Why don’t we learn more about the history of the Socialist and Communist Parties of America?

41 comments

1. Because they’re not very relevant to American history.

   The instances where they did have an impact (e.g. the labor movements of the early 20th century) were in fact covered at least in my high school history classes, as I recall.

2. In all seriousness, what is there to learn? How are they different than any other political party?

3. I don’t remember learning much about the Whigs either and they were at least relevant.

4. There are five times as many people in my small town you have never heard of than there are members of either party.

5. I learned about them around early-20th century labor. Which is…basically the only thing of significance they were involved in.

6. What would you teach and why would they be relevant to the overall US history vs anything else that is currently taught?

7. In hindsight, I think we all understand that these people were basement dwelling losers. What’s there to learn?

8. Because they hold no weight

9. They don’t appear until the 1920s and teachers have bigger topic issues to teach in the classroom than 4th parties during that period.

   Most US history classes (k-12) end with the Vietnam War.

10. We did learn about the Socialist Party and Eugene V. Debs, their candidate who ran while incarcerated and received over 900k votes! AP US History in the 11th grade.

    CPUSA, a shell of its former self, was always just an irrelevant propaganda tool for the USSR during the Cold War.

11. Because they don’t have much influence in the US, and it needs to stay that way. Their political views have ruined enough countries already — we definitely don’t need that poison here.

    People are free to have and express communist or socialist views, of course, but we don’t have to take them seriously.

12. Why don’t WE learn…. Who is WE? And how do you know that WE have not learned any of the history behind the Socialist and Communist parties in America? Learning is available to anyone. Go to the library and pick up a book. Peruse a website. Watch a documentary. Ask a friend. All kinds of avenues are open to you if you’re interested in this topic.

13. Can you name any third parties which never fielded a successful presidential candidate that we learn more about? I think the Bull Moose party is the only one, and that’s only because their candidate had already been President twice.

14. Tell you what- get the DSA, the Socialist Party USA, the Socialist Party of America, the Socialist Labor Party of America, the Socialist Equality Party, Socialist Alternative, and the Party of Socialism and Liberation , the largest Socialist parties currently existing in the US, together to agree on what the history of socialism in America *is*. Or what America is, or what Socialism is, for that matter.

    After that, get the Communist parties together, but be warned they’re a bit hair-split and might be a bit contentious.

    Of course, you could also do a sidebar on, say, communes in the 60s or Midwestern style sewer socialism.

15. They lost. History is often written by the winners.

16. Why would we? We know all we need to know about Socialism and Communism — everywhere it’s been tried it’s been a disaster. These are just the Americans who won’t admit that.

17. because they aren’t very relevant

18. They were basically trolling funded by the Soviets, a people so successful they were rolling around on ox carts in the 1980s

19. What do you want to learn and what do you cut out to make the time?

    Early 1900s labor movement was covered in my schooling as was the US reaction to communist Russia.

20. Mainstream political discourse that goes leftward tends to stop at neo-liberal. Yuck.

21. You might in US History classes at university. There’s more time for more detail.

22. I am actually pretty surprised at how few people know the socialist party had mayors of Milwaukee for many years and are the reason Milwaukee was one of the few American cities with bike lanes

23. Because they aren’t particularly important in the grand scope of things.

24. Because the Communist party was always a meme in America and the Socialist party became one after opposing WWI.

25. > Why don’t we learn more about the history of the Socialist and Communist Parties of America?

    Irrelevancy? I mean at best they came in third a couple of times… In a two-party system. More often they came in fourth or fifth or worse behind various other oddball fringe movements.

26. You know why

27. There were and are many tiny parties in America. Each election may have 5 or 6 presidential candidates. They are usually insignificant, so are not really discussed as part of American history. There are people who like to study the different 3rd parties and their candidates. I can think of Ross Perot, who got 18% in the 1992 elections, and Ralph Nader, who was responsible for the Democrats loosing the 2000 elections.

28. Americans become hysterical or violent at any mention of socialism, even as a discussion point.

29. I did, at least during the section on early 20th century labor movements.

30. I’m someone who took AP US History in high school and was a History major in college. To put it simply, they’re short lived and not really relevant.

31. American history generally focuses on relevant aspects of our history. Eugene Debs, McCarthyism, Ethel & Julius Rosenberg and the progressive era were all taught in my HS history class as they were pretty relevant and had an impact on American History. Socialist and communist parties in the US have never been relevant as a political party, just like a few dozen other minor political parties.

32. I’m pretty sure I did in my AP classes and once again in college.

33. Because they never held a nationally relevant office. They are as pertinent to American history as the Rent is Too Damn High Party

34. You do learn about them if you pay any attention. The Socialist Party (in its various competing forms) held mayorships in Milwaukee, famously, as well as some minor cities like Reading, PA. Individual socialists were the brains behind many progressive reforms, as well, like social security, workers compensation, public housing, etc.

    The Communists were important in certain relevant actions like the defense of the Scottsboro Boys and the development of the United Mine Workers. There was a time (as seen in Oppenheimer) were they were relatively entrenched in certain areas of high culture and academia. But they were never electorally relevant. Maybe they managed a couple NYC councilmen.

    The exact internecine struggles among left factions would be covered in a college seminar. It’s not relevant at the school level.

35. 1. The people who write the curriculum don’t want kids to get the “wrong” ideas

    2. The communist party never really had much relevance. It was a very small minority party that never garnered much traction. The socialist party had Eugene Debs so decent well for a third party candidate a couple times, but that was the extent of it really.

    3. The closest thing we learned about any kind of socialist movement was the labor movement during the late 19th/early 20th century, but it’s a heavily whitewashed version that eliminates the socialist aspect of it. (Again, looping back to #1, can’t let kids become socialists and question the system)

36. They’re not important to American history.

37. We went into pretty good depth in my public education.

38. The same reason we “don’t learn about” the Whig or Populist parties (despite the fact that they accomplished much more). By and large, we do. In high school history class. Which a lot of people sleep through or are otherwise bored by.

39. There is just so much involved in the history of America specifically its political history for it to be properly talked about by the time someone graduates high school. I took advance placement US history and by the time we got to the latter part of the 19th century we were talking about populist movements and the early socialist party. They really were a footnote. This wasn’t out of an attempt to sideline them. It was just that there was so much for us to cover.

    This is coming from a lefty who’s done personal research on American socialist and anarchist movements in the 19th century as well as the history of the labor movement.

40. Because this country has tried very very hard to drive all notions of socialism out of this nation from straight up killing or exiling leftist and interfering in left leaning democracies. Teach about them in anything but the barest terms that always ties it back to the Soviets would defeat the purpose.

41. Out of curiosity I read the works of Marx and Engels recently. Despite being told my entire life that socialism and communism were inherently immoral ideologies, I actually had zero idea wtf they even really were and just wanted to see what the fuss was all about.

    It was pretty eye opening tbh.

    American schools don’t teach students what communism or socialism actually is because our society is ran by a financial elite. They most CERTAINLY are not going to tolerate stuff like class struggle, revolutionary theory, or dialectical matierialism in school as standard curriculum. Thats like asking the pope to endorse the church of satan, or north korea to teach its students how the stock exchange works. Its just not gonna happen.