In July, the largest annual socialist gathering in the US, sponsored by Haymarket Press in Chicago, had a record attendance of over 2,000 participants. Many attended for the first time, feeling the urgency in the wake of Trump’s second presidency and his conflicts with social movements. A standing-room-only debate, one of over 180 conference events, took place over the meaning of Zohran Mamdani’s recent primary victory in New York—and what it signals for the future of independent socialist politics in the United States. While all panelists shared enthusiasm for Mamdani’s campaign, they represented diverging strategies on how, or even whether, to engage with the Democratic Party.
The U.S. “No-Party” State
Ashik Siddique, speaking for DSA’s Groundwork Caucus, started with the argument that the U.S. isn’t really a two-party system—it’s a “no-party system” dominated by fundraising networks and state-run ballot lines. This legal structure blocks independent working-class parties from emerging. In this context, Siddique argued, DSA is constructing a party of its own—developing membership structures, platform coherence, and leadership—even if its candidates, like Mamdani and hundreds of others throughout the US, currently run on the Democratic Party line.
He positioned this “party surrogate” model as a transitional strategy where DSA builds the infrastructure and mass base necessary for future independence, using the Democratic ballot line tactically. Unlike the Bernie and AOC moments that popularized some socialist ideas, Siddique argued, Mamdani’s win reflected DSA organizing power, not just an individual’s charisma. DSA’s labor and tenant work, he claimed, will be key to implementing Mamdani’s platform.
A Cautionary History
Howie Hawkins, long-time Green Party activist and 2020 presidential candidate, praised Mamdani’s campaign for listening to workers and making class demands, but warned that winning office is not the same as holding power. He pointed to state-level Democrats already pledging to obstruct Mamdani’s agenda, and noted that without a progressive majority on the city council, Mamdani could be boxed in like center-left candidates before him.
Hawkins offered historical perspective: from the 1830s to the early 20th century, independent working-class oriented parties, from the Greenbackers to the Socialist Party of Eugene Debs, helped set aspects of the national agenda. But in the 1930s, Communist Party realignment strategies within the Democratic Party began a long period of left subordination to a capitalist party. Today, Hawkins argued, any participation in Democratic campaigns is no different than crossing a picket line. Instead, he proposed the formation of various independent local political organizations. These would eventually increase programmatic unity to form a national independent party capable of starting a socialist caucus in congress. Hawkins emphasized the need for structural reforms like ranked choice voting and proportional representation to overcome structural disadvantages to independent party building.
An Inside/Outside Strategy
Bennett Carpenter of Liberation Road argued that even though the Democratic Party is a candidate-centred fundraising machine, not a true political party, it’s still the main electoral arena of workers and oppressed groups in the US. Carpenter advocated an inside/outside strategy, where socialists contest Democratic primaries but maintain independent organizing power. They stressed the importance of year-round, issue-based campaigns—pointing to the victory of a queer Black socialist in Durham, North Carolina, who won with a campaign started by an independent organization with just ten active members and no formal party.
Carpenter emphasized the need for mass organizations with base-building, rejecting the idea that electoral and movement work are mutually exclusive. Electoral victories, even on the Democratic Party line, they argued, can help defend and deepen gains, especially in areas where the system is rigged against access to independent ballot lines.
Social Movements Over Politicians
Lee Wengraf of the Tempest Collective, along with support from Charlie Post on the floor, struck a more critical tone. While recognizing Mamdani’s progressive platform and Palestinian solidarity, she warned against over-investing in electoral terrain. Wengraf emphasized that mass movements—not politicians—achieve real reforms, citing Gaza solidarity, tenant fights, and labor strikes as key arenas of struggle. She questioned the strategic focus on Democratic ballot lines, citing repeated disappointments: AOC, Sanders and India Walton in Buffalo.
For Wengraf, the left’s task is not developing candidates for office, but mobilizing independent, militant struggle from below. She argued that much of the energy poured into Mamdani’s field operation would be better spent building the grassroots movements that force change no matter who holds office.
As Mamdani heads into the general election, the US left remains divided—not on the need for transformation, but on the road to get there. Whether the future lies in tactical campaigns inside a hostile system, an immediate break to independence, or grassroots movement-building beyond elections, remains an open and urgent question for socialists in the US.