Showing posts sorted by date for query ABOLISH PRISONS. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query ABOLISH PRISONS. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Friday, October 02, 2026

The Movement to Abolish ICE Is Gaining Momentum

As activists rally around federal legislation to dismantle ICE, Amnesty International joins the call for abolition.
September 26, 2026

Community members gather at Remembrance Park before the “ICE Out of Texas / Marchamos Por Lorenzo” march in Houston, Texas, on July 25, 2026. Organizers called for accountability in the death of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo and urged state and federal officials to investigate Immigration and Customs Enforcement's actions.Raquel Natalicchio / Houston Chronicle via Getty Images

Echoing activists across the country, the global human rights watchdog Amnesty International has called on the United States government to abolish Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Emerging from the #Not1More campaign organized by undocumented activists and groups like Puente and Juntos in 2014, and gaining momentum with concerted organizing by grassroots groups such as Mijente, Detention Watch Network, Freedom for Immigrants, La Resistencia, and many others, the movement to abolish ICE has been building for years.

However, to have a mainstream organization such as Amnesty International — which has 7 million members and a global budget nearing $400 million, and which is often turned to by corporate media outlets — officially endorsing the explicit call for abolition signals a shift in the movement’s momentum as public support for ICE dwindles.

While ICE has been accused of violating human rights since it was created in the early 2000s, the Trump administration’s racist mass deportation campaign has taken its abuses — including “unlawful killings by federal agents” — to a “perilous new level” that is putting the general public in danger, according to a new report released by Amnesty International on September 24.

In calling for ICE to be abolished, Amnesty International joins a growing movement to put an end to an agency that has invaded neighborhoods across the country with squads of violent, masked federal agents recruited under President Donald Trump. On September 24, a coalition of public officials, advocates for undocumented people, and civil rights groups lined up in support of the Reimagining Safety Act, federal legislation introduced by Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Illinois) that would dismantle ICE and rebuild its parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), from the ground up.


People Keep Dying in ICE Custody. 13 Dems Back a Bill to Abolish the Agency.
At least 53 people have died in ICE custody since President Donald Trump’s return to office. By Mike Ludwig , Truthout July 23, 2026

“You cannot militarize our neighborhoods, surveil our families, and make people afraid to leave their homes and call that safety,” said Rep. Norma Hernandez, an Illinois state representative from Chicago, in a statement.


“ICE is not broken — it’s working exactly as intended, and that’s the problem.”

Meanwhile, the violence of mass deportation continues. ICE announced this week that Carlos Josué Marchena, a 36-year-old from Costa Rica, became the third person to die at a notorious immigration jail in Louisiana in less than six months on September 18.

Marchena reportedly told family members that he missed meals and the insulin shots he needed to control his diabetes. His story echoes widespread reports of medical neglect and the complaints made about inhumane conditions, which have sparked waves of hunger strikes by detainees. At least 55 people have died in ICE custody since Trump returned to office, including a record 31 deaths in 2025, according to Detention Watch Network. Experts suspect that is an undercount.

ICE has repeatedly claimed the medical care and conditions in its jails and prison camps are better than those in most hospitals and prisons, but polling suggests that a majority of voters are not buying these claims as the death count continues to rise. Videos of ICE officers apparently breaking the law while off-duty and violently violating basic constitutional rights of citizens and noncitizens alike when attempting to make arrests regularly go viral online.

“We’re going to keep pushing. We’re not going to apologize,” said Tom Homan, the White House border czar, in response to public scrutiny on September 24.

Trump and his senior officials unleashed masked and poorly trained ICE agents onto the streets while openly supporting violent and racist enforcement practices, creating an “institutional environment” for widespread abuses, according to Amnesty International’s report. The group, which examines human rights crises across the world, examined the large-scale, militarized ICE crackdowns that recently unfolded in the metro areas of Los Angeles; Washington, D.C.; Chicago; New Orleans; and the Twin Cities in Minnesota.

Researchers documented similar abuses in each city, including arbitrary arrests, harassment, intimidation, degrading treatment and unjustified use of force by federal agents, repression of protests with crowd-control weapons, unlawful use of surveillance and facial recognition technology, and denial of due process for detainees.

ICE agents have also shot and killed multiple people, most famously Alex Pretti and Renee Good, who were protesting the ICE invasion of Minneapolis. Amnesty International said this lethal use of force should be investigated as extrajudicial executions. On September 22, family members and witnesses of five people killed by ICE testified at a shadow hearing held by congressional Democrats. Republicans did not attend.

“We cannot separate any of this from the bigger agenda we are witnessing: an agenda that has disproportionately targeted Latino, immigrant, Black and Brown communities, treating the color of our skin, the language we speak, and where we come from as reasons to target us and treat us as if we are less human,” State Rep. Hernandez said.

Nadia Daar, the executive director of Amnesty International USA, said ICE’s militarized enforcement operations are intended to “instill fear” in immigrants and their families, but in practice, put everyone in danger.

“ICE is fundamentally broken and cannot be fixed,” Daar said in a statement on September 24. “For the U.S. government to have an immigration enforcement system that complies with international human rights law and standards, ICE needs to be abolished, and we need to start over.”

However, activists on the ground have been calling for ICE to be abolished for decades, according to Laura Hernández, executive director of Freedom for Immigrants, a group that supports people in ICE detention.

“ICE is not broken — it’s working exactly as intended, and that’s the problem,” Hernández told Truthout in an email.

Established along with DHS in 2003 as the Bush administration rode a wave of heated nationalism after the 9/11 attacks, ICE has accumulated a remarkable record of human rights abuses under both Democratic and Republican administrations as Congress repeatedly failed to pass immigration reforms.

For example, while the number of deaths in ICE custody skyrocketed during Trump’s second term, advocates have been ringing alarm bells about violence, abuse, and medical neglect in ICE’s network of jails and privately run prisons for years. Between 2017 and 2021, nearly 95 percent of deaths in ICE custody could have been prevented if proper medical care was provided, according to Physicians for Human Rights.


“Fundamentally, ICE has always been an agency that was designed to terrorize communities, separate families, and forcibly detain and deport our people.”

“At times its violence has been more visible or received more public attention, and certainly this administration is escalating the scale and speed of its cruelty,” Hernández said. “But fundamentally, ICE has always been an agency that was designed to terrorize communities, separate families, and forcibly detain and deport our people.”

Representative Ramirez, who represents an Illinois district targeted last year by ICE in “Operation Midway Blitz,” has joined other Democrats in calling for accountability and is perhaps the leading proponent of abolishing ICE in Congress. In January, Ramirez introduced a standalone bill to abolish ICE and redirect its funding to safety-net programs that can help people navigate the spiraling affordability crisis.

The Reimagining Safety Act would go further by dismantling and rebuilding the Department of Homeland Security as a federal public safety agency. ICE and Customs and Border Protection would be abolished and replaced with customs offices to limit government surveillance and militarized enforcement. DHS agencies that serve public safety — including the Transportation Security Administration and the Federal Emergency Management Agency — would be preserved as Congress begins the process of creating a separate and reformed immigration system.

Ramirez said the bill’s creation was “community-led,” with undocumented people and leaders from various immigrant communities contributing to the process.

“Building something new, creating in a time of destruction, is a revolutionary act. It is proof of our hope and belief in what is possible even in dark times,” Ramirez said in a statement. “The people have the power to reshape our government and to reimagine how we cultivate safety and collective well-being.”

Thursday, September 17, 2026

ABOLISH PRISONS

Incarceration may escalate criminal behavior in South Africa



Study quantifies the unintended consequences of imprisoning petty offenders




PLOS






Allowing petty offenders in South Africa to remain in the community may reduce their risk of committing serious crimes compared with imprisonment, according to a study published September 16, 2026, in the open access journal PLOS One by Farai Nyabadza of the University of Johannesburg, South Africa.

Violent crimes such as cash-in-transit heists and mass shootings have increased substantially in South Africa in recent years. Although petty offences such as theft and burglary receive less attention, they remain pervasive and account for the majority of criminal cases in the country. Both minor and major offences are highly prevalent and together contribute to elevated public safety concerns and deepening doubts regarding the efficacy of the criminal justice system. Research suggests that imprisonment may not only fail to reduce crime but can, under certain conditions, intensify criminal behavior. In South Africa, chronically overcrowded prisons routinely house minor offenders alongside hardened criminals, creating environments that substantially elevate the risk of recidivism.

Using South African crime and prison data from 1995 to 2024, Nyabadza developed a mathematical model that describes the population dynamics of individuals transitioning among states defined by criminal behavior and rehabilitation status. The population states included pathways related to susceptibility, petty and serious crime, custodial and non-custodial sentencing, rehabilitation, and relapse. A custodial sentence requires an offender to serve time locked in a prison or secure institution, while a non-custodial sentence allows the offender to remain in the community under specific rules and restrictions.

The results demonstrate that indiscriminate custodial sentencing of petty offenders can amplify criminal activity. By contrast, the risk of escalation from petty to serious crime is substantially lower under community supervision. According to the study author, evidence-based policies prioritizing non-custodial rehabilitation, relapse prevention, and prison reform are essential for curbing recidivism and achieving durable crime reduction.

There are a few important study limitations. For example, the findings might not generalize to other countries, and pre-trial detention data are not included, potentially leading to an underestimation of criminal career duration. Additionally, allocating all released petty offenders to a high-risk class may overestimate escalation of criminal activity. Also, the methods do not capture explicit socioeconomic drivers of crime, or a cost-effectiveness analysis of interventions. Nonetheless, this quantitative framework highlights the potential benefits of prison reforms that integrate deterrence with effective community-based rehabilitation.

Nyabadza adds: “What struck me most was how clearly policy leaves its fingerprints in the data. The sharp prison-population spike around 1999–2002, coinciding with mandatory minimum sentencing, showed how legislative shocks can reveal insights that a smooth mathematical model alone cannot capture.”

 

 

In your coverage, please use this URL to provide access to the freely available article in PLOS One: https://plos.io/4dhQlAc

Citation: Nyabadza F (2026) Modelling the dark side of prison dynamics: Quantifying the criminogenic effects of petty crime offenders’ incarceration. PLoS One 21(9): e0356366. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0356366

Author countries: South Africa.

Funding: The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

Tuesday, August 11, 2026

‘Landmark Victory’ for Human Rights as Lebanon Becomes First Arab Nation to Abolish Death Penalty

“In a country that has experienced profound loss and suffering, this decision represents a powerful commitment to the right to life,” said the UN’s human rights chief.



Lebanese activists protest against the death penalty in this undated photo.

(Photo by Lebanon National Human Rights Commission)

Brett Wilkins
Aug 11, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

In a move cheered by human rights defenders around the world, Lebanon’s Parliament on Tuesday abolished the death penalty for all crimes, making the country the first in the Arab world to do so and standing in stark contrast to neighboring and nearby nations.

Lebanon’s abolition—announced on June 30 at the 9th World Congress Against the Death Penalty in Paris—was approved by parliamentary lawmakers and, once signed by President Joseph Aoun as expected, will make the country the 129th worldwide to abolish capital punishment.

Under amendments introduced by Independent MP Abdul Rahman Bizri, execution—formerly carried out by hanging or firing squad—will be replaced as the ultimate punishment by life imprisonment under hard labor for crimes committed after abolition. Those currently condemned to death will have their sentences commuted to hard labor for life.

“Lebanon is regaining its pioneering role in the region as a defender of human rights,” Lebanese Justice Minister Adel Nassar said, adding that his country “has chosen to combat murder rather than resort to capital punishment.”

MP Georges Okais of the Christian, right-wing Lebanese Forces party, said that “Abolishing the death penalty is a historic achievement, and we have adopted international standards regarding human rights.”

Hezbollah’s parliamentary bloc walked out in protest of abolition, which is also opposed by other lawmakers including Independent MP Jihad al-Samad, who called the move “contrary to Islamic law.”

Opponents of abolition argue that it, plus a general amnesty draft law introduced in April, could result in leniency for perpetrators of bombings and other serious crimes.

However, Nassar insisted that abolition “does not mean leniency toward criminals.”

Lebanese law had designated execution as punishment for a wide range of crimes including—but not limited to—murder, aggravated rape, terrorism, treason, spying, military desertion, aggravated theft, and arson. While 84 people were sentenced to death, Lebanon has not executed anyone in 22 years.

“We can see the uncertainty that those who are condemned to death are living under,” one psychologist working in Lebanese prisons told the French advocacy group Together Against the Death Penalty in a 2021 study. “We don’t apply the death penalty, but we don’t cancel it either.”

“Are we going to wake them up one day and tell them that they will be executed?” the psychologist added, describing the process in Japan and Europe’s last executioner, Belarus, without mentioning the countries. “It is the most horrible thing to live through. It leads to anxiety, depression, and stress that is sometimes uncontrollable. They are alive, but without living.”

Lebanon’s imminent abolition stands in stark contrast with neighboring and regional countries. Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen rank among the world’s most prolific executioners, while Syria’s recent history is marred by thousands of extrajudicial executions during the administration of President Ahmed al-Sharaa, and Israel recently legalized the hanging of “terrorists”—a law critics claim will only be applied to Palestinians.

Daniel Cullen, project manager at Oxford University’s Death Penalty Research Unit, lauded Lebanon’s achievement, which came at “a time of myriad domestic challenges.”

“Since October 2023, Israeli forces have conducted intense bombardments in their campaign against the Hezbollah militant group, resulting in thousands of civilian deaths, including during periods of nominal ceasefire,” Cullen wrote. “Together with the Israeli military occupation of large areas of the south of the country and issuing of evacuation orders, this has resulted in the displacement of around one million people.”

“Even prior to this, the country had already experienced a stark economic collapse since 2019, with a near 40% reduction in GDP, in addition to recovering from the effects of the explosion at Beirut port in August 2020,” he continued. “Against this background, Minister of Justice Adel Nassar specifically highlighted the importance of the abolition legislation as a demonstration of Lebanon’s ability to commit to international human rights standards.”

“Lebanon’s commitment to achieving abolition during a time of national crisis demonstrates that this is entirely possible,” Cullen added.

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk said on social media: “I welcome the Lebanese Parliament’s decision formally to abolish the death penalty, and call on others to follow its lead. In a country that has experienced profound loss and suffering, this decision represents a powerful commitment to the right to life.”




European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas called Lebanon’s abolition “a significant step forward for human rights in the country.”

“As the first country in the region to abolish the death penalty, Lebanon is setting a powerful example for other countries in the Middle East and beyond, reinforcing the strong global trend towards abolition and the growing international support for ending the death penalty worldwide,” she continued.

“The European Union calls on all countries that still apply the death penalty to abolish it and, pending abolition, to maintain or introduce a moratorium on executions as a first step,” Kallas added, urging “those considering its reintroduction to refrain from such a regressive step.”

The West African nation of Burkina Faso adopted a draft penal code last December that would restore the death penalty for crimes including treason, terrorism, and espionage. An effort to revive capital punishment in the Central Asian country of Kyrgyzstan was blocked by its Constitutional Court. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has repeatedly said he is ready to reintroduce the death penalty during his 23 years in power, while populist Filipino Sen. Ronald dela Rosa—a former police chief closely associated with former President Rodrigo Duterte’s mass-murderous drug crackdown—reintroduced death penalty legislation after his reelection last year.

Human Rights Watch Lebanon researcher Ramzi Kaiss hailed Lebanon’s “final break from a cruel sentence that should never be imposed.”

“Capital punishment is unique in its cruelty and finality and is plagued with arbitrariness, prejudice, and error,” Kaiss asserted.

Amnesty International called the move “a landmark victory.”

“Lebanon’s decision to abolish the death penalty marks a major milestone and a victory for human rights in the country,” said Heba Morayef, Amnesty’s Middle East and North Africa director.

Morayef continued:
Justice must be rooted in human rights, not in an irreversible and cruel punishment. After more than two decades without executions, today’s step transforms a precarious hiatus in executions into lasting legal protection upholding the right to life and bringing Lebanon in line with the global trend towards abolition.

The passing of this law is testament to the decades of tireless advocacy by Lebanese human rights defenders and organizations, as well as the leadership of key officials who recognized the death penalty as a cruel and inhuman punishment, often imposed after unfair proceedings and the burden of which frequently falls on those at most disadvantage.

“To turn this law from paper to practice, Lebanese authorities must now ensure that all death sentences are commuted and ratify the key international treaty on abolition, while advancing broader reforms to strengthen a justice system based on dignity, fairness, and respect for human rights,” Morayef added. “Authorities must accompany this law with broader legislative reform, including to ensure that any criminal justice punishments are consistent with human rights principles.”

Thursday, August 06, 2026

ABOLISH PRISONS

Study finds many Colorado jails still lack public opioid treatment policies despite state mandate



CU Anschutz researchers say greater transparency and support are needed to ensure evidence-based care for incarcerated people with opioid use disorder



University of Colorado Anschutz





AURORA, Colo. (Aug. 6, 2026) - Four years after Colorado passed a law requiring county jails to provide medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) and to publish their policies for MOUD care, researchers at the University of Colorado Anschutz have found that many jails still lack publicly available policies explaining how they provide this lifesaving treatment.

The study, published last week in Health & Justice, reviewed opioid treatment policies from all 46 county jails in Colorado. Researchers found that nearly 40% of jails had no publicly available policies related to opioid use disorder (OUD). Among those that did provide policies, fewer than half indicated they offered all three FDA-approved medications used to treat opioid addiction.

"State legislation is an important first step, but policies also need to be transparent, comprehensive and consistently implemented," said Katherine LeMasters, PhD, MPH, senior author of the study, assistant professor of medicine at CU Anschutz and the Colorado School of Public Health. "Publicly available policies can help healthcare providers, families and community organizations better support people during incarceration and after they're released."

People with opioid use disorder are disproportionately represented in U.S. jails and face an especially high risk of overdose after release. Research has shown that medications such as methadone, buprenorphine and extended-release naltrexone reduce overdose deaths, improve recovery and decrease the likelihood of returning to jail.

Colorado's Fentanyl Accountability and Prevention Act, passed in 2022, requires county jails to develop and publish opioid treatment policies, offer medications for opioid use disorder to eligible individuals and help connect people with treatment after release.

To evaluate how the law has been implemented, researchers collected publicly available policies and additional information provided directly by county jails between June and October 2024.

Among the 28 jails that provided policy information, researchers found:

  • 71% described screening individuals for substance use disorder.
  • 67% outlined policies for providing medications for opioid use disorder.
  • 63% described connecting people with treatment after release.
  • 46% indicated they offered all three FDA-approved medications for opioid use disorder.
  • 26% included peer recovery support services.
  • 22% described harm-reduction services such as providing naloxone upon release.

The researchers also found notable differences between urban and rural counties. Urban jails were generally more likely to have comprehensive policies for screening, treatment and post-release care, while rural jails often faced limited access to opioid treatment programs and other community resources.

"Some jails want to offer these medications but face significant barriers," she said. "Methadone, for example, must be dispensed through federally regulated and state-licensed opioid treatment programs, which can make access especially difficult in rural areas. Sustainable funding, technical assistance and partnerships with community providers will be essential to fully implement the law."

Without medication, people experiencing opioid withdrawal while incarcerated can suffer severe physical symptoms and intense cravings, increasing their risk of returning to opioid use after release.

"When these medications aren't available, people may go through painful withdrawal while they're in custody," LeMasters said. "After release, that can increase the risk of returning to opioid use, overdose and death."

The researchers emphasize that the study evaluated written policies rather than actual clinical practice, meaning some jails may provide services that are not reflected in publicly available documents. Still, they say transparency is essential for ensuring continuity of care and identifying where additional resources are needed.

As more states consider requiring medications for opioid use disorder in correctional settings, the researchers say Colorado's experience offers important lessons about the challenges of translating legislation into consistent statewide practice.

"This is ultimately about saving lives," LeMasters said. "Jails are an important place to reach people with opioid use disorder, but they shouldn't be the only place. Expanding access to treatment in communities before people enter the criminal justice system remains just as important."

LeMasters co-authored the study with Paul Christine, MD, PhD, assistant professor of medicine at CU Anschutz, Jarratt Pytell, MD, assistant professor of medicine at CU Anschutz, Alena Gabrielson and Selena Munoz-Jones, PhD students at CU Boulder, Betsy Craft, a Peer Support Specialist and harm reductionist, Hayley Rotello, a social work supervisor at Denver Health, and Ingrid Binswanger, MD, professor of medicine at CU Anschutz and senior clinical investigator at Kaiser Permanente.

About the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus

The University of Colorado Anschutz is a world-class academic medical campus leading transformative advances in science, medicine, education and patient care. The campus includes the University of Colorado's health professional schools, more than 60 centers and institutes, and two nationally ranked independent hospitals—UCHealth University of Colorado Hospital and Children's Hospital Colorado—which see nearly three million adult and pediatric patient visits each year. Innovative, interconnected and highly collaborative, CU Anschutz delivers life-changing treatments, exceptional patient care and top-tier professional training. The campus conducts world-renowned research supported by $890 million in funding, including $762 million in sponsored awards and $128 million in philanthropic gifts for research.

                                                               ###

 

 

Wednesday, August 05, 2026

DSA

Michael Harrington is Spinning in His Grave


 August 3, 2026

Harrington speaking at a Socialist International Congress in Vancouver, 1978 – Public Domain

Most of you will not know who Michael Harrington was.   Or why he should be spinning.  Let me explain.

He was the founder of the Democratic Socialists of America in 1982 and its leader until he died in 1989.  But any comparison between the DSA he created and what is now getting headlines for shaking up the Democratic Party is tenuous at best, and the difference between what he championed and what this younger cohort of amateurs puts forth is a great chasm whose winds are doing the graveyard gyrations.

I knew Mike.  He was a close friend and traveling companion; he married one of my college colleagues, and for ten years I watched him up close as he tried to make socialism a part of the American political system.

The essential element of Mike’s politics in the 1960’s and ‘70’s was anti-Communism, and no one would have thought for a moment to call the Democratic Socialists “Communists,” as Trump has taken to doing. The whole socialist tradition in America was to shun the Communist experience in the Soviet Union, denounce Stalinism, and put forth a vision of a democratically elected government that would be like those of the Scandinavian countries, providing state services in health, education, housing and the like while preserving some capitalist enterprises to provide the taxes to pay for it all.

That was why Mike founded the DSA in 1982 and was its National Cochairman, and chief spokesman, until his death in 1989. Nowhere stuff about ending capitalism, doing away with the Presidency and the Supreme Court, gouging billionaires, everything-free-and-not-having-to-work, not even state-run groceries. The original Democratic Socialists strove, as  Mike once put it, “to be on the left wing of the possible,” and that generally meant working within the Democratic Party.  Where indeed Mike had some influence, particularly in the 1960’s when his book on the poor in the U.S., The Other America, influenced the Democrats’ emerging War on Poverty.

That DSA was never a large organization, having maybe 6,000 members in the 1990’s and early 2000’s.  What changed was the Presidential campaign of 2016, when Bernie Sanders, a leading DSA figure and its only representative in Congress, began having great success in attracting young voters new to the idea of socialism and making of it pretty much whatever they wanted government to do for them. The DSA has grown to some 120,000 members today and looks to have a real influence in this fall’s elections.

But it is no longer anything that could be called democratic or socialist, and it has stood on its head the principles that Mike and his colleagues stood for.

 It refused to support Kamala Harris in the last election; the DSA under Mike actively supported George McGovern in the 1972 election because he feared a Nixon presidency.

It issued a weak disapproval of Hamas for its 2023 massacres; Mike was an outspoken champion of the new Israel.

It has become outspokenly anti-Western in policy with Sanders; the original DSA was part of the Socialist International with social democratic parties in Germany, Sweden, France, and England.

Its leaders have vowed to do away with capitalism; the original DSA knew that capitalism was the economic engine that created the economy but that it needed to be supplemented with a welfare state on the Nordic model.

I don’t think these new DSAers can possibly have any serious influence in the months ahead.  They will win a few mayoralties around and some seats in Congress this fall, and their little bloc in the House will keep causing trouble for the Democratic leadership.  But their politics is so far from mainstream America that they will soon not even interest the suppliant media, and talk of socialism will go back into the backrooms where it has always lurked.

But poor Mike.  Spinning.  Not that DSA.

Kirkpatrick Sale is the author of 20 books, including Why the Sea is Salt: Poems of Love
and Loss (2001) and In the Beginning:  Essay-Poems and Others (2023).

Red All Over? It’s Not So Black and White


 August 5, 2026

Photograph by Nathaniel St. Clair

In the month celebrating 250 years of red, white and blue, Americans were seeing plenty of red — and not just as part of commemorative trifectas or midterm forecast maps.

Red-baiters based in red states (or the financial districts of blue ones) have a wave of actual reds in power to push against.  Once, the best opposition they could hope for were such fellow travelers as Reds director Warren Beatty, who as biographer Peter Biskind notes “was no Communist but empathized with the idealism of the American left” (and whose production “reflects his ambivalence”).

In 2026 they are able to point to candidates who can win elections (if only within the bluest of blue electorates) affiliated with the Democratic Socialists of America collective, which dropped a manifesto in mid-July proclaiming a need for “aggressive wealth taxes” to bring about the day when the whole sectors of “food, education, energy, medicine, and transportation aren’t for-profit businesses.”

On August 3 alone, the Wall Street Journal op-ed page offered “A Brief History of Wealth Creation” from John Steele Gordon, chiding “many on the left, unable to distinguish between wealth aggregation and wealth creation,” immediately above Allysia Finley judging “the socialist agenda” to be “a sham” (and not just because it attracts “relatively affluent people” who “dress like hobos”).

In July’s Journal, Karl Rove called for not falling for “a seductive tale” reducing life’s woes to the machinations of “nasty villains with evil plans” who “can be beaten” by ballots for ruthless representatives (like the narrative he helped provide for George W. Bush?), while Obama staffer Rahm Emanuel deemed efforts by “socialists who led the charge to defund the police, open the borders, abolish prisons, release violent criminals onto the streets and degrade the flag” to be just as counterproductive as their efforts “to turn safe Democratic states and districts a darker shade of blue” at the expense of winning purple areas. (In fairness, the socialists might spare the Stars and Stripes.)

Even former card-carriers Joshua Muravchik and Ronald Radosh took their ex-comrades to task in 2025.  Those who “would transform the economy from private enterprise to public ownership, but — unlike communists — only through persuasion and legislation, not violence and coercion,” a viewpoint for which they take pains to note they had both been true believers, “must choose between democracy and socialism” when the former cannot yield enough consensus for the latter. Thus, “the two of us made peace with democratic capitalism” while “the DSA has clearly made the reverse choice.”

There’s something to be said for socialists being forthright about their most radical ideas. In contrast, as Roderick Long observes, free-market libertarians have perennially treated theirs as “esoteric doctrine … confined to scholarly studies and movement periodicals.”  In a previous era, the sort of rhetoric in the DSA program would have only been shown to the general public accompanied by a South Park-style disclaimer on how “this is what socialists actually believe.”

Yet the DSA’s vision of how “the political and economic system under which we live is built on private ownership and profit at all costs” leaves out many of the same complications absent from Gordon’s “brief history.”  Half a century before Radosh made that “peace with democratic capitalism,” he filled a book with the help of a very different coauthor, “firm believer in laissez-faire capitalism” Murray Rothbard.  In A New History of Leviathan, Radosh and Rothbard’s joint introduction explained how they and a contributing roster of leftist and libertarian historians traced how the “economy dominated by giant multinational corporations” in the years leading up to the bicentennial had followed, not from “fierce winds of competition,” but from efforts in which “sophisticated reformers sought to stifle” just such remnants of “a freely competitive economy” — preferring instead to “mold the government into a mighty instrument of monopolization and cartelization.”

Getting the dust off the shelf of books by A New History of Leviathan’s generation of New Left historians, and carrying their analysis forward, will show how much both economic innovation and well-being for the masses are being held back by the assumption that current concentrations of wealth are the result of an inherent conflict between the two, and not by a distorted conception of both.

Joel Schlosberg is a contributor to the Center for a Stateless Society (c4ss.org). He lives in New York.