Questions: Society & Politics

The Democratic Socialists of America openly advocates major constitutional changes, including drafting a new constitution and creating a democratic socialist republic.

The current Constitution makes changes like that extremely difficult. Article V generally requires two-thirds support to propose amendments and ratification by three-fourths of the states, with even stronger protection for equal state representation in the Senate.

My argument is not that a handful of democratic socialists could take office tomorrow and simply abolish the Constitution.

My concern is what could happen over time if a movement committed to replacing major parts of the current system continually gained voters, elected more candidates, controlled more state governments, expanded its influence in Congress and other institutions, and eventually accumulated levels of political power that seem unrealistic today.

Some people argue that the Constitution’s safeguards are strong enough that the DSA could never realistically accomplish its most radical goals.

I disagree. Constitutional safeguards are strong, but I do not believe they are an absolute guarantee forever regardless of how much political and institutional power a movement eventually gains. Political movements organize specifically to turn goals that are impossible today into possibilities tomorrow.

So I believe Americans should take an organization’s stated long-term constitutional goals seriously before it ever acquires enough power to attempt them.

Denmark Norway Sweden?