I want to start this statement by emphasizing that I have no ulterior motives in writing this; I don’t have an alternative political agenda to push nor do I stand to lose or gain anything from the existence or lack thereof of the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL). My only hope in writing this is to implore the Party and it’s remaining members to examine their accountability measures and mishandling of the sexual abuse accusation against Steven Powers and other party members in the past.
Steven Powers is not the first person in the Party to be accused of sexual misconduct, nor is this the first time the Party has been accused of covering up the sexual misconduct of well-respected members. The Party has shown repeatedly that it cares more about its own reputation than it does genuinely seeking justice for victims, even if that means committing what is very blatantly character assassination against survivors that only further alienates those who’ve experienced sexual abuse both inside and outside of the Party.
I joined the PSL this past summer during the height of the uprisings against racial injustice admittedly without doing very much research on the Party itself because I very quickly came to respect and admire many of the organizers currently holding membership in my local branch. It is because of this respect that when I was first presented with information on the Party’s history of mishandling sexual misconduct, I remained dismissive because I felt that the convictions of the members of my branch must be reflective of the organization as a whole.
As time moved on and I did more investigation on the Party’s past, I came to regret my initial dismissal and eventually worked up the courage to bring my concerns about the allegations against Steven Powers to a member of my branch’s Steering Committee, to which I was met with the response that the internet was not a valid place to receive information of the internal affairs of the Party and the assurance that the matter was being investigated by a “diverse” group of Party members appointed by the Party’s Central Committee. As a junior member I was also informed that the Party has been under direct attack by forces likened to that of COINTELPRO for “decades” and that most criticisms of the Party’s actions are made by ill-informed, ill-intentioned non-Party members. I would later see this very same reasoning be used as an excuse to fedjacket the survivor of Steven Powers’ abuse though evidence very clearly suggests otherwise.
Though I walked away from this conversation dissatisfied, I remained in the Party with the hope that a statement would be released that at the very least briefed members on how these allegations were being handled and expressed sympathy for that of the survivor. However, the statement never came and I was told that the situation would be addressed after the party dealt with “more important” matters, namely the arrests of party members in Denver, Colorado.
After another few weeks passed and I continued to watch completely valid criticisms of the Party mount, I seriously began to consider suspending my candidacy. When I voiced what I’d been considering and why with a member of the Steering Committee, I was met with responses similar to what I’d been given the first time I’d ask about the situation, only this time I was informed that a statement from the National Committee was imminent. I was told that this statement would provide context and perspective to the situation. When this statement was released however, it was revealed to be nothing more than an attempt to discredit the victim based on flimsy accusations of anti-Blackness and erraticism.
I, fortunately, suspended my membership the day before this statement was released, but only after sitting through a Zoom call in which members of the Steering Committee attempted to defend the Party’s stances and make it seem as though my concerns were due to a difference in understanding on the right to privacy of a democratically centralized organization. From what I was told, comrades who left after the statement was released were subjected to calls where leadership attempted to justify the horrendous nature of the statement, most notably the decision by the “Women of the PSL” to doxx the survivor of Steven Powers’ abuse.
The Party for Socialism of Liberation prides itself on being a revolutionary Leninist organization, following the same model that many revolutionary parties/movements of the past have organized themselves by. However, from what I’ve observed, the concept of democratic centralism to them seems to mean blind faith in leadership and the established accountability structures with no past or present examples as to why these institutions are deserving of said trust.
In his August 1904 address to the party, Lenin wrote:
The proletariat does not recognise unity of action without freedom to discuss and criticise. Therefore, class-conscious workers must never forget that serious violations of principle occur which make the severance of all organisational relations imperative. (Lenin Collected Works, p. 454–461)
It is the responsibility of any revolutionary organization to hold it’s membership accountable for their actions, even if that means expelling respected members of the organization from its ranks when their actions go beyond whatever accountability can be achieved through rehabilitative measures. Leadership holds that it is within their right to keep some Party actions centralized on the basis that the National Committee is comprised of democratically elected members and to an extent I agree, but I disagree with the idea that this entitled them to publish a hit piece on the behest of all women in the Party without even informing the general membership on what the situation was.
When I first drafted this statement, I intended to release it anonymously because I feared severing ties with people in my local activist community who I genuinely respected. But after hearing what many of them had to say both on Twitter in defense of the Party’s statement and in real life to comrades who made the decision to leave soon after I did, I no longer have any interest in remaining cordial with people too deep-rooted in defending the Party to see and accept valid criticism.
A survivor of sexual violence is well within their right to publicize that matter regardless of whether or not you agree with how they do it and especially if they feel like the “justice” they’ve been offered is inadequate in comparison to what they’ve suffered. On top of this, every survivor is, at the bare minimum, entitled to the right to be believed. Though the PSL claims to understand and agree with these principles, it has shown through it’s treatment of the survivor of Steven Powers’ abuse and other survivors in the past that it does not actually stand behind them. If the PSL truly wishes to be the vanguard party of any future revolution, the failings of the Party on these matters must be acknowledged and rectified.