Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), darling DSA Socialist in Office (SIO), has received her fifth consecutive endorsement from NYC-DSA. She is sailing towards what is almost assuredly a safe re-election and will start her fifth term as a representative in Congress in 2027. NYC-DSA’s endorsement has opened the door to yet another round of conversation on AOC, what she stands for, and what she means for DSA.
AOC’s primary victory in 2018 was a transformative moment for DSA, leading to an explosion of membership as her underdog story spread across the country. Since then, DSA has evolved substantially. AOC’s victory in 2018 brought a newly-resurgent DSA to 40,000 members; this past February we surpassed 100,000.
AOC has the most storied career of any modern-era DSA SIO. Her celebrity and public profile has made her one of the most popular politicians in the country and a very early front-runner for the 2028 Democratic presidential primary. Over her seven years in Congress, she has far eclipsed her association with DSA and has moved her closer and closer to the Democratic Party.
We’ve discussed this before. Red Star, alongside many others in DSA (e.g. in Democratic Left, DSA San Francisco, Partisan, and Marxist Unity Group) , stood firmly against her re-endorsement in 2024 on the grounds of her weak commitments to Palestine and our organization. Two years later, her positions have only gotten worse. AOC’s awkward, arms-length maneuvering around Palestine and the demand for an arms embargo is demonstrative of the contradiction between our fight against empire and the Democratic Party’s mission to uphold it.
[Endorsing AOC is a Bridge to Nowhere
Over the past several weeks, DSA has been rife with discussions about the National Political Committee (NPC) considering re-endorsement of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), the congresswoman for NY-14. The question arose suddenly; after receiving her endorsement request, the National Electoral Committee (NEC) declined to follow the normal process of having a
Red StarGrayson L.
](https://redstarcaucus.org/endorsing-aoc-is-a-bridge-to-nowhere/)
The NYC-DSA endorsement forum
On March 31st, the congresswoman attended a virtual forum where she delivered her case for re-endorsement to members across NYC-DSA. Members were invited to participate in the chapter’s endorsement process via an online meeting which featured Q&A and closed deliberation. Members could submit questions before and during the meeting. Both sets of questions were subject to filtering by facilitators.
The questions chosen explored AOC’s and DSA’s shared goals in Congress, how she would take on the affordability crisis, and the escalation in Iran. She opened with a review of her political history: outlining her support for legislation such as the Green New Deal and Medicare for All. AOC also asserted her role in popularizing controversial positions like Abolish ICE and reaffirmed her goal to “reimagine the public landscape” by shifting the Overton window towards progressive politics.
AOC’s responses were less those of a fellow DSA member navigating the politics of the moment and felt more like a mainstream politician walking us through her resume. Aside from the flattery of calling DSA her “political home", NYC-DSA members heard little self-reflection from AOC on her role as SIO and her orientation towards DSA. This was evident in her response to a question about her endorsement process and whether she would endorse the current NYC-DSA electoral slate. In her meandering answer, AOC did not commit to endorsing the slate and instead treated the NYC-DSA-backed candidates as if they were any other candidates requesting her endorsement.
The headline-grabbing moment of the forum was when a DSA member asked AOC about whether she supported an arms embargo. AOC responded with a resounding affirmation that the U.S. must stop providing military funding to Israel. At the same time, her remarks also repeatedly affirmed that Israel can “buy their own weapons” without the U.S.’ help. When asked a follow-up on whether she opposed “defensive” aid explicitly, including the Iron Dome, she hastily responded with a “yes” and moved the forum along.
AOC’s evolving stance on Palestine
Many members were looking forward to the discussion on Palestine because it has been the most contested aspect of AOC’s relationship to DSA’s evolving politics. When she emerged on the scene in 2018, AOC initially seemed to be a strong counter to the Democratic positions on Palestine. Maybe she could be a strong advocate in a hostile environment. Maybe she could break the mold of “progressive except for Palestine.”
In 2021, the first fissure appeared through her “present” vote on funding the Iron Dome. This moment showed her to be susceptible to pressure from Zionists in the Democratic Party. These cracks grew further after Israel’s genocide began after October 7th. In 2024, the NPC considered her re-endorsement, which Red Star opposed. That process ended with the NPC ending her national endorsement. Later that year, AOC fiercely advocated for the Biden and Harris presidential campaigns, despite their unwavering support of Israel’s genocide.
NYC-DSA members were eager to hear their fellow DSA member clarify her stance at the forum. Unfortunately, AOC failed to openly reflect on her loud support of Biden and Harris campaigns. Instead, she came across as defensive, failing to acknowledge the legitimate criticism of her track record and public profile. The forum became the space to announce her new position: she will oppose all military aid to Israel because “the Israeli government should be able to finance their own weapons.”
In attempting to put forward a new line, AOC is trying to bridge the widening political gap between DSA and the Democratic Party, as she has before. She wants to peddle moderating language and retain her position as a socialist. However, these roles are completely at odds with each other. There is no common ground.
[Sectarians, Sheepdogs, and the Center
By Nate W. Something is changing in this country. Millions of Americans, for the first time, have found themselves drawn away from the liberal mainstream ideologies that dominate the Republican and Democratic parties and are looking towards socialism for answers to the problems that plague the United States. From online
Red StarRed Star
](https://redstarcaucus.org/sectarians-sheepdogs-and-the-center/)
In practice, every statement of support for the Palestinian people is followed by a condemnation of the actually existing Palestinian resistance. Every narrowly targeted criticism of Netanyahu and the Israeli government is carefully calculated to obscure the fascism inherent in both Zionist project and the American state. And she’s doing it for free: not because she’s receiving support from Zionist lobby groups—she clearly is not. It is because the maintenance of empire requires a political capitulation to the American and Israeli settler projects.
The economic necessity of imperialism
AOC’s stance is a result of Israel’s position in the world system. Regardless of intent, AOC is unable to offer complete and unqualified support to the demands for an arms embargo on Israel. She makes an effort to echo the popular demands of the Democratic base from Congress. However, her role as a leading face of the Democratic Party depends on her ability to metabolize these demands into a palatable message that doesn’t confront the root of capitalism and imperialism. Her willingness to toe the party line on Palestine puts her in contrast with other DSA-endorsed electeds who were less equivocal, some of whom paid a heavy price.
As elected officials ascend the political ranks, they face ever-increasing demands of U.S. imperial interests to fall in line. For them, the decision is straightforward. If the political benefit of standing up to empire is small, the “savvy” choice is to follow the lead of the political establishment, who are acting in the interest of empire. To the electoral sphere, “foreign affairs” is treated as one policy area among many. It becomes a platform plank that can be negotiated around. This mode of thinking neatly avoids deeper questions around internationalism and leaves unchallenged how imperialism underpins the capitalist system.
Israel is a core part of the U.S.-led global economic system. Israel has intimate economic and political ties with the U.S., particularly in the military and technology sectors. Like any other Global North country, Israel parasitically appropriates wealth from the Global South. Israeli-occupied Palestine sits at a critical chokepoint at the crossroads of Asia, Africa, and Europe. Its close proximity to the Suez Canal and to many of the world’s major oil and natural gas fields make Israel an ideal launching pad for imperialist interests in West Asia and North Africa.
Zionism is intrinsically tied to imperialism. Imperialism is the economic base behind the superstructural phenomena that uphold the Zionist project. This was true under British imperialism, when the Zionist settler-colonial project in Palestine began, and is still true under U.S. imperialism today. Understanding Israel’s utility to U.S. empire is critical to correctly understanding Zionism. This means religious, academic, and political Zionism all serve and are mutually reinforced by the imperialist system.
Imperialist violence is a systemic requirement of the U.S… It is not simply a series of uncouth foreign policy decisions. It is the core, ironclad logic of capitalist development. The political economy of the U.S. depends heavily on both the wealth extracted from the Global South and the violence required to enforce this extractive dynamic. In Israel’s case, the settler-colonial foundation of the state is a product of this system. This means anyone who is invested in upholding U.S.-led economic order will seek to justify and expand that violence. Political institutions will remain supportive of Zionism, so long as Zionism is useful for upholding U.S. empire.
Democratic Party politics justify empire
Even staunch imperialists have disagreements on how to best serve empire. Despite their differences, both Democrats and Republicans uphold U.S. imperial interests first and foremost. The two-party system has always served as a framework for different factions of the ruling class to compete for political power, from this country’s origins as a slavery-fueled settler colony to the superprofits-fueled capitalist empire of today.
The Democratic Party is closely tied with the imperialist system. These connections are fostered through the Democratic Party apparatus: the politicians themselves, party structures such as the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, as well as the web of issue-specific non-profits, think tanks, labor unions, and media institutions. Political advancement through the Democratic Party means working through that superstructure: backroom deals, quid pro quo, coordinated media–whatever it may take to uphold the party’s interests.
AOC has put forward new messaging for this apparatus. She is trying to balance the push of the anti-Zionist left and the pull of Zionist Democratic Party mandates. This is where AOC’s new line comes from: support for cutting all military aid to Israel, but qualifying that stance by asserting that Israel can buy their own weapons. She is attempting to reconcile a pro-Palestinian position with a genocidal worldview. Liberal Zionists such as J Street can get behind this messaging in exactly the same words as AOC. Even Netanyahu can advance messaging focused on U.S. “military funding”, seeking to end direct subsidies while increasing the flow of weapons to Israel.
This new messaging strategy glosses over the fact that Israel is a genocidal settler-colonial project. It should not have weapons. It should not even exist. In her recent public statement, AOC spread the lie that the Iron Dome “has proven critical to keeping innocent civilians safe”. We would never tolerate a DSA-endorsed socialist in office justifying the self-defense of a genocidal state such as Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, or Apartheid South Africa. Why would we tolerate it for Israel?
Popular anti-Zionist pressure is forcing American politicians to contend with the U.S.-Israeli relationship. Lacking a correct anti-imperialist analysis on Palestine, AOC would rather find a “workable solution” to this contradiction, which flattens it altogether and leaves the imperialist relationship structurally unchallenged.
This logic led her to become a champion for the Biden and Harris campaigns at the same time that the Biden administration was directly enabling Israel’s genocide in Gaza. The decision exemplified her instinct for capitulation to the Democratic Party establishment. It secured her position in the party, a necessary sacrifice she needed in order to advance her platform. She also believed the move was necessary to defeat Trump. This did not work. Biden and Harris’ position around Palestine has proven to be one of the key contributors to their loss. AOC conceded on Palestine, and in doing so failed to turn out the progressive base that mobilized for Palestine.
There was immense public pressure on the Biden administration to end the genocide in Gaza. AOC could have championed the sentiment by withholding her endorsement; she could have used her leverage to push the Biden administration. Instead, she lent Biden and Harris her credibility when their popularity was at its lowest. She peddled the lie that the administration was “working tirelessly” for a ceasefire. Without any clear reflection or self-criticism, we can only expect that she would make the same mistakes again.
AOC’s failures extend to other questions of anti-imperialism as well. Our comrades in the 21st Century Socialism caucus have detailed this extensively in their recent dossier. Palestine is a canary in the coal mine for an electoral approach that prioritizes popularity and political careerism over anti-imperialism and party-building.
Partisan Democrats cannot put forward anti-imperialist politics. The Democratic Party remains a party of capital which seeks to uphold U.S. interests across the world. At their core, they are aligned with Republicans, fossil capital, and the military-industrial complex in leveraging Israel’s critical economic and geopolitical role in West Asia. No anti-imperialist line can be drawn through that party.
AOC tethers us to the Democratic Party
DSA has not yet solved the contradiction of our relationship with the Democratic Party. There is broad consensus across tendencies in DSA that we must detach ourselves from the Democratic Party apparatus. At the same time, AOC has risen to a level of stardom and celebrity that has put her among the front runners for the 2028 Democratic presidential ticket. This is not an opportunity for DSA—it is a trap. DSA needs to build a counter to the Democratic Party superstructure, not be an extension of it.
Cori Bush and Rashida Tlaib demonstrate that our SIOs in Congress do not need to move closer to the Democratic Party. Cori and Rashida did not uphold Israel’s right to defend itself, as AOC has. Both through their voting records and public statements, Cori and Rashida consistently showed a stronger willingness to push against the Democratic Party than AOC. While Rashida spoke at the People’s Conference for Palestine and the DSA Convention, AOC spoke at a Biden campaign rally and the Democratic National Convention. Any step forward for DSA in Congress must come with a political analysis that opposes the present state and the fortitude to resist the lure of the ruling class.
AOC played a stepping stone in our organization’s growth as one of our first high-profile campaigns. Yet, since her election, AOC has shown herself to be more attuned to the interests of the Democratic Party than she is with the interests of our organization. It is apparent that she is a cunning political figure who would sooner compromise with our class enemies than uphold the just and necessary cause of defeating U.S. empire.
Accountability should be the foundation of our electoral project, not a lofty goal. We undermine our own political power and do the working class a disservice when we settle for uncritical processes that perpetuate superficial relationships instead of constructively engaging in struggle with one another. Especially in our electoral program, politics should come first and foremost, not celebrity and status. We must understand electoral politics as an opportunity to build DSA, independent of the Democrats. Elections are a means to a revolutionary party, and not an end in and of themself.
[Elections, not electoralism: A tactic in a revolutionary movement
[T]he working class cannot simply lay hold of the ready-made state machinery, and wield it for its own purposes. - Marx [R]evolutionaries who are incapable of combining illegal forms of struggle with every form of legal struggle are poor revolutionaries indeed. - Lenin For Marxists in the U.
Red StarBob M
](https://redstarcaucus.org/elections-not-electoralism/)
Imperialism is a structural imperative and the economic base of capitalism. Being in the heart of empire means benefiting from the mountains of wealth extracted from the Global South. Whatever a socialist member of Congress does, it should never be at the expense of oppressed nations. Redistributing wealth that the U.S. has stolen is not socialism’s horizon. We need to fight to dismantle that extractive relationship, not beg for a larger share of its crumbs.
[Race, Class, and Empire: Reading J. Sakai’s ‘Settlers’
The primarily white character of DSA is shaped by the contradictions within the class position of its base, being both wage-earning proletarians and beneficiaries of imperialist superprofits. We must reckon with the historical attachment to reformism created by this struggle.
Red StarChristina W
](https://redstarcaucus.org/zenith4-race-class-empire/)
As our organization continues to grow, we must emphasize anti-imperialism and not reduce it to one issue area among many. Staunchly anti-imperialist politics should be a prerequisite to any DSA campaign, especially at the federal level. We must not make the mistake of tailing popular elected officials’ reformist messaging as a way to grow the socialist movement. Compromising in advance with the structural imperatives of capitalism is a failure of working-class leadership that makes revolutionary transformation impossible.
Nasser and Jairo are members of NYC-DSA
From Red Star via This RSS Feed.