Socialism 2026: The Left's New Radical Agenda

Held from September 4-7, the event attracted thousands of participants, serving as a key platform for discussions on contemporary socialist thought and strategy. Haymarket Books hosted the conference, which featured a wide array of speakers and workshops.

Notable figures included Angela Davis and popular online personalities like Hasan Piker, signaling an effort to bridge academic and digital activism. Endorsements came from various organizations, including the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), open-borders advocacy groups, and prison abolitionists, some of which receive funding from George Soros's Open Society Foundations.

The aim was to create abundance and dismantle capitalism through the collective strength of a capable workforce. However, the current discourse at Socialism 2026 showcased a significant shift towards new and often unconventional ideologies, departing from these historical tenets.

Beatrice Adler-Bolton presented a controversial argument, asserting that fitness is inherently fascist, challenging long-held societal views on health and physical capability. She claimed that fitness acts as a measure of relative disposability under capitalism, suggesting that efforts to become 'fitter' inadvertently make individuals more valuable to the existing ruling order. Adler-Bolton described the pursuit of fitness as a form of eugenics, implying a link between physical optimization and oppressive societal structures.

Adler-Bolton further elaborated on her controversial stance by advocating for 'dysgenic' qualities as beneficial to revolutionary struggle. She explicitly stated that the objective is not to surpass fascists in physical prowess or eugenic ideals. Instead, she suggested that a 'more dysgenic' approach is preferable, asserting that revolution should not be seen as a competition between optimized and prepared bodies. This perspective, according to Adler-Bolton, is inherently fascist and dismisses the historical context of various global leftist struggles.

Historically, successful revolutionary movements have often depended on the physical fitness and resilience of their participants, a stark contrast to the modern radical activists' emphasis on weakness. The Bolsheviks, for instance, were largely comprised of factory workers and soldiers who were in their physical prime, enabling them to endure the rigors of conflict and maintain discipline. Similarly, Chinese peasants, hardened by arduous agricultural labor, possessed the physical fortitude necessary for their revolutionary victory.

These historical precedents highlight that sustained physical effort, endurance, and collective strength were often prerequisites for challenging and overturning established powers. The ability to engage in prolonged struggle, withstand harsh conditions, and execute physically demanding tasks was central to the success of these movements.

This historical reliance on robust physical health stands in direct opposition to the contemporary arguments presented at Socialism 2026, which downplay or even condemn the pursuit of fitness in revolutionary contexts. The historical record suggests that physical preparedness has been an indispensable component of successful uprisings, challenging the notion that weakness or a 'dysgenic' approach could effectively drive revolutionary change.