National Problems Require National Solutions: Increasing Buy-In Through Campaign Cohorts

Now more than ever, under the Trump administration’s constant barrage of attacks, it is critical that YDSA can organize nationally and present a strong alternative to the two-party system’s inaction. The author argues that campaign cohorts, as proposed by R17, would build buy-in to national campaigns and goals by fostering relationships across chapters. 

The working class is under assault. As ICE tears through our communities, our educational institutions are gutted for scraps, and the bottom falls out on survival programs like Medicaid and SNAP, young people across the country are seeing through the veil of our capitalist controlled two-party system. 

As we search for a fighting alternative, what are our options? In my medium-sized city in the Southeast, left-leaning students were left with two choices. On the one hand were the empty mobilizations of groups like 50/50/1. Large and exciting but the ultimately directionless politics of the Democratic party –  the Groundhog Day of American politics. On the other hand was my local YDSA chapter. In the winter we had decided to pursue a campaign focused on raising the wage for campus workers, but were ultimately left flat-footed when the political moment shifted to concerns about what a Trump administration would mean for immigration, reproductive health, and higher education. Despite this, we ran an effective campaign, with over a third of students signing on to our demands. Still, at every turn we were dogged by the question, how do we connect this hyper-local campaign to a national political moment?

If one positive thing can be said about the 50/50/1 movement, it is that they presented a clear and nationally organized strategy that connected with people who were afraid. Their argument went, “If we mobilize enough of us on the same day, we can fight back and take down this administration.” What “fighting back” meant in concrete terms remains to be seen, but the sway this approach had over millions of organizable folks is undeniable. At my chapter, we even had a member leave to join the local 50/50/1 steering committee. When I talked to them about it, they explained that with everything going on, they didn’t see the point of our campaign on campus. This was a tough critique to hear, but I think it points to a deeper problem with how YDSA runs national campaigns. 

My chapter has now either directly participated in, carried out related-efforts, or is laying the groundwork for participating in three national campaigns. From my view as a chapter leader, when a priority campaign or day of action is announced, it often feels like 130 or so chapters standing together haphazardly under a trenchcoat masquerading as a nationally unified force. Core to the problem is the lack of a widely-shared understanding of the objectives and justification behind a campaign, or what our goal is in running them. In short, a lack of buy-in. 

The clear answer to a lack of buy-in is tighter chapter integration to our national project. It is no coincidence that our strongest chapters are the ones that are also most closely tied to national, observable through consistently fielding NCC candidates or committee members, and participating in national projects. These are also the chapters that are the quickest to pick up national campaigns, see Florida International University, which pivoted from a Plan-B win to ICE Off Campus within a month of the national announcement. For a chapter, close ties with the national organization not only means leadership development for members beyond insular campus politics and more targeted and consistent support from mentors; it also serves as a powerful motivational force. The first time I attended a national event, I remember being awe-struck by the sheer fact that I wasn’t alone, that the struggles my chapter faced were not unique, and that there were hundreds of other students just like me fighting the same fights and winning. 

How, then, can we build this kind of buy-in on a larger scale? Not every chapter member can be on a committee or hold a position on the NCC, nor should they. Our organizers do vital work on their campuses and that is where their primary focus should remain. As I’ve led increasingly large delegations from my chapter to the winter organizing conference, though, one reflection jumps out at me. When I ask new attendees what was useful, they mention the skills covered in the workshops, but when I ask what excited them, the answer is always the organic connections they developed in between blocks and over meals. The combination of these two experiences, skills and connections, is what makes national events deeply radicalizing and motivating experiences. This combination of skills and connections is a winning formula for building buy-in to our national project. 

But, when we run national campaigns, we only hit half of this equation. Currently, our national campaigns primarily rely on vertical integration. The most routine mentorship a chapter receives is from their NCC point-person, a valuable practice that should remain in place, but one wholly insufficient to build the necessary buy-in for more nationally unified campaigns. Even when we do hold mass calls, they are primarily top down in nature, with an emphasis on lecture with the rushed breakout as a space to digest and process the information that has been shared. Both structures produce a distinct (though sometimes useful) hierarchy that stymies the connective tissue between a chapter and the national project. I’m proud to say that YDSA has a solid infrastructure for sharing and educating the practical lessons of organizing, but the lack of unity in our application of these skills leaves us scattered, without national coherency and weaker as a result. 

In recent years, this problem has been recognized and the sketches of a solution have been brought forward. The 2024 Convention’s R5: “Towards a National Student Strike for Palestine” was a step in a positive direction, conducting student strike cohort calls, a tactic imposed by the necessity of carrying out a nationally unified strike. Much retrospection has been offered on why the strike failed to materialize, but a part of it undoubtedly was a lack of buy-in from chapters. A fact not helped by the structure of these cohort sessions, which were, as it was described to me, essentially “extended mass calls.” The sharing of practical lessons from experienced organizers is necessary, but it doesn’t create the trust and confidence within a group that collective action requires. 

The existing priority campaign for YDSA national and the clear front-runner for this year’s convention is R19: “Building Socialist Sanctuaries to Win the Battle for Democracy.” In the same vein as R5, it calls for the creation of “system level coordinating structures,” through joint chapter check-ins, socials, and list-building. If we are to answer NCC at-large candidate Claire I J’s call for “hearts beating in unison” around a national campaign, it is vital that we simultaneously vigorously recommit to these kinds of structures while also radically departing from their stalling top-down iterations. If it passes, R17: “For A Strategic Campaign Committee,” could facilitate the development of nation-wide campaign cohorts: regular meeting spaces for peer mentorship, shared work, and brainstorming, as proposed by Claire I J in the most recent debate. Imagine a routine space for building connections beyond the campus, with cohorts organized by similarity of conditions and campaign-stage, not merely geography. A place where our active layer of membership could reflect on what’s working and what’s not, from event ideas and escalation timelines, to tabling pitches and poster design. Cohorts could set their own agendas, designating time for both reflection and work based on their needs.

If implemented successfully, we might see a flourishing of chapter-level tactical innovation, an explosion in our mid-level leadership, and a reinvigorated membership willing to do the difficult work of national coordination. Building this kind of culture will not be easy and it won’t happen overnight, but if there is any hope of presenting ourselves as a credible alternative to the empty mobilizations of the liberal NGO-industrial complex, it is what is necessary.  

National unity around a campaign can not be imposed from above. It has to be an emergent quality that bubbles up through a connective tissue, organically built out of a trust and confidence in our ability to carry out nationally coordinated actions. The role of national in this can not be to dictate these relationships, but to create the mediums for them to flourish – to give a unified form to the politics already emerging from autonomous chapter activity. As delegates, in order to meet the political moment and build a capable and fighting national organization, we need to prioritize resolutions that create this space for connection, vote in NCC candidates who want to implement that vision, and bring our chapters into the national fold when we return in the fall. And until we do this, we’re leaving unorganized youth on the table.