The Democratic Socialists of America is experiencing surprising and unprecedented growth that is alarming many Americans, but energizing a subset of voters, notably within the Gen Z demographic. Up to 2016, and for decades prior, the movement, which is a membership-based political organization rather than its own separate party, had a membership that hovered around 5,000 to 6,000 members. That base expanded significantly in 2016, coalescing around its most prominent member, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, whose presidential candidacy opposite Republican Donald Trump, challenged the Democrats own coronated candidate, Hillary Clinton.1 By 2017, DSA’s membership had surged to 32,000, and then a year later it stood at 55,000. By 2021, its membership was 95,000. In terms of revenue, the organization earned revenue of $491,000 in 2015; in 2023, that number had risen to $6,161,514.
The surge could be traced to several factors occurring around that time, which were primarily economic: a sense among young voters that they were being locked out of the so-called American Dream due to housing costs, and the burden of student college debt which had, around 2018, grown to approximately $1.5 trillion to $1.57 trillion. The escalating burden of student debt was a prominent issue often highlighted by democratic socialists and progressive politicians like Bernie Sanders, who advocated for policies such as tuition-free college and student loan forgiveness. This alignment of a growing political movement with a major economic concern such as student debt likely contributed to the DSA’s increased appeal during this time. The surge in DSA membership post-2016 was significantly driven by young people’s increasing struggles with housing affordability and precarious employment, issues often seen as direct failures of the capitalist system. As housing costs skyrocketed while wages stagnated and student debt remained a crushing burden, many young adults found traditional milestones like independent living and homeownership increasingly out of reach. This dual economic precariousness, often leading to a “Generation Rent” mindset, fostered a profound sense of disillusionment with the status quo and a receptiveness to democratic socialist critiques and proposed systemic solutions, such as social housing and universal programs.
However, a deeper look at the DSA reveals a movement whose rapid growth has brought with it deeply troubling ideological stances, particularly regarding the State of Israel, which have alienated and alarmed much of the Jewish community, especially in cities like New York with large Jewish populations. While prominent DSA-backed figures like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have achieved national recognition, the organization’s embrace of anti-Zionism and its rhetoric surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have sparked widespread accusations of antisemitism.2
The DSA’s official statements and those of some of its vocal members, especially after the October 7th, 2023, Hamas attacks, have been widely condemned for their perceived failure to unequivocally denounce terrorism and for immediately pivoting to blaming Israel. For instance, the NYC-DSA faced significant backlash for promoting a pro-Palestinian rally that, to many, appeared to celebrate the horrific violence of that day. Critics, including many Jewish community leaders and elected officials across the political spectrum, decried these actions as justifying terror and exhibiting an alarming “double standard” against the Jewish state. Figures like New York Congressman Ritchie Torres went as far as to call the NYC-DSA an “antisemitic stain on the soul of America’s largest city.”
This extreme anti-Israel posture is exemplified by individuals such as New York Assemblymember Zohran Mamdani, a prominent DSA member and recent mayoral candidate in New York City, a city home to the largest Jewish population outside of Israel. Mamdani’s positions are deeply anathema to a significant portion of New York’s Jewish community. He has not only vocally supported the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which many view as inherently antisemitic and aimed at delegitimizing Israel’s existence, but has also drawn intense criticism for his refusal to condemn slogans like “globalize the Intifada,” which many Jewish individuals understand as a direct call for violence against Jews.3 His assertion that he would not support any state with a “hierarchy of citizenship on the basis of religion” has been seen by critics as a veiled attack on Israel’s identity as a Jewish state, despite its democratic structures. Furthermore, Mamdani’s past social media activity, including material mocking Hasidic Jews and insinuating Jewish control over institutions—classic antisemitic tropes—further solidifies the perception among many Jewish New Yorkers that his politics are not merely critical of Israel, but actively hostile to Jewish safety and identity.
While some younger, progressive Jewish voters may find common ground with Mamdani on domestic issues, the overwhelming sentiment from established Jewish organizations and a significant portion of the broader Jewish community is one of alarm and outright rejection. His continued refusal to distance himself from rhetoric that is widely perceived as threatening has made him, for many NYC Jews, an unacceptable political figure, highlighting the profound chasm between DSA’s radical stances and the values of a community deeply concerned about rising antisemitism and the security of Israel. The growth of the DSA, therefore, while numerically impressive, comes at a moral cost, aligning itself with views that alienate a vital segment of the American population and raise serious questions about its true commitment to inclusivity and combating bigotry.