I liked what I knew about the DSA. I liked what Democratic DSA candidates were saying (with some exceptions). Because I believe strongly that our government must be more about the people in order to be true to our founding principles, and industry should have less power. And so I was in agreement with Democrats who are socialists (with a small "s"); indeed, none of the DSA candidates are Socialists (with a capital "S")—they do not believe that capitalism should be replaced by government or collective ownership of the means of production.

When I first looked at the DSA, it sounded as though democracy was central to their philosophy. The DSA states that, "At the root of our socialism is a profound commitment to democracy."

But after doing some further research recently, I found that their goal is not democracy—which is universally defined as "government by the people," meaning all of the people, not some subset. Instead, their goal, stated unequivocally, is a "government and economy by and for the working class," not by and for all Americans. In its view, to protect the American worker, our whole system needs to be trashed and replaced with something non-capitalist and worker-controlled, not just worker-friendly.

This is taking the wrong that they are rightly fighting against—the way capitalism has developed in the U.S. and our democracy benefiting the rich and industry more than the average person, in spite of everyone having a vote—and turning it on its head and replacing it with another wrong, government by and for the working class. Not everyone. I was also shocked that part of DSA's platform includes the abolition of the police, prisons, and borders; defunding the Pentagon; abolition of the Senate; and other provisions that would create a workers' state.

As I've written, I urge a return to the founding principles contained in the Declaration of Independence and making government more focused on the people. While that does mean reforming our capitalist system, it does not mean doing away with the entire structure of our government and economy.

Yes, the police have significant problems—they need to be retrained and their leadership vetted on their attitude towards those they "serve and protect." Yes, prisons are a terrible place, and our concept of how to treat those who break the law should be altered.

The problems the DSA is trying to address are not a function of the form of our government or economic system; it is a function of the nature of society, of people. It's true that there is a real problem with most of the institutions that the DSA wants to dismantle. However, the answer is not abolition.

These institutions have a legitimate purpose in the function of our or any democracy. The answer is not the creation of a workers' state. The answer instead is the answer to the question: how do we make these institutions more reflective of the values contained in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution so that government and the economy work for all the people?

That was the purpose of my book, We Still Hold These Truths: An American Manifesto. It looked at all major areas of government activity, using the words of the Declaration as a touchstone, to determine what policies the Democratic Party should advocate.

We live in a country and in a world with a great diversity of people—not just in ethnicity and religion—but more tellingly in their financial status or educational status, and all the inequality that results from these differences. Those are the facts of life recognized by the Founding Fathers.

The answer to that inequality—material and otherwise—provided by the Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence was that all people have a moral right to equality and that the government must ensure that every citizen has an equal right to pursue life, liberty, and happiness, which means that they must all have an equal opportunity to pursue that right. What someone makes of the opportunity is another matter and solely the responsibility of the individual, but it is the government's role, as stated in the Declaration, to secure that right, to provide that opportunity.

The DSA is committed to creating a very different system of government—a government by and for the working class. That is not the United States, nor was it meant to be at its founding. That does not reflect the thoughts of our Founding Fathers in creating our country and government. That is not a democracy. Much needs to change for us to live up to the promise of the Declaration of Independence, but the change should and can be within the framework of government set down at our founding.

Bernie Sanders, Zohran Mamdani, El-Sayed, and all other Democratic candidates who are members of the DSA should resign from the DSA if they believe in America, because its platform is inimical to our government as set forth in the Constitution. It's not just one aspect of the platform; it's the whole framework. If they don't, Republicans will skewer them in the general election.

Instead, they should fight to have the Democratic Party adopt a Mission statement based on the Declaration of Independence. Fight to return the Democratic Party to what it was before the Democratic Leadership Council brought about a shift to the right in the party's ideology in the late 80s. Fight the good fight to ensure that all people have the rights promised to them in the Declaration of Independence.

_____

Ronald L. Hirsch is a teacher, legal aid lawyer, survey researcher, nonprofit executive, consultant, composer, author, and volunteer. He is a graduate of Brown University and the University of Chicago Law School and the author of We Still Hold These Truths. Read more of his writing at www.PreservingAmericanValues.com

_____

©2026 The Fulcrum. Visit at thefulcrum.us. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.