DSA's Radicalism Disconnects from Working-Class Reality
By Alma Cordero ·
A former organizer argues the movement is trapped between academic theory and practical economic struggle.
On the podcast "The Free Press," Jake Alman, a former DSA organizer, offered a stark and deeply troubling assessment of the organization’s trajectory. The most jarring claim was not merely that the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) have radicalized—though he cites 36% identifying as communist in a recent survey—but that this radicalization is fundamentally disconnected from the working-class people who actually live and breathe on the borderlands, or anywhere else with real economic struggle.
Alman detailed his journey, noting that when he joined in 2013, the DSA was described as "much more social democratic." He tracked a dramatic shift toward what he called a "cultural juggernaut," citing mechanisms like the erosion of anti-communism and influence from academia. His conflicts with the party—from its defense of the Maduro regime to the final straw of blaming Western Europe for Putin's invasion of Ukraine—highlighted growing ideological chasms.
The discussion expanded into broader critiques of the Democratic Party itself, which Alman argued is now a "shell." He contended that while the DSA possesses strong infrastructure and media discipline, it fails because its members are composed of "very affluent, very culturally affluent people" who do not know how to run a union or address the practical needs of working people. The host echoed this concern, noting that progressive populism exists among primary voters but questioning whether the DSA truly represents this base.
The Dangerous Divide Between Theory and Reality
The central tension revealed on the podcast is the widening gulf between academic theory and lived reality. Alman repeatedly argued that while the average American simply wants "functionality" in their system, the radical platform proposals are viewed as "crazy pie in the sky stuff." This critique strikes a chord with anyone who has spent time watching how policy debates—whether about 32-hour weeks or abolition of the Senate—are divorced from the practical struggle for survival.
From my vantage point here in El Paso, where every border crossing, every hotel job, and every shift worker's wage is governed by harsh economic calculus, this detachment is sickeningly familiar. The DSA’s failure to represent working-class people, as Alman suggests, isn't just a political misstep; it's an ethical one. It assumes that the problems faced by someone struggling with downard mobility or precarious employment can be solved by abstract ideological purity derived from university lecture halls.
Who Gets Left Behind When Ideology Wins
The podcast makes clear that the current progressive movement, in its zeal to dismantle historical structures and challenge global powers, often sacrifices local solidarity for grand, abstract narratives. The insistence on "forgetting the history of the 20th century" or using political cover to defend regimes like Maduro demonstrates a profound lack of grounding.
The real struggle at the border—the one that requires practical organizing, not just media messaging—is messy and difficult. It is about coordinating with people who are doing the work, regardless of their ideological purity. When progressive policy becomes indistinguishable from supporting "terror sympathizers," as the host warned, it signals a dangerous abandonment of the core mandate: protecting the most vulnerable among us.
The Democratic Party needs to stop listening to college professors and start listening to the workers whose lives are defined by shifts, paychecks, and border crossings. The energy spent on internal ideological warfare—the "diehard ideologues" perfecting message discipline—is energy that should be going into rebuilding local power structures.
Progressivism cannot survive as a set of academic talking points; it must be rooted in the concrete struggle for economic justice at ground level. We need to stop confusing radicalism with revolution, and instead focus on militant organizing that speaks directly to the needs of the working poor across this borderlands. The true fight is not between moderate and extreme, but between organized labor and those who treat policy like a thought experiment.