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
Is A Citizens United 2.0 Right Around The Corner?
July 15, 2025
Take Action Now Is it possible for American democracy to be further degraded by the influence of billionaires? Thanks to champion of the working…
U.S. Leaders Gave Up On Diplomacy With Iran. We Must Make Them Return To It.
July 15, 2025
Take Action Now Building an antiwar movement means preventing the systemic U.S. aggression that creates the conditions for war.By Hanieh Jodat,…
What To Do When You See ICE In Your Neighborhood
July 14, 2025
Take Action Now How can you deter the Trump administration’s immigrant deportation machine when it pops up in your community? Follow these…
ICE Campaign Of Violence Will Lead To More Deaths
July 14, 2025
Take Action Now Jaime Alanis’s death shows the horrific consequences of a secret police force behaving with utter impunity.By Natasha Lennard, The…