The kind of progressivism that people expect from the Democratic Party has been subsumed by another politics.
By Brandan P. Buck, Responsible Statecraft
“What’s happened to the Democrats? They used to be antiwar!” Such is one of the many questions being bandied about byan online commentariat seeking to make sense of a litany of Republican endorsements of Kamala Harris, many of them made by party elites known for their hawkish foreign policy like former Wyoming Representative Liz Cheney and former Vice President Dick Cheney.
One could find similar consternation withAmerican liberals’ support for U.S. involvement in the Ukraine crisis. The confusion is based primarily on nostalgia, a selective view of history that obscures the Democratic Party’s longer, more complicated relationship with interventionism.
The reality is quite different: what we are witnessing is the latest iteration of an ongoing intraparty struggle where the dominant liberal interventionist core asserts itself over a smaller progressive noninterventionist periphery. While the latter often dominates popular conceptions of the Democratic Party and its vision for American foreign affairs, the former drives the reality of party politics.
This has been happening since the First World War, best encapsulated bythe public debate betweenColumbia professor John Dewey and one of his students, writer Randolph Bourne. While both were considered liberals of a progressive stripe, they maintained opposing views on American entry into Europe’s conflagration.
Known for his adherence to philosophical pragmatism, Dewey asserted that the war could save the world from German militarism and be used to shepherd theAmerican political economy toward a fairer, managed state. Bourne rejected this notion and argued that American entry into the war would undermine the egalitarianism of the larger progressive project and create a labyrinth of bureaucraciesthat would undermine democracy.
While Dewey’s arguments held sway as the United States entered the war, American involvement in Europe’s quarrel, compounded by civil rights abuses at home, proved Bourne posthumously correct.
Despite succumbing to the Spanish Flu in 1918, Bourne’s views of the war, bolstered by the posthumous publication of a collection of essays entitledUntimely Papers, found fertile soil in an American society horrified by the conflict. Chastened by the realities of the Western Front, interwar progressivism took on asolid strain of pacifism and opposition to centralized authority.
Recent Posts
Democrats Failed In Their Most Important Task — Defeating Trump
January 21, 2025
Take Action NowFor nine years, Democrats abandoned all else to focus on one thing: keeping Donald Trump out of office. In the process, they…
Media Organizations Must Fight Trump’s Agenda In His Second Term
January 21, 2025
Take Action NowTrump’s attacks on press freedom aren’t separate from his attacks on oppressed communities. We must resist them all.…
Where Is The Resistance 2.0?
January 20, 2025
Take Action NowThe true believers came out to the People’s March in D.C., but a mass movement against Trump 2.0 failed to materialize.……
Another World Is Already Here
January 20, 2025
Take Action NowTo see the future we want to create, we just have to look outside of our own borders.By David SwansonI hope…