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 1 week ago (2 children)

I agree with some parts of this but disagree with a bunch of other parts still.

I've never met a victim, and I've met many, who wants their shit blasted all over the world like this. Everyone I've met wouldn't consider it sweeping it under the rug to keep the victim's privacy. I disagree with all the parts about how they should've told everyone Marissa's private story. It's also clear to me that despite what everyone here is saying, Eugene is not a danger after the initial event because it never happened again. Everyone says he's X because he did something once while drunk that he didn't even remember. I'm not defending him his actions, he needed to be punished, I'm just saying sometimes one event doesn't define a whole person. It seems restorative justice worked in this case. And I see people saying restorative justice doesn't apply here for some reason, but nobody is saying why. I work in prison abolition and am trying to build communism in a conservative area, though so maybe I have a different view on people's abilities to change.

I do agree that they handled parts wrongly the first time, but to me it's because they didn't know what they were doing. It doesn't define Ben as some sort of guy trying to cover things up, but as someone over their head who was trying to figure out what to do. He should probably at the very least step down for a bit to get some heat off the party. And the party should have probably been alerted that Eugene is being suspended for an inappropriate sexual assault event at a company party, but only if Marissa wanted that. Everyone, I imagine even Marissa, was probably worried about the state and their enemies taking advantage of that to destroy the party. It's a tough one on what to keep in and what to blast because every weakness will be taken advantage of and every party internal communication will leak. They chose wrong in this case, but I empathize with the difficulty of trying to build socialism in the imperial core.

It's clear that they made the NDC to account for this in the future, but the fact that they didn't have it setup before this doesn't mean the party is unfixable or the whole thing is a wash. It's a part of the improvements every org will have to go through as it grows. From what I heard, their current processes are much better, but I'm sure it varies from branch to branch. It probably does need to be kept separate from the CC, but I think it already is completely independent and has a higher authority than it.

And does hiring professionals from the bourgeois society full of sexual harassment and sexual assault a good idea? Idk if trusting the processes or current companies and such is a great idea. It's not like they all do amazing on these kinds of things, either, but the writer of this acts like the PSL needs to be copying them.

Also, they attest the faction doesn't exist because it's people leaving who are then forming a new org, but that's a lie. It formed while they were members of the PSL as an attempt to split the party, attempted to recruit people in the PSL, pretended to agree with their politics while secretly forming their own faction, and are continuing to do so.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 week ago

    "restorative justice" has repeatedly been misused in this discussion. It does not mean sweeping offences under the rug and allowing people to stay in their top positions, where they will continue to be a threat to others, who will have no way of knowing of any danger. It means accountability and change and then afterwards being allowed, provisionally, to return to a normal status, not an entitlement to the very position of authority which enabled this behavior in the first place. If you can't understand this basic difference, if you don't understand the first thing in this topic, then you should seriously reflect on why you feel the need to give ignorant opinions on serious topics.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    Hard agree. There's a strong effort here to portray the organization as irredeemable or fatally flawed. You can see an org that has learned from multiple failures and that is continuing to improve. You can see that the NDC is an iterative improvement over using standard channels and even though this incident predates the NDC you can see that body is also learning from it. In my personal opinion I'd want to see the party, and any socialist party, plan for malfeasance, sexual assault, and other inappropriate behavior by creating a strong independent and adversarial investigative arm. That said I'd defer to people that have more experience in building strong mechanisms for handling these kinds of issues.

  • source
  • parent