Earlier this year, after admiring the organization for about a decade, I finally joined the Democratic Socialists of America. In many ways, this was the kind of group I wanted to exist as a freshman in college, at the start of President George W. Bush’s second term, when the only leftist group active in my area was a Trotskyist sect. Of course, DSA technically did exist then, but it was nothing like what it is today. When, last month, I attended my first meeting of the revitalized, multi-tendency group, I was deeply impressed.

For instance, DSA appears very good at seeking to address the not-explicitly-political needs of its members. The Hartford branch offered board game nights, parent meetups, and a choir that sang labor songs. It quickly became clear to me that if you had the time and inclination, DSA could be your whole life, in a good way. Of course, they were engaged in impressive, more politically-focused efforts as well, like helping elect leftists to the Connecticut state house and pushing back against Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

As I read more about the internal workings of DSA at a national level, though, I was disappointed to learn one of the two elected leaders of the organization, belonged to what’s called the Red Star caucus, which identifies as Marxist Leninist. For those who aren’t aware, ‘Marxist Leninist’ is a phrase which has really only been used as an ideological self-description by Stalinists and their ilk. For instance, Vladimir Lenin and his followers in his lifetime didn’t use the term. Neither did Trotskyists. It was really just reserved for the most unapologetically authoritarian of authoritarian socialists.

On a certain level, I don’t think these various ideological descriptions are very relevant in the here and now. But then again, this co-chair, Megan Romer, is one of two leaders of DSA. She’s increasingly being called upon to serve as a public spokesperson for the group, and is being identified as a Marxist Leninist on major media platforms. No one forced her to identify this way. She could just as easily identify as a socialist or a Marxist, but she’s chosen to identify with an extremely divisive, authoritarian tradition which I can only assume doesn’t actually reflect the kind of socialism which most of DSA’s membership believes in.

Honestly, I’m not sure why anyone in the United States, circa 2026, would identify as a Marxist Leninist. The best answer I can come up with is members of the Red Star caucus are either ignorant or edgelords. However, I want to be clear. I’m not calling for these self-avowed Marxist Leninists to be expelled. I think once socialist organizations start purging members, it can create a vicious, self-destructive cycle that’s hard to stop. What I am saying, though, is I’d like members of the Red Star caucus to be voted out of significant positions of leadership. Ideally, Marxist Leninists would be reduced to the role of your crazy uncle at a family gathering. The sad fact is you’re going to have cranks in any large group.

So, yes, it’s about optics. I think it’s a very bad look to have a Marxist Leninist — even a very well meaning and potentially confused one — leading a democratic socialist organization. But more than that, it’s about substance. For me, socialism and democracy are inseparable. You can’t have one without the other. Socialism means democratic control of the means of production. At the risk of pursuing a ‘no true Scotsman’ defense, I don’t view Marxist Leninism as meaningfully socialist or leftist in any real way.