Party Time? Setting the record straight

On June 9, 2026 Tempest Magazine published Party Time?, the transcript of an interview with Charlie Post by David Camfield. The central question being asked was whether socialist organizations should consider themselves parties.

Charlie Post, a former member of the U.S. Socialist Workers Party (SWP) and Solidarity and current member of Tempest, takes a stab at answering that question by outlining how all of the traditions in the U.S. failed because they followed what he calls “the micro-sect model”. While a revolutionary party is necessary, it requires that a large layer of the working class be radicalized.

Post provides a history starting in the 1860’s in Europe up to the broad Left parties of today. In addition to the basic objective problem regarding the working class, there were also subjective mistakes made by socialist organizations which included swinging from ultraleft abstentionism to adaptation. From my perspective, so far, so good.

At this point, Post begins a broad attack on the existing far Left. All groups either continue to use the micro-sect model or proclaim themselves to be parties. Those following the micro-sect model are prone to a “fetish of leadership” which played a part in those organizations ignoring or excusing oppressive behavior from leadership. This led to the demise of the ISO and other organizations.

Post then turns to the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) as an alternative to the micro-sect model. He says there were opportunities for engagement between 2017-2020. He cites the Jamaal Bowman debacle as an illustration of the decline of DSA into a more authoritarian and bureaucratic organization. Today, with the advent of Mamdani, Tempest is re-evaluating whether engaging with DSA is worthwhile.¹

Post next turns to Solidarity. He was a member from its founding in 1986 until 2015. During much of this time, he was in the leadership. He claims that Solidarity was good at training its members until about 1993. This change, according to Post, had to do with members giving up on revolution and accepting reformism as the only thing possible. His conclusion is the most damning “What we ended up with was that the group—politically, not organizationally—liquidated itself into a more amorphous left-reformist current.” He later goes on to say that Solidarity became depoliticized and the atmosphere became toxic.

I am a member of Solidarity, serving on its National Committee, and also a member of Tempest and DSA. I joined Solidarity in 1997 so I can’t comment on the shift in training members that allegedly happened in or around 1993 but I believe our remaining founding members would be as puzzled by that comment as I was. It is also totally untrue that we have a paper membership of one hundred with an active membership of thirty.

Solidarity’s membership has been affected by the same objective factors that have fragmented the rest of the far left. The rise of DSA drew members away as well as allowed a portion of the existing membership to be comfortable in supporting progressive Democrats, a mistake in my opinion. However, this is a question on which Solidarity members are about evenly divided and one that we continue to debate.

We lost members as we grappled with gendered violence and trans rights. However, unlike other organizations, we got things right. I proudly served on the Gendered Violence Commission during this time. The loss of members was an inevitable result of this painful process.

I’ve added to the list of negative issues that have affected Solidarity in the interest of honesty and to acknowledge mistakes and shortcomings. That does not mean that the musings of a disgruntled former member are accurate or fair. We continue to call ourselves revolutionary socialists in the tradition of socialism from below. We continue to grow with youth and women as new members. We continue to seek opportunities for collaboration with other like-minded organizations and individuals.

One such collaboration is the United Left Platform (ULP) which Post does not even bother to mention and to which he has done a great disservice in his snarky attacks on Solidarity.

Which organization is immune from criticism? Tempest, of course! It’s unclear how Tempest has all the answers. This is where it gets very vague. If Solidarity is a drop in the ocean, then Tempest is a drop and a half, a fact that should engender a high degree of humility and self-criticism both of which were sorely lacking in this interview.

NB: Dual Solidarity-Tempest members Bill Balderston, Ron Lare, Ted McTaggart, Peter Solenberger and Judy Wraight concur with this article. The views expressed are the author’s and do not necessarily represent those of Solidarity.

[1] In my opinion, Tempest made a sectarian turn away from DSA, a mistake that I and others argued against at the time in an article published in Tempest magazine (“DSA after the 2023 convention: Another view”).The size of DSA has waxed and waned with the election of Trump in 2016, the election of Biden and the re-election of Trump. There is nothing surprising about this. Currently, DSA has over 120,000 members and continues to grow.  A group with young, enthusiastic members who call themselves socialists and who have an active interest in Marx is one place we should want to be, illusions about social democracy notwithstanding.

The issue with Jamaal Bowman was a much more fundamental one than what Post identifies. DSA should not be endorsing Democrats, and if they do, they should not be surprised that there is no accountability. At most, DSA should be critically endorsing independent candidates. Revolutionary socialists should be arguing this at every step of the way, not mounting campaigns for expulsion when (surprise!) Democratic candidates, who have been endorsed by all kinds of groups and individuals, turn out not to be accountable. Post says that participation in DSA is a tactical question and I agree with that.

Opinions expressed in signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or the Tempest Collective. For more information, see “About Tempest Collective.”