Shallow Commitments: Democrats Say One Thing, Do Another
In the early days of Fall last year, a well-known Democratic strategist named James Carville, who was then 80, made a bold claim in the New York Times, asserting that Kamala Harris was all set to win the presidency. Just a short while later, he shifted gears and proclaimed that ignoring Trump would be the best strategy for the Democrats. Many people genuinely questioned this strategy, considering Trump’s aggressive push for an unprecedented expansion of his executive power and his open disregard for the separation of powers that aim to keep the executive branch in check.
Carville’s proposed approach suggests a nearly blind tolerance of Trump’s march towards total disregard of democratic norms, creating an alarmingly transformative America. Alarm bells ring at the mere thought of Republicans potentially disputing a legitimate House election win by Democrats in the near future. Such an event would signal a further departure from America’s democratic principles.
Another consequence of the Democrats’ passive attitude towards Trump’s disturbing audacity has been their exposure as overtly pliant and opportunistic. Their shallow commitment to principled politics is perfectly illustrated by the muted aftermath of the Black Lives Matter protests. There were a plethora of speeches about police reform and firm denouncements of racial prejudice, but these didn’t translate into any significant change for many African Americans.
A striking instance of this occurred during Trump’s joint address to Congress. Al Green, an African American Congressman from Texas, rose in defiance, loudly protesting against Trump. Instead of standing by this bold act, a number of Green’s Democrat colleagues chose to criticize him. The irony here is that although the Democrats frequently lean on the enduring legacy of the civil rights movement, they were unable to appreciate the relevance and importance of Green’s vocal opposition in the context of our evolving society.
Harris’s running mate, Tim Walz, attracted attention recently for using down-to-earth, everyday language much like Trump, to describe Elon Musk. He referred to Musk using harsh and unfiltered expressions, showing a departure from usual political-speak. Surprisingly, the left sharply critiqued Walz for this, choosing to perceive his use of plain language as an adoption of ‘Trump’s playbook’. This reaction was another testament to the liberals’ selective indignation.
Meanwhile, the public messaging of Democrats tends to appeal to intellectualism, like Bernie Sanders’ rallying cry, ‘Fight the Oligarchy!’. However, this has had little resonance with most Americans who feel alienated by such highfalutin rhetoric. Furthermore, many Democratic supporters were dismayed at the questionable alliances formed by Gavin Newsom, a Democratic presidential contender. Newsom’s association with far-right influencers became a subject of intense liberal outrage, reflecting yet another example of their inconsistency.
Behind all these moral protestations seems to dwell a deep-rooted complacency with the existing system that perpetuates social inequalities. A case in point involved Senate Democratic minority leader, Chuck Schumer’s cancelled book tour. Blocked after Schumer’s vote for the Republican-crafted budget, the media focused on the security implications while ignoring the irresponsibility of planning such a tour amidst America’s most intense political crises.
It’s worth mentioning that Trump, a man borne of Manhattan’s audacity, can detect such a lack of authenticity from miles away. He wasn’t surprised when high-profile liberals such as Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and large corporations turned around to show their support for his regime. The flipping of loyalty from figures who once posed as symbols of liberal beliefs underscore the questionable depth of their commitment.
In an event that completely boggles the mind, Columbia University, earlier a champion of diversity and equality, bowed down to Trump’s barefaced threat of withholding federal funds. Instead of leveraging its near 14-billion-dollar endowment to defy such audacious demands, Columbia complied and even hired ‘special officers’ to police its students and faculty—a concession that unexpectedly shifted world politics by enabling Netanyahu in his controversial Gaza policies.
Traditionally, Columbia has been the birthplace of many ideological movements that have shaped American society. However, the university’s submission to Trump’s blackmail signals an unsettling change in this stance, further adding to the disarray in the liberal psyche.
Strong beliefs and the courage to stand up for them in solitude are the hallmarks of a true dissident. However, liberal righteousness often leans on group acceptance instead, revealing its inherent hollowness. This neatly explains why the wealthy and socially elevated sections of the society that largely make up the liberal base, though they ‘resisted’ Trump during his last tenure, now seem to endorse him in greater numbers.
The left continued to focus on advocating for the ‘working class’ that forms a significant voter base. But it also fails to understand that not all of Trump’s supporters are from the working class and that economic concerns aren’t the only priority for all of them. If there’s a unifying thread that binds American voters, it’s their appreciation for straightforward, sometimes brash rhetoric of the kind the liberals are often afraid to employ.
Paralyzed by the fear of being politically incorrect or upsetting established norms, liberals often fail to deliver their message in a clear and relatable manner. Having spent their lives adhering to and benefiting from the rules, they are now at a loss when confronted with an erosion of these norms. The struggle they now face is to break their inherent mold and learn to speak plainly to the masses.