bloodygranuaile

Hey, I actually attended a DSA reading group for more than one session! I've not had the greatest track record with actually attending reading groups, probably because I am already in five million book clubs. But the Electoral Working Group's read of Richard W. Judd's Socialist Cities: Municipal Politics and the Grass Roots of American Socialism ran only three sessions, of which I have attended two (one via Zoom, god bless Zoom) and will be attending the last one on Friday.

Socialist Cities covers the successes and failures of the Socialist Party in the early years of the 20th century, mostly in the Midwest. Much of the book focuses on various cities in Ohio between 1898 and 1924, although states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin make appearances, and there's a chapter dedicated to Flint, Michigan. The book specifically focuses on municipal electoral politics, and the accomplishments -- and, sometimes, lack thereof -- of Socialist parties in electing members, enacting a policy agenda, and navigating the institutions of municipal politics.

The "navigating the institutions of municipal politics" is by far the most interesting stuff, although I've already talked a lot of it out at length at book club so I don't feel like reiterating all my thoughts here. But let's just say: HOO BOY there are a lot of things that sound familiar! We see the Socialists's opponents playing all kinds of procedural hardball, breaking longstanding norms and rewriting the rules every time they could to block the Socialists from enacting their agenda, even for things that the other parties would have supported if it hadn't been the Socialists proposing it. While the Socialists were often beset by infighting, because that's how we do, their ideological opponents managed to set apart some pretty big political differences to form blocs and fusion tickets with the sole object of preventing Socialists from taking power.

There are also some moments of humor in the book, not the least of which is some poor dude saddled with the last name of "Sharts." And there are even moments of triumph -- some of the early Socialist mayors and city councils did pull off some impressive feats of "sewer socialism," such as establishing health departments and improving city services. One small town in Pennsylvania even managed to abolish the police (granted, the police force was only two people to start with).

An interesting topic in the book is not just the relationship between American socialism and American liberalism, but the specific interplay between Socialist movement politics and the politics of the Progressive movement, which was a more middle-class type of reform orientation that sometimes aligned with the Socialists but often didn't. This is an especially valuable bit of context to work through today, when the identities of socialism, liberalism, and progressivism are so thoroughly confused and mashed up with each other in the popular discourse.

While the prose style isn't thrilling, neither is it particularly dense; the result is a thoughtful, concise, and readable account of pre-World War I electoral radicalism in American politics. It's also a good source from which modern U.S. leftists can draw Useful Lessons From History when strategizing about electoral work, although, being leftists, I am sure different people will draw different conclusions.