The Democratic base is fed up with a system that gives inordinate power to the wealthy and to large corporations.
Recently, there have been numerous alarmist reactions following the success of socialists and other left-leaning candidates over “moderates” in several key Democratic primaries. The concerns intensified this month when Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive Senate hopeful in Michigan, triumphed over Rep. Haley Stevens, described by the New York Times as “the moderate establishment-backed candidate.”
The comforting “moderate” tag is frequently applied to figures like Stevens, who have consistently supported ongoing military aid to Israel. According to the Times, she “benefited from about $62 million in advertising spending from half a dozen outside groups,” with “over half of that sum” coming from the super PAC of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, one of the most powerful pro-Israel entities in the nation.
What in the world is “moderate” about endorsing genocide?
Politicians are also labeled “moderate” when they shield severe income inequalities and deadly disparities in healthcare, while obstructing widely supported policies such as raising taxes on the wealthy and Medicare for All, which three-quarters of Democrats endorse.
The Democratic grassroots has grown weary of a system that bestows overwhelming authority on the affluent and corporate giants. In reality, those branded as “moderates” often support policies that sustain widespread hardship and avoidable deaths both domestically and internationally.
Veteran party operatives like James Carville and Paul Begala portray progressive candidates as deceiving Democratic voters. Early this month, Carville threatened to quit the party, while Begala made news by stating, “I don’t like the socialists. I can’t stand them.”
However, a recent CNN poll revealed that “about a third of Democrats and Democratic-leaning adults identify as democratic socialists.” At a critical juncture where defeating the fascistic Republican Party is essential, any strategy aiming to dismiss or exclude those voters is politically reckless.
Viewing a large portion of the Democratic electorate with disdain might appease corporate financiers but runs counter to prevailing political trends. Polls indicate that younger Democrats tend to have more favorable opinions of socialism. The Pew Research Center reported that “younger adults are more likely to be in groups on the left, while older adults tend to cluster in more conservative groups.”
Using data from a recent survey by Global Strategy Group, it was recently noted that “socialist Democrats skew younger, with 57 percent of them being between the ages of 18 and 44.” Additionally, a poll conducted last month by Tufts University’s Center for Information and Research found that two-thirds of young people reported some shift in their political views in recent years, and those who changed were nearly twice as likely to have become more liberal or progressive rather than more conservative.
As leftist and socialist candidates win numerous prominent contests, the disapproving comments from some in the Democratic Party leadership are increasingly futile. Since young voters represent the party’s future, alienating or denigrating them only weakens its chances in upcoming elections.
Many young Democrats hear criticism of their voting choices from party elders who seem disconnected and treat critical challenges as mere abstractions or rhetorical gestures. Millions of young Americans grapple with financial insecurity and a dim employment outlook. The cost of college is often prohibitive, and student loans burdensome. Housing expenses continue to soar, and everyday costs pose serious hardships. The climate crisis looms as an undeniable threat.
These hard truths darken any hope for the future. Above all, these voters reject condescending leadership unwilling to acknowledge the urgency of today’s political landscape.
Original article: www.commondreams.org
About the Author
