recently received my membership card from the Democratic Socialists of America. I also donate a few bucks a month to this organization. Now, you may be saying, “But Kafkaphony, you’re a Libertarian Socialist. What’s this about?”

Well, libertarian socialists don’t have a website because they are more decentralized by nature. Libertarian socialists are inherently suspicious of centralized power–even in organizations. So creating a single “official” website or group is contradictory to a lot in the movement. Also, the DSA has membership dues, elected leadership, and is involved in electoral politics. Libertarian socialists reject those kinds of structures, which means they lack the resources to build or maintain polished sites or public campaigns.

So, how can I be a libertarian socialist and donate to the DSA? I like to work within the DSA for strategic reasons. The DSA is a “big tent” and includes: Marxists, social Democrats, Democratic socialists (obviously), libertarian socialists, and even some anarchists and syndicalists.

The DSA is a vehicle, not an identity. It’s a way to build power, influence policy, and meet like-minded people, even if the ultimate goal (like abolishing the state or capitalism entirely) goes beyond what the DSA is currently pushing.

I prefer to use the DSA to push for reforms that improve people’s lives now, even if the long-term goal is revolution or abolition of hierarchies. I use it for organizing opportunities like meeting people who might be down for more radical actions outside of the DSA. It’s also for learning skills, gaining political, experience, and building networks.

There will be disagreements between the two though. The DSA sometimes supports electoral politics, which some libertarian socialists reject. However, it’s the best we’ve got right now. I don’t have to buy into the DSA’s entire platform.

I plan on using the DSA to connect with organizers, practice power building, and to push for transformative demands, but I’m always keeping my eye on the bigger picture: dismantling capitalism, hierarchy, and the state–not just reforming them. I’m looking for shared goals and ways to push the DSA further left by putting theory into action.

Does Socialism Mean that Everyone Will be Poor?

One of the most common myths about socialism is that it makes everyone equally poor. It’s a talking point used to scare people away from the idea of economic justice, but it’s far from the truth. In reality, socialism isn’t about dragging everyone down. It’s about lifting everyone up.

What is Socialism Really About?

At its core, socialism is about making sure wealth and resources are distributed more fairly. It doesn’t mean no one can be successful or that everyone has to live in the same conditions. Instead, it prioritizes meeting basic human needs–like healthcare, education, and housing–so that no one is left behind while a small elite hoards obscene amounts of wealth.

Under capitalism, wealth tends to concentrate at the top, leaving millions struggling to get by. In contrast, socialist policies aim to level the playing field by ensuring that the economy serves the majority, not just the privileged few.

But Won’t That Lead to Poverty?

This is where the misconception comes in. Critics argue that socialism discourages innovation and hard work, leading to economic stagnation. But history shows otherwise. Many countries that have adopted socialist policies–especially in areas like healthcare, worker protections, and public services–have some of the highest standards of living in the world.

Take the Nordic countries, for example. While they’re not fully socialist, they implement strong socialist policies: universal healthcare, free education, and robust social safety nets, The result? High wages, low poverty, and some of the happiest populations on the planet.

Who Really Stays Rich Under Capitalism?

If you’re worried about socialism making you poor, ask yourself: Is capitalism actually making you rich? For most people, the answer is no. Wages have stagnated while billionaires multiply their fortunes. Basic necessities like housing, education, and healthcare are increasingly out of reach for the average person.

Socialism doesn’t mean equal poverty. It means ensuring that wealth isn’t locked away by a tiny elite while the rest of society struggles. It’s about making sure the economy works for all of us, not just those born into wealth and power.

At the end of the day, the real question isn’t whether socialism will make everyone poor. It’s whether we’re okay with an economic system that keeps most people struggling while a handful live in unimaginable luxury.

How a Libertarian Socialist Society Would Work

I’ve already stated my political leanings and they are very far to the left. We’re seeing what the far right can do to a society and it’s horrible. We’re seeing it now. Some people saw it in Nazi Germany. The far right is dangerous and should be destroyed. Capitalism itself should be destroyed.

So, what would a libertarian socialist society look like? I’ve been reading more and more about my political leanings and coming up with how the United States would look under libertarian socialism and here’s what I’ve come up with:

First and foremost, it would prioritize decentralization, have direct democracy, and collective ownership while abolishing capitalist wage labor and hierarchical state power. It would be built on cooperation, bottom-up structures that allow the people, not managers or CEOs to manage their workplaces and communities without coercion from a centralized authority.

How it would affect the economy and community

There would be no private ownership of production. That means factories, farms, and businesses would be collectively owned and managed by workers and communities. Instead of bosses, workers would directly organize production through democratic assemblies and councils. Goods and services would be distributed based on need, contribution, or through participation rather than profit-driven markets. All economic decisions would be made through federated councils of workers and consumers rather than dictated by a federal government or market forces.

How it would affect politics

Instead of a government ruling over people, power would be held in local, self-managed assemblies where absolutely everyone has a say in decisions affect them and their lives. Local communities would coordinate with each other ensuring cooperation without a top-down hierarchy. There would be no politicians. We’re all sick of them anyway, right? Instead, think about it: communities and workplaces would elect temporary, recallable delegates with strict limited power.

Free Association and Mutual Aid

People would contribute to society based on their ability and receive according to their need. For those of us, like me, who are disabled, no one would be forced to work to survive. People would contribute according to their abilities, and those unable to work would still be valued as full members of the society.

Land, housing, and natural resources would be collectively maintained and distributed according to democratic principles. People would form communities and organizations based on voluntary cooperation rather than state enforcement.

Now, some of you may be wondering how justice might work. Will there still be police and prisons? I think we can all agree that for-profit prisons have to go. Prisons will be meant for rehabilitation. That is what the society would look like: conflict resolution, justice focusing on rehabilitation, community accountability, and non-punitive solutions.

Work and Leisure

With production driven by human needs instead of profit, people would work fewer hours and have more time for leisure, education, and creativity. Who wouldn’t want a society like that? There would also be lifelong learning. Decision-making would be central to civic life.

Technological advances would be used to reduce labor, improve well-being, and enhance sustainability.

Healthcare

Healthcare would be free and universally accessible, including specialized care for the disabled, including mental health services. Caregiving would be shared responsibility rather than an individual burden, ensuring that people who need support receive it without being financially or socially isolated.

Leadership

Now, you’re probably wonder who would run such a society. Where there be a president? A leader? A kind? What kind of leadership would there be? If there were a leadership role in a libertarian socialist society, it would be more of a coordinator or spokesperson chosen by democratic means, with limited power and subject to recall at any time. Governance would be more about collective decision-making through councils, federations, or assemblies rather than a single executive figure.

Utopia

Would a libertarian socialist society be a utopia? No. There’s no such thing as a utopia. People aren’t perfect and conflicts will arise. The democratic structures would allow for ongoing problem-solving and adaptation without authoritarian control.

If I’m being honest, it would be messy and experimental at first, with different regions trying different forms of organization. The core principles would remain though: maximizing freedom and equality by ensuring that power is always distributed among the people rather than concentrated in a ruling class.

If you’ve read this far, I thank you. These are just my ideas of what a libertarian socialist society would look like based on my reading of the system and researching it and reading a shit load of Noam Chomsky and Peter Kropotkin. I haven’t read much by Mikhail Bakunin, but he’s on my list and I’m curious about his ideas of what a society should be.

So, what do you think? Would you live in this type of society? I for one am tired of capitalism and would jump at the chance to try something new.

Why I’m a Libertarian Socialist

I didn’t vote in 2016 because I didn’t like Clinton or Trump. I voted third party in 2020 because I thought Biden and Trump were both too old. I voted for Harris in 2024 because I thought anyone, even a Democrat would be better than Trump. Voting Democrat does not make me a Democrat, though. I’ve always fallen into what is known as Libertarian Socialism (think more Noam Chomsky and Guy Debord.)

Libertarian Socialism is a political philosophy that combines socialist economics with a strong emphasis on individual freedom, direct democracy, and decentralized power. It oppose both state control as seen in authoritarian socialism and capitalist exploitation, advocating for worker self-management, cooperative ownership of resources, and voluntary associations.

I believe true freedom is impossible under capitalism, as economic coercion forces people into exploitative relationships. I’d like to see a society based on voluntary cooperation. I’m looking for ways to disrupt capitalism and push for socialist alternatives. I’m extremely skeptical of relying solely on electoral politics and traditional protests. I’d like for more immediate tactics.

I don’t trust the powers that be in a capitalist society. Capitalism is an inherently exploitative system that prioritizes profit over people. Capitalism concentrates power in the hands of the few at the expense of the many. Capitalism traps people in powerlessness rather than enabling real change; it also exacerbates human selfishness and destruction. It’s a system that rewards the absolute worst people like Trump, Apartheid Clyde, Zuckerberg, and Bezos while crushing everyone else.

The end goal of libertarian socialism is to create a society where economic and political power is decentralized, capitalism is abolished, and people have direct control over their workplace and communities. It seeks to replace hierarchal systems — whether capitalist or authoritarian socialist — with cooperative, voluntary, and democratic structures.

Essentially, libertarian socialism sees a world where power is in the hands of the people, not corporations or the state, and where cooperation replaces exploitation.

I am more than willing to work with Democratic Socialists, which I have started to do by contacting a local Democratic Socialist representative in the government here. I am also willing to work with traditional socialists as well as communists. I want to do what I can to bring down capitalism where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. If there are any other socialists or Marxists out there willing to help me in this fight, please reach out. My email is kafkaphony@gmail.com. I realize by having a gmail account it’s just giving capitalists more power, but it’s a necessary evil at the moment.

Can Freedom and Communism Coexist?

I’ve been delving more and more and reading more and more into systems other than the oppressive one that is Capitalism. Something has to be done to bring down the entire Capitalist system. I think we need some sort of revolution and to make way for Socialism or Communism or at the very least Democratic-Socialism, Libertarian-Socialism, or Anarcho-Communism.

I’m fond of the freedoms we have so far in the United States, but with this new administration I fear that those freedoms are going to be taken away by the Capitalists. But you may be asking, “But isn’t Communism against freedom?” I have always thought that as well after being brainwashed and indoctrinated by the education system and the news, but it’s not the case.

Can freedom exist within a Communist or Socialist society? It depends on how you define “freedom” and “Communism.” If by “freedom” do I mean the ability to live without economic coercion? Have access to basic needs and participate in decision making? If that’s what I mean then the answer is yes. Many leftist theorists argue that true freedom is only possibly when Capitalism is abolished, since it forces people to sell their labor to survive.

Communism is against the right to accumulate wealth and own private property at the expense of others. In that regard, Communism is incompatible with freedom. Communism prioritizes collective well-being over individual accumulation, which can sometimes mean restricting certain freedoms such as the freedom to exploit labor or hoard resources.

Historically, some communist regimes have suppressed political freedom such as the USSR and North Korea, but those two were never truly Communist, but I’ll save that for another day. Many leftists argue that a stateless, decentralized form of Communism, like Anarcho-Communism would maximize both economic and political freedom.

In a truly Communist society — especially in a decentralized, democratic form like Anarcho-Communism — freedom of choice, speech, and the press could still exist, and in some ways, they might even be stronger than under Capitalism.

In a Communist system where resources are collectively owned and distributed based on need, people wouldn’t be forced to take jobs just to survive. Instead they could choose their work based on interests and community needs. However, certain choices like owning private businesses or accumulating excessive wealth wouldn’t exist because the contradict the principle of Communist ownership.

In theory, a Communist society could allow free speech and press, especially if it’s structured democratically. If power is decentralized and decisions are made collectively, suppressing speech would go against the idea of worker control. The press would be worker-run instead of owned by a few wealthy individuals, leading to a more diverse range of perspectives instead of media being controlled by corporate interests.

In short, freedom of speech, the press, and choice could absolutely exist under Communism, it just depends on whether the system is democratic and decentralized or authoritarian and bureaucratic.

Hey Kid, You Want to Build Communism?

My reading this month has consisted of re-reading The Communist Manifesto. I haven’t read it since my freshman year of college. I am also discussing communism, socialism, and capitalism with a friend of mine. Capitalism is no better than communism or socialism. People say, “Communism has killed millions!”

To that, I say that Capitalism exploits people in other countries for profit, not for the greater good. How many people has Capitalism killed by letting the poor and sick and homeless just go ahead and die just because they couldn’t afford food, shelter, or healthcare? Capitalism is responsible for the deaths of the sick and poor. As was said in an Otep song, “There isn’t any cure for the poor and uninsured.”

So, how are we defining the number of people killed by an economic system? Do you count all the preventable deaths by hunger or curable diseases that took place due to poverty under that system? When counting death tolls of 20th century state socialism, most people count such deaths. If we do that for capitalism, then the death toll is astronomically higher.

What about occupational deaths among proletarians and unfree laborers in capitalist societies, both on the job and as the result of health problems brought on by their work?

And how about those killed in wars in which a capitalist state was the aggressor, including in any anti-colonial uprisings against a capitalist state (as the capitalist state was the aggressor in these also, because the violence of their occupation provoked the necessary uprising)?

Communists may have killed people, but wars waged for feudalism and capitalism way outrank it with centuries of imperialism and the people killed by communists tend to be those with guns trying to shoot them and so, in a battle context, don’t really count as killing innocent people.

So, am I a Communist? No. I am just saying capitalism is shit for being exploitative and it’s not the perfect system Americans think it is. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer under Capitalism. If you ask me what has radicalized me into this way of thinking then I say to you it’s Trump. Trumpism has radicalized me. I am doing anything I can to fight back against this regime. I am emailing and calling anyone I can to ask them to put an end to this oligarchy we now live under. I have my first meeting with a group of Socialists next week that I’m looking forward to.

“Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Workingmen of all countries unite!”