The Democratic Party has an identity problem
How looking to the past can provide Democrats with a new political paradigm for the future
By Jeremy Potter
Staff Writer
The Democratic Party, despite some Republicans’ claims, is not very progressive. While Democrats sometimes adopt progressive stances on certain issues such as LGBTQ+ rights, racial equality, or higher taxes on the rich, none of these things make a progressive party. The Democratic Party is best described, in fact, as a coalition of various identifiers all working together (in theory) under a shared left-wing banner.
In recent decades, however, the Democratic Party has faced an identity crisis. This crisis began in the 80s, when the Republican Party adopted neoliberalism, an economic philosophy based around deregulation and market-based solutions to the world’s problems. Pressured by Republican victories, the Democrats began turning further and further right on the political spectrum.
This trend began with President Clinton, whose campaign included promises to “end welfare” and be “hard on crime.” Neoliberalism continued to hold sway in the Democratic party through President Obama’s presidency — think of the bailout of Wall Street banks after the 2008 recession.
President Biden has taken steps to distance himself with the ideology of neoliberalism. But despite increasing government spending, he has a troubled track record of siding with economic elites rather than labor. During his campaign, Biden promised donors that “no one’s standard of living will change, nothing would fundamentally change,” and last December, he sided with railway corporations to block a critical labor strike over working conditions.
Americans are increasingly and overwhelmingly dissatisfied with the direction of politics in our country. Now think about the messaging presented to American voters. Republican messaging acknowledges this feeling of dissatisfaction and channels it towards political action. Democratic messaging, meanwhile, seems to indicate a preference towards the status quo. In an era of deteriorating upward mobility and severe economic inequality, today’s Democrats give next to nothing for Americans to hope for.
The center-left is rapidly losing its identity, and both parties are unpopular in the eyes of both the general public and their own members. Currently, the Democrats coast along by being “better than Republicans.” If the Democratic Party wants to represent anything other than unpopular neoliberal politics, it needs revitalization from the left.
Unfortunately, Democratic leadership often seems to be hesitant to align their goals with the progressive arm of the party. We saw the effects of this tension in the 2022 midterms in New York, where moderate Democrats backed by party leaders lost to Republican candidates across the state.
Why the Democratic party is so hesitant to throw itself behind a progressive agenda is difficult to grasp. To understand why, we should draw a parallel between the conditions of the present day and those of the early 1930s, before the New Deal was passed.
Franklin Roosevelt originally campaigned in 1932 on a relatively moderate platform. But after coming under heavy fire from Republicans and seeing popular leftist candidates earn a combined five percent of the national vote, he decided to turn left on labor and economic issues. His ’36 platform included the establishment of Social Security, unemployment benefits, and agricultural subsidies.
This platform was, needless to say, popular. To call his reelection a landslide would undersell it. He won 61% of the popular vote and lost only eight electoral votes. It was the biggest victory in the electoral college in over a century. Its monumentality would not be contested until Reagan won in 1984. Should we be surprised by now that paradigm shifts are popular in times of discontent?
Regardless, the story sounds somewhat familiar. At a time when the Democratic Party desperately needs a stable foundation, we should be looking to the past to understand what steps can take us there.
The strengthening of government and labor was the paradigm of the twentieth-century Democrat, allowing the party to dominate the federal government for decades. Those of us on the left of the party, however, cannot assume that center-left Democrats will suddenly pass federal legislation and provide the party with a progressive paradigm.
Much like the “rebranding” of the Republican Party, the progressive turn of the Democratic Party must begin at the local level. Elections for school boards, city councils, and county offices must be priorities for the progressive left. Just as the Tea Party in the late 2000s and early 2010s emerged from regional power onto the national stage, the progressive left must similarly organize to push the Democratic Party away from neoliberalism.
Some centrist Democrats believe that progressive ideas cannot attract enough support among the general public to create such a movement. This argument falters in two regards. Firstly, this idea is not supported by polling data. Progressive policies such as Medicare for All, raising the minimum wage, and passing stricter antitrust laws are widely supported by the American public — on both sides of current party lines.
The second weak point of this argument is the presumption that “mainstream Democratic policy” is attractive to Americans. Grassroots political movements grow because of discontent with the status quo. And currently, the right has a monopoly capitalizing on this discontent.
Center-left Democrats need to recognize that the American people are unsatisfied with “business as usual” politics. Progressives need to start building the kind of local political power that makes centrists pay attention. Our country cannot improve politically, economically, or socially without a powerful left-wing party. Democrats need to work together to make that happen.
Jeremy Potter is a sophomore majoring in Political Communication.
