A leftist friend told me during the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries that being a Democrat felt like being in an abusive relationship. And indeed, as leftists, our electoral battles with Democrats end in wailing and gnashing of teeth. It all arises from how we situate ourselves with respect to the Democratic Party.
But we can redefine our relationship with Democrats. In doing so, we will not only relieve our distress, but also position ourselves to build meaningful, sustained power.
I’ll start by sketching a false assumption that drives leftist electoral strategy. Rejecting this assumption frees us to build a more productive relationship with Democrats. And with that relationship in place, we can organize with clear purpose.
Leftist Electoralism
The false assumption arises from the fact that many leftists identify as progressives. They do so as a matter of course. But this identity draws on a deep history, and it’s not a history favorable to the left.
Bernie Sanders and others used the ‘progressive’ label in Vermont as early as the 1970s as a more palatable word for ‘socialism.’ ‘Socialism’ calls to mind the horrors of Stalinist gulags, especially when grandma hears it. ‘Progressive,’ on the other hand, is a word you can proudly take home to her, delighting her with childhood memories of the quasi social democracy of FDR and LBJ.
Strategically, leftist electoralists seek to build a left-liberal coalition to win a majority within the Democratic Party. They’d thereby rather save the party from the shitlibs than replace it. This was the vision of Michael Harrington, early leader of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). And no matter how many times DSA exorcises the demon of Harrington on Zionism, it still dances with the devil in its electoral strategy.
The strategy has had its successes. It sat at the heart of the Sanders presidential campaigns of both 2016 and 2020. While Sanders failed to win the presidential nomination, he took the left-liberal coalition to new heights. He changed the platform and composition of the Democratic Party. And his work led to the initial explosions in DSA membership that made it the largest socialist organization in U.S. history.
Furthermore, DSA continues to increase its reach, culminating (for now) in the election of Zohran Mamdani as mayor of NYC, Janeese Lewis George as future mayor of Washington DC, and House primaries in multiple states.
But leftist electoralists premise these electoral strategies – inherited all the way from Harrington to Mamdani – on building power within the Democratic Party. They assume a set of shared values between leftists and progressive Democrats, as well as a lack of leftist base from outside the Democratic Party. To them, there’s gold in the Democratic Party and nothing but hopelessness and despair in the wilderness.
Leftist and Progressive Goals
Let’s return to that assumption I mentioned at the outset.
Leftist electoralists assume that the left shares with progressives the same ultimate political goals. Sanders put the term ‘progressive’ to good use, but he failed to note progressives’ diametric opposition to the left on core issues.
As leftists we want a world that puts people at the center of their own lives. In the short term, we want a social democratic program that includes Medicare for All, mixed-income social housing, free college, and a jobs guarantee. Ultimately, we want a world where we extend democracy from politics to the entire economy.
This requires a party that working people join and lead.
But progressives don’t believe in much of that. They agree with us from time to time on policy. But they believe in government by experts that maintains the underlying system of capital accumulation. Progressives don’t want a party led by workers, and they don’t care about putting people in charge of their own lives.
That has been the progressive way for a century, dating to Woodrow Wilson on the Democratic side and Theodore Roosevelt on the GOP side. And the history of progressivism haunts its current iteration, and it frustrates the progressive identity of leftist electoralists. Yes, its modern practitioners drop the racism. But they keep the anti-socialist implications in their platforms and political visions.
Democrats show their progressive values by calling on unions to supply door knockers and phone bankers. With these values, they also support technocratic fixes and redistributive policies that help working people at the margins. But they’re not interested in changing who owns and manages the country’s wealth. Progressives see working people as the recipients of charity and nobless oblige, not potential party leaders and the core of a democratic society. They’re a nut to be cracked or a problem to be solved.
Working people, of course, understand all this. It sits at the core of why so many hate the Democratic Party. And it’s why our goals, as leftists, are fundamentally different from those of Democrats, even those who fly the progressive flag.
The Cowardly Democrat?
Some leftist electoralists wave this off. They think Democrats in office really want they same things they do. With a sustained majority, Democrats would push for social democracy. They’re just too cowardly to fight for their beliefs. Instead, they turn chicken, terrified of the all-powerful moderates they’ve offended with their visionary ideas.
We can find this view mucking up the pages even of outlets I enjoy reading, such as Current Affairs and Jacobin.
Of course, the reasoning of these hypothetical cowardly Democrats fails. Medicare for All is no less popular than targeted, means-tested Democratic health care ideas that few understand or benefit from. Mixed-income public housing is no less popular than an unworkable UBI plan or the latest idea from Elizabeth “Willy” Warren’s wonk factory. Candidates who speak plainly and fight for social democracy fare no worse than ones who sound like Chuck Schumer.
The deeper problem is that the progressive base is rife with radlibs who use the lingo (e.g., ‘abolition‘) but whose politics will never move beyond a redistributive liberalism that leaves in place the basic structure of the economy.
The Democrats, then, aren’t so cowardly after all.
In fact, they reflect the will of their base. And so, far from being fooled by consultants, elected Democrats understand their voters. Many of their voters are upper middle class progressives doing well in today’s economy. They prefer symbolic politics, culture war, and labels over substantive social democracy.
What if the Democratic Party Really Is a Capitalist Party?
Here’s a more helpful way for us to think about the Democratic Party, as leftists. What if Democrats in office do politics this way because that’s what they actually believe? And what if we believe them when they tell us they’re capitalists?
What would that get us?
Let’s suppose Democrats reject Medicare for All in favor of health care savings accounts for BIPOC veterans in target zip codes who fill out their paperwork in triplicate. When they do so, we’ll know (accurately) that this is the policy they want. When they vote for war, we’ll know (accurately) that they support war. And when they pander to flannel wearing dudes in big trucks who cosplay as working people instead of promoting actual working people into leadership, we’ll know (again, accurately) that’s what they want, too.
As leftists, we all remember the video of Nancy Pelosi asserting that the Democratic Party is a capitalist party. It offended many leftist electoralists. They heard it as ‘we’re too cowardly to admit that we actually want social democracy, so we’re pretending to be a capitalist party until our consultants tell us it’s OK to come out.’
But that’s not what the video showed. Pelosi said they’re a capitalist party, because…they’re a capitalist party.
She told the truth. They don’t want socialism, or even social democracy.
Democrats – even progressive ones – oppose socialism for lots of reasons. For one, it involves working people far too much for their tastes. They’re a party of professionals and experts. They want a policy slate that preserves capital accumulation and growth, but redistributes the proceeds to those not as well off.
And this policy preference unites Democratic officeholders with their progressive base. Democrats in office target these ideas at the same liberal, highly educated people from the upper middle classes that leftist electoralists are trying to put into a left-liberal coalition.
It works at the margins, yes. In cycles like 2026, we’ll even win a few House primaries. But it will always run into a short glass ceiling.
Toward a Healthier Relationship
I sympathized with my friend in the abusive relationship with the Democratic Party. But, upon reflection, I concluded that she followed the same flawed reasoning as leftist electoralists. And she ended up at the same place – the same state of distress.
There’s a better way.
As leftists, we should change how we think about Democrats and reorient our relationship with their party accordingly. For starters, we should stop thinking of ourselves as Democrats. Ultimately, they don’t want the same things as us. Doing this will allow us to maintain flexibility to work either inside or outside of their party as needed.
So, what’s blocking us from taking these reasonable steps?
The assumptions we discussed above, of course. Plus, leftist electoralists also fear for their electoral gains, especially in 2026.
But they need to balance their electoral prospects against the risks of going all-in with progressives on a left-liberal coalition. For one, it damages their credibility with working people of all ages and races – a population much larger than progressives. These folks don’t care for either the Democratic Party or its progressive wing.
And so, we need to think more broadly about how we put together a coalition, careful not to isolate ourselves to progressives deeply distrustful of working people and removed from the experiences of most Americans.
How to Deal with Democrats
So, how should we deal with Democrats?
We should deal with them honestly, fairly, and with eyes wide open. We should accept that they have views different from ours, and that we’re not part of the same political movement as them. And we should stop voting blue no matter who.
We should deal with Democrats the same way we (should) deal with anyone who disagrees with us – by having an open conversation, putting our views on the table, listening to their views, and clarifying what they need to do to win our votes.
For me, the price of my vote in a federal election is clear. I expect the candidate to support Medicare for All, and I expect the candidate to have at least a minimally non-ghoulish foreign policy. That’s it. And if they don’t meet this standard, I don’t vote for them. Period. No excuses.
I never identify as a Democrat, consider myself a Democrat, or root for their party like it’s the hometown sportsball team.
This creates space for a healthier relationship with the Democratic Party. Others should try it.
Leave a Reply