Elitism: How Jacobin and AOC’s Assault on Chris Smalls Exposed the Imperialist Soul of Social Democracy

The June 2026 publication of an article titled "The Rise and Fall of Chris Smalls" in Jacobin magazine marks a watershed moment in the degeneration of the American "democratic socialist" media landscape. Nominally a critique of the Amazon Labor Union’s (ALU) internal friction, the piece serves as a thinly veiled political execution carried out on behalf of Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC).

The catalyst for this media assault was simple yet profound: Chris Smalls, the foundational organizer of the historic ALU victory at JFK8 in Staten Island, publicly broke ranks with the progressive political establishment. Specifically, Smalls subjected Ocasio-Cortez to fierce, principled critique over her voting record regarding Israel, the ongoing devastation in Gaza, and her consistent capitulation to the broader Democratic Party apparatus.

The ensuing online backlash from rank-and-field workers, radical leftists, anti-war activists, and Black organizers was swift and unsparing. By attempting to dismantle Smalls' credibility as an organizer, Jacobin did not just reveal its own editorial biases; it exposed its functional role as the unofficial media wing of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, and liberals masquerading as radicals. The incident unmasked a deeper structural reality: when a self-made, independent Black working-class leader challenges the imperialist accommodations of elite progressive darlings, the social-democratic media complex will actively work to discipline, discredit, and discard them.

AOC, Chris Smalls, and the Class Divide

To understand the vitriol behind Jacobin’s hit piece, one must examine the history between Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Chris Smalls—a relationship defined from its inception by political opportunism from the politician and a demand for genuine solidarity from the worker.

When Smalls was fired by Amazon in March 2020 after organizing a walkout over unsafe pandemic working conditions, he did not have the backing of established, deep-pocketed trade unions. He and a small group of workers built the ALU from the ground up on a shoestring budget, greeting workers at Staten Island bus stops with food and literature. During the height of this grueling, uphill battle against one of the most powerful corporations on earth, the ALU repeatedly reached out to AOC—whose congressional district sits just a few miles away in Queens and the Bronx—asking her to bring her massive social media megaphone and star power to the picket lines.

Ocasio-Cortez routinely demurred. In mid-2021, she backed out of a highly publicized ALU rally at the eleventh hour, citing vague "security concerns," an excuse that rang hollow to workers facing down corporate intimidation every day.

Yet, when the ALU pulled off what pundits called an impossible miracle in April 2022—winning the union vote at JFK8—the progressive establishment suddenly rushed to center themselves in the victory. Ocasio-Cortez, who had been conspicuously absent during the trenches of the organizing campaign, quickly pivot to congratulate the workers online, attempting to bask in the reflected glow of working-class triumph.

Smalls and the ALU leadership refused to let the politician rewrite history. Smalls publicly noted her absence when it mattered most, drawing a sharp line between the performative solidarity of electoral progressives and the gritty reality of independent rank-and-file organizing.

               The tension reached a boiling point as the Biden administration and the congressional "Squad" continuously aligned themselves with imperial statecraft. Smalls, alongside a growing vanguard of anti-imperialist workers, refused to separate domestic labor struggles from global working-class solidarity. Following the escalation of violence in Gaza, Smalls directly and publicly confronted AOC for her tepid, compromise-laden statements, her votes funding the Israeli military apparatus, and her willingness to shield the Biden administration from systemic critique.

By demanding accountability for Palestine, Smalls committed the ultimate sin in the eyes of the progressive elite: he broke the unwritten rule of bourgeois politics, proving that working-class loyalty cannot be bought with a tweet or an invite to a gala.

Shielding the Squad: How Jacobin Whitewashes Neoliberal Capitulation

The Jacobin article functions as a classic character assassination, attempting to reframe Smalls’ refusal to bow to the political establishment as a psychological flaw—dismissing his leadership as mere "celebrityism" and vanity. In doing so, Jacobin deployed its standard editorial template: defending and whitewashing the egregious, neoliberal behavior of social-democratic politicians like AOC, Bernie Sanders, and the wider progressive caucus.

For years, publication venues like the World Socialist Web Site (WSWS) have meticulously documented how Jacobin acts as a political buffer for these figures. When Bernie Sanders voted to fund billions in military aid to fuel regional conflicts, or when he refused to call for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza during critical junctures, Jacobin offered sophisticated, hand-wringing apologetics. When AOC voted in late 2022 to outlaw a strike by rail workers—forcing a contract without paid sick leave down the throats of the working class on behalf of the Biden administration—Jacobin rushed to frame the betrayal as a complicated tactical maneuver rather than a direct strike against class independence.

This dynamic is not accidental; it is structural. The role of social-democratic journalism of this stripe is to convince radicalizing youth and workers that the Democratic Party can still be reformed from within. Whenever a genuine worker leader emerges from outside this bubble and exposes the absolute bankruptcy of this strategy, publications tied to this milieu must neutralize the threat.

By attacking Smalls, Jacobin sought to protect AOC’s left flank. They sought to convince their readers that the breakdown of the ALU’s momentum was entirely due to Smalls’ flaws as an individual, rather than the immense pressure of an unsupportive state and an abandoned progressive infrastructure that prefers compliant union bureaucrats over disruptive, independent agitators.

Liberals Posing as Radicals

To understand the fierce online backlash against Jacobin, one must understand its positioning within the media landscape. Jacobin operates as the unofficial, de facto mouthpiece of the DSA leadership and the progressive NGO complex. It uses Marxist terminology, displays stylized socialist aesthetics, and invokes historical revolutionaries to build credibility among young people looking for alternatives to predatory capitalism.

However, beneath the radical veneer lies a fundamentally liberal, reformist project. As commentators from outlets like Left Voice have noted in their public rebuttals to the Smalls piece, Jacobin’s editorial line has consistently opposed true class independence. True class independence requires a complete, uncompromising break from both corporate political parties. Jacobin, conversely, champions a strategy of realignment—utilizing the Democratic Party ballot line to run candidates who ultimately become house-trained managers of the capitalist state.

When Smalls critiques AOC from the left on Palestine, he exposes the core contradiction of this strategy. He highlights that you cannot build a "democratic socialist" movement inside a political party that acts as the primary manager of global imperialism. The online backlash reflected this exhaustion: the working class is increasingly tired of liberals posing as radicals, using socialist catchphrases to justify voting for war budgets and corporate bailouts.

The Anti-Black Dynamics of the DSA Milieu

A particularly damning element of the Jacobin hit piece—and one that drew immediate fire from Black radical organizations like the Black Agenda Report and independent Black Marxists—is the underlying, institutional Anti-Blackness that characterizes both the publication and the DSA milieu it represents.

The modern progressive movement in the United States remains overwhelmingly white, middle-class, and professional-managerial in its composition and cultural orientation. When this movement interacts with the Black working class, it historically does so through a paternalistic framework. When Black workers are compliant, quiet, and willing to serve as backdrops for progressive campaign ads, they are celebrated. But the moment a Black working-class leader asserts absolute independence, rejects white progressive tutelage, and formulates critiques using their own language and aesthetic, the establishment turns on them with venomous elite condescension.

The Jacobin article dripping with this elitism. It sneered at Smalls’ wardrobe, his public appearances, and his cultural presence, reducing a brilliant, organic intellectual of the working class to a superficial "celebrity." This is a recurring trope within social-democratic spaces:

• It pathologizes independent Black leadership.

• It demands that Black organizers submit to the bureaucratic structures dominated by white Ivy League graduates and NGO professionals.

• It dismisses autonomous Black radical critique as "divisive" or lacking "structural understanding."

By weaponizing these tropes against Smalls while simultaneously whitewashing the actions of a gentrifying progressive political class, Jacobin confirmed what Black radicals have argued for decades: Western social democracy is fundamentally tied to an elite, Eurocentric framework that is structurally hostile to independent, revolutionary Black working-class power.

The Verdict of the Working Class

The online backlash against Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Jacobin demonstrates that the political consciousness of the working class is outgrowing the narrow confines of electoral progressivism. Kshama Sawant and other radical voices who jumped to Smalls’ defense correctly identified that the attack on Smalls was an attack on the principle of class independence itself.

"The attempt by social-democratic media to scapegoat an independent Black worker for the immense difficulties of fighting corporate giants like Amazon is the height of political cowardice."

Chris Smalls is a human being, and like any organizer navigating uncharted historical territory, his strategies and organizational choices are open to fraternal debate within the movement. But there is a grand canyon of difference between a fraternal critique aimed at building worker power and a political hit piece designed to protect an imperialist-adjacent politician from legitimate accountability over a genocide.

By choosing to write that article, Jacobin drew a line in the sand. It proved that when the chips are down, it will always stand with the professional-managerial class, the state-integrated politicians, and the liberal managers of capital against the raw, unfiltered, independent power of the working class. The backlash wasn't just temporary Twitter outrage; it was a collective declaration of independence from a working class that refuses to be managed, lectured, or betrayed any longer.