Socialism, American Style: L.A. Comrades Look To 2012 Election

Mimi Soltysik’s epiphany sounded a lot like machine-gun fire.
The 37-year-old was working in South Los Angeles with his girlfriend Lynn Lomibao, 42, with the group A Place Called Home, giving away bikes to impoverished children when they heard a loud, metallic rat-tat-tat from afar.
The volunteers were frightened. But the kids they were working with seemed unfazed, continuing with their bicycle safety lessons as before.
“We asked the director [of A Place Called Home] why the children didn’t flinch,” Soltysik said. “He said the children were used to hearing that sort of thing.”
It wasn’t just the kids’ reaction that upset Soltysik.
“The director told us there’s no grocery store in the area,” he said. “If these families wanted to get a gallon of milk, they’d have to go to a liquor store where they’d pay twice as much as the families in Bel Air or Brentwood.”
As a tax-paying resident, Soltysik worried he was part of the problem.Soltysik said he felt pained that the neighborhood’s residents were being victimized by a system that seemed to favor the wealthy.
“One day while I was online, I began searching for an organization,” Soltysik said. “I wanted a place where the pain I felt [for this neighborhood] could be channeled into a positive effect.”
That was when Soltysik, a consumer advocate, and his girlfriend Lomibao, a nonprofit development professional, stumbled upon the Socialist Party USA website.
Soon, the couple joined more than 1,000 Americans alreadyregistered with the party.
Soltysik said after reading the party’s mission—provide universal healthcare, offer free college education, rebuild neighborhoods and establish a more balanced tax structure—he knew he had found a system in line with his personal beliefs.
“For working people, I don’t see any evidence of the success of capitalism,” said Soltysik, now the Socialist Party of California’s male chair. “I see capitalism being a success for maybe the executive board of the largest corporations on Wall Street, but for working people, I see it as an abject failure.”
California has the highest concentration of socialists, with more than 100 living in the Golden State. But nationwide, nearly 60 percent of Americans have a negative reaction to the word “socialism,” according to a recent Pew Research Center poll. Soltysik blamed Cold War mindsets for the stigma.
“As those who were alive during the Cold War begin to leave the public debate, younger people are entering for whom the Cold War is just a historic relic,” he said. “So I think those misconceptions are beginning to wither.”
To that end, the same Pew Research Center poll reported nearly 50 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds actually had a positive view of socialism.
At its height last fall, the Occupy movement had branched out to nearly 100 cities across the country, exposing more and more young people to the fight for the 99 percent. The Socialist Party USA has long touted those themes.
“I think a lot of the things that people hear at the Occupy movement and a lot of people’s personal experiences since the recession has piqued their interest in socialism,” Soltysik said.
Like the majority of Occupy protesters, Soltysik said socialists are disheartened by Obama’s four years in office, even as right-wing conservatives—including one-time Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry—have repeatedly pegged him as a socialist.
In a recent Forbes magazine article, writer Paul Roderick Gregory questioned whether or not President Barack Obama, often derided as the socialist-in-chef by conservative circles, is, in fact, a socialist.
“By ‘socialist,’ I do not mean a Lenin, Castro or Mao,” Gregory wrote, “but whether Obama falls within the mainstream of contemporary socialism as represented, for example, by Germany’s Social Democrats, French Socialists, or Spain’s socialist-workers party?”
Citing similarities between Obama’s beliefs—greater access to healthcare, progressive taxation on the rich, a general distrust of the free market system—and the November 2011 Declaration of Principles of the Party of European Socialists, Gregory concluded Obama is a socialist after all.
Soltysik disagreed. “I don’t think there’s been a policy that Obama’s enacted that is socialist,” he said. “He’s as capitalist as George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush.”
It was disillusionment with Obama that drew Alex Mendoza, 35, a small business owner in Dallas and the Socialist Party USA’s 2012 vice presidential candidate, to split from the Democratic Party.
“I did not classify myself as a socialist until after Obama became president,” he said. “I supported Obama [in 2008], and I believed in a lot of his policies, but then it became evident a lot of those policies were not being implemented.”
Mendoza said he was disappointed that the president did not support the Employee Free Choice Act, legislation that would have made it easier for workers to form unions.
He also said the Affordable Health Care Act was a failed opportunity.
“As socialists, we believe in socialized medicine,” Mendoza said. “In his health care act, he threw a bone to the insurance companies [with the individual mandate], giving them millions and millions of new customers and didn’t even consider single-payer.”
Soltysik, who’s working as the campaign manager for Mendoza and his running mate Stewart Alexander, said the candidates’ experience in the working class makes them ideal for the Oval Office.
“Our elected officials are typically all cut from the same cloth,” he said. “They’re carefully crafted and shaped into these hollow, disconnected used car salesman types.”
He said the socialist candidates, who are aiming to get on the ballots in at least 22 states—including California—actually care about the issues and want to effect real change.
“I personally believe that the general public really needs to hear these guys right now,” Soltysik said.
And Mendoza said win or lose, the ultimate goal of his bid for VP is to educate the masses about socialism.
“It’s very clear that there’s a failure in the system when 1 percent of the population controls 35 percent of the wealth,” Mendoza said. “To believe that the free market is going to trickle down all of its benefits into workers’ pockets historically has not happened.”
If he and Stewart are elected, Mendoza said the new administration would take several steps during their first 180 days in office to put the country back on the right path.
“We definitely want to put together a path to socialized medicine, right off the bat,” he said. “We’d bring troops home and those billions of dollars would stay here and get reinvested into our communities and social programs.”
Mendoza said they’d also suspend the Bush tax cuts, make sure workers’ rights were protected and end all tax subsidies to oil and gas companies.
“I think people are starting to realize that the system is broken,” Mendoza said. “This whole idea of a laissez-faire free market capitalism that was supposed to be perfect for everyone is just failing.”
“I think we’ve all been hoodwinked by the idea that we’re living these decent middle-class lives because we can afford cheap products like a flat-screen TV, an iPhone, a laptop,” said Lomibao, who’s serves as female vice chair to the Socialist Party of California. “But most families can’t afford to send their kids to college without that child going into deep debt.”
If presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney wins the general election this fall, Lomibao said she thought it would help drive scores of voters to the socialist party.
Lomiboa has some personal insight to Romney’s style of leadership. She said his venture capitalist group, Bain Capital, bought a company she used to work for.
An executive board of three people was installed to “clean house,” cutting two-thirds of the work force that had invested decades of their lives into the company. They suddenly found themselves unemployed, Lomibao said.
“I think if Romney were elected president, you would see this sort of restructuring happening on the macro level,” she said. “Maybe it would be just the thing that would get people up in arms. I think it would [ultimately] strengthen the socialist party.”
And Mendoza said his vice presidential ambitions hit a little closer to home than 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
“I hope when [my kids] are old enough to go to college, they’ll not have to go into debt just to get an education,” he said. “I hope they can have healthcare and find employment that gives them a living wage.”
He said his vision for the country is not out of reach.
“This is not just attainable in a few generations,” he said. “It’s something we could do. If we get elected, changes could take place immediately.”
Reach Contributor John Hobbs here.



Comments
Umm... 100 socialists in California? Wow, great journalism. Oh hey isn't there a socialist coalition party with California ballot status that has nearly 100,000 registered members? Oh well, facts don't really matter in journalism...
American socialists and the left in general are giving Barack Obama a raw deal. Obama is the most successful president of the left since FDR with no close third and the first to implement a wide array of socialist policy.
Obama's nationalization of GM and Chrysler was a hybrid of classical and economic democracy socialism in a virtual replay of the British Labour government's nationalization of British Leyland in 1975.
Obama's "clean energy economy" and Obamacare programs are faithful implementations of German Zwangswirtshaft socialism, where the government allowed nominal private ownership of an industry, but uses its police, tax and spending powers to affirmatively direct the operations of that industry. http://obamacrisis.wordpress.com/read-a-book-sample/
GM and Chrysler have not been nationalized, they have been bailed out. US ownership of any part of the companies have been on paper alone, with full private control for profit, not public, democratic control for the public good. They were effectively given a loan, nothing more. The Labour Party had also ceased to have any socialist notion by 1975.
Zwangswirtshaft is not socialism, it's fascism. It translates as "war socialism" and has nothing to do with what socialism is. He gave subsidies to burgeoning corporations that helped get him to power, including the health insurance companies, who continue to operate for private profit. That's not socialism, that's corporatism, the economic engine of fascism, and as Mussolini said, a merger of corporate and state power. Socialists are for participatory government and economics, not the state interceding to assist corporations in their plunder of the working class.
It's important to remember that Obama's solutions are Republican solutions from two decades back. Shall we look upon Bob Dole as an ideal socialist because he promoted Obamacare in the 90's while Democrats still wouldn't hear of it?
But, if you think that socialists are giving Obama a raw deal, perhaps you should talk to the Freedom Road Socialist Party. Obama reinterpreted a Clinton-era law against providing support to state-deemed terrorist groups to throw them in prison for verbally speaking in favor of Central American guerillas. That's a raw deal, when the first amendment doesn't apply to you anymore because of your politics. And remember, FDR raided the Socialist Party platform's immediate demands to save capitalism from collapse; Obama raided the Republican Party platform from 1995.
I'd first like to point out that a Alexander-Mendoza administration would seek not to simply suspend the Bush tax cuts, but reverse them.
However, there is a common misunderstanding being voiced by many here, the fallacy that socialism is welfare. Socialism is interested in the welfare of those who cannot take care of themselves, but it is not a welfare state. Socialism is economic democracy, a system in which the workers collectively own and control the means of production and direct economic activity towards the common good. That means that your paycheck is based on your production, not on a portion of that, often even a small portion, where the fruits of your labor are siphoned off in profit. No more high interest rates, outrageous bank fees, and crushing debt holding people down as the financial sector is run for the public good, not Wall Street barons. We won't have to spend nearly as much on police, as meaningful work made available through full employment removes most of the economic incentive for crime, fighting crime at the root of the problem. No more worthless jobs, such as in advertising, where good folks are left trying to manipulate others into buying things they don't need and didn't want - or in the case of things that are actually of worth, directing people's purchasing decisions based on factors that are irrelevant, perhaps leading them to buy the wrong product.
In the end, socialism doesn't increase welfare. In the capitalist system, there has formed a permanent unemployed underclass which is expected to not work. They exist to be a threat to minimum wage workers and keep them in check and not asking for raises and better working conditions out of fear that they will be replaced. Welfare is handed out, and it works as a bribe. They get a barely livable existence in return for not rioting, not revolting, and not going out and robbing the rich. Socialism gives them the opportunity to be productive and removes the very need for welfare.
Education can be personally fulfilling and is needed for certain jobs - and yes, there is a difference in pay between workers because they have a difference in the value of their labor - and education provides access to those better paying, and perhaps more fulfilling jobs.
Wait, what, the fat 32 year old was giving the entitlement kids more stuff? Why? How does that benefit them if all they learn is that free shyt comes from a.) White people and b.) the government? Socialism is that's killing America, people just don't understand how free-market capitalism (granted the crony-capitalism going on in Washington has got to GO, so I sympathize with OWS kids, they're on the right track) and are too lazy to get down and dirty to create real value and real wealth. Too many Westerners now just sit around waiting for a check or waiting for other people to "help" them and give them stuff.
Yes, he and his girlfriend with the last name of Lomibao, helping kids who are living in poverty shows that free s*** comes from white people and the government. For the record, Lynn is Asian and neither of them constitute the government. But maybe, just maybe, if they have enough to eat and have a safe place to live, perhaps have access to a computer they might actually learn a lot more than if they didn't have that. Maybe, just maybe, they may be able to be capable of producing a whole lot more real value and wealth if they get the help their parents aren't able to afford to give them because - by and large - situations beyond their control. Even if you are going to blame the parents, why is it that you think that innocent children should live in squalor as a result?
The Socialist Party with only a couple hundred members is so weak even in California that there it runs sporadically and opportunistically under the banner of the Peace and Freedom Party, the forty four year old party which has close to 60,000 registered members.
But as this article clearly shows the so-called socialist ticket of Alexander-Mendoza doesn't even bother to mention this fact. Fortunately Peace and Freedom Party will select its Presidential and Vice presidential candidates at the August 2012 convention in Los Angeles and the delegate count doesn't bode well for these simpering S.Pee types. There are a number of other candidates running in the Peace and Freedom Party's June 5th primary everyone of whom is preferable to doofusses Stewart Alexander and Alex Mendoza.
A few things in response to the Peace and Freedom comment. 1. The Socialist Party USA has never been secretive about the need to secure the Peace and Freedom Party nomination to make it on the CA ballot. It is not politically advantageous for the Socialist Party USA to deny that fact. We have nothing to gain by hiding the realities of ballot access in CA. 2. The newly-formed Socialist Party of California has had a good relationship with Peace and Freedom. The Los Angeles Local of the Socialist Party actually shares and office with Peace and Freedom, and the Socialist Party USA's Presidential candidate, Stewart Alexander, has been working with Peace and Freedom for a long time. The Socialist Party of California will continue to have a good working relationship with Peace and Freedom. 3. Many, if not most, of the Socialist Party of California's members are registered with Peace and Freedom. 4.It's unfortunate that there are a couple of rogue Peace and Freedom Party members who have made a habit of bashing the Socialist Party USA and the Alexander/Mendoza Campaign. Having said that, we are aware that their behavior is not indicative of Peace and Freedom in general. 5. Make no mistake, we are running a campaign on behalf of the Presidential ticket that was elected at the Socialist Party USA National Convention. This particular piece was about the Socialist Party USA and its chapter in California.
PS - I have to say, I particularly enjoyed the playground tactics of referring to the Socialist Party as "S.Pee" and Alexander and Mendoza as "doofusses". A tactic usually successful when used between the merry-go -round and the swings. Really lame, you two.
Peace and Freedom was mentioned in this piece, but did not make the final cut. As a matter of fact, the author of the piece was scheduled to come to the Presidential Candidate Forum in Los Angeles on April 22nd but fell ill. Your response is absolutely amazing, and I'm not surprised that you'd want to keep your name anonymous. The Socialist Party in California was only chartered on June 25th of 2011 and we are proud of the membership the Party has gained during the period of California's reorganization. The Socialist Party is a membership party, with an annual dues, unlike Peace and Freedom which is not a "membership" party. The 60,000 registered members that this author claims are simply people who have registered to vote Peace and Freedom.