This was originally shared by Marissa Sanchez in a note with the following content:

As I am finalizing my own response to the Central Committee’s “true narrative” about what happened to me, I am deeply appreciative of others who are taking the time to read their response carefully and assess what it reveals.

I especially appreciate this piece for calling attention to the fact that I signed the Steven Powers letter in 2020, and yet now find myself subjected to the same insinuations that I am a wrecker, a state agent, or someone whose criticisms must be understood as part of an attack on the Party rather than engaged with for its own substance.

I think there is an important lesson in that for every comrade to internalize.

One of the things I have had to reckon with from my own time in the PSL and on the NDC is how, when the Party comes under criticism, women comrades are placed in front of and made to bear those criticisms. Our identities become something the Party wields defensively against people who criticize it. I wish I had understood more clearly what was being asked of me in 2020. I wish I had thought more independently and critically about the role I was being asked to play then. It has taken a great deal of personal development for me to understand that role and to take responsibility for having allowed myself to play it.

As I said in my own essay: if PSL members can change the organization, great. I mean that sincerely. But this is one place where I differ from the hopes expressed in this piece. I do not believe the Party can be reformed by its membership in the ways this comrade is calling for.

The Central Committee’s response to me, and what I am hearing about the way I continue to be discussed in internal meetings and in one-on-one conversations with members, has only deepened that conclusion for me. Right now, rather than seriously assessing the organizational shortcomings that allowed these events to happen, Party leadership is working seemingly tirelessly to discredit me and to reinforce it’s increasingly closed internal narrative about why criticism exists in the first place.

I hope everyone following this situation will read this piece carefully. And I especially hope we will all think seriously about what it means that someone who once helped defend the Party against these very kinds of criticisms can so easily become their target when she is the one speaking.

For my part, my branch has expelled me. I'm officially no longer a party member after years of work, hundreds of hours, signing the lease on our Liberation Center, and helping to found the branch. This has hit our branch very hard; but leadership has doubled down and closed ranks.

I'm looking into other cadre orgs to join and work with, and looking to try and build an alternative here with the expectation that the party will not be able to handle this contradiction and will implode. Wish us luck 🤞

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -2 points 2 days ago (6 children)
  • [–] 19 points 1 day ago*

    Merely smear the survivor as being an unprincipled wrecker.

    Consider, perhaps, that we can have principles which do not allow for us to submit to the will of a central committee good ol' boys club that protects assaulters and denigrates survivors. That is not unprincipled, it reflects a difference of principles.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 1 day ago

    Neither I nor the party has, at any point, disregarded the sexual assault that took place

    No. Instead they acknowledged that it happened and protected the perpetrator anyway.

    That is not better.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 24 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    The leadership of the party disregarded it by not immediately expelling Puryear and focusing on care and safety for Marissa and launching an investigation into anyone else Puryear may have assaulted or harassed. The party will have disregarded it if it doesn't force big changes in leadership.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (1 child)

    They asked her what she wanted. It seems to me focusing on what the victim wants is the best thing, and I could see why they thought so, too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago

    They told her to keep quiet at the same time and emphasized discipline. In addition, you have to actually enforce these things as an org with a decision body and have some basic discipline as the org itself, not just appeal to someone recently assaulted and going through the ringer. Someone who just wants it all to go away, in this case - and it didn't because it was not dealt with correctly by the organization's top leadership.

    Your position is completely incorrect and creates abusive environments.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 1 day ago

    Get a new hobby, this is disgusting. At this point I can only assume that you are alternating between exaggerated callousness and this absurd posturing about "good faith" as some sort of sophistic strategy.

  • source
  • parent