[Future of America Series] ② The Backlash of Identity Politics and the Future of the Democratic Party

I. Why Biden Still?

The 2024 presidential election is set to be a rematch between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump. This is the first time since the 1952 and 1956 contests between Dwight D. Eisenhower and Adlai Stevenson II that the same two politicians have faced each other in consecutive presidential elections. It is also the first time since 1912, when Theodore Roosevelt ran, that a former president is seeking a return to office. While these circumstances are not without interest, the reality perceived by American voters is quite different. In an era of extreme political polarization, the competition between two already well-known candidates has completely erased the forward-looking messages seen in past presidential elections. Furthermore, the advanced age of both candidates is also a problem. In particular, it is difficult to allay public concerns about the health of President Biden, who will be 82 this year. Why must the Democratic Party stand by and watch President Biden's re-election bid?

To answer this question, we must go back to 2004. At that time, Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry entrusted Barack Obama with the keynote address at the party convention. Obama, then a state senator from Illinois, was a novice politician running for the U.S. Senate from Illinois. With no national name recognition, Obama captivated the media and voters with his skillful oratory and message of unity in his keynote address at the Democratic National Convention. Riding this momentum, he defeated Hillary Clinton, a strong contender for the presidential nomination, in the 2008 Democratic primaries, was nominated as the presidential candidate, and ultimately won the presidency by defeating Republican candidate John McCain. Obama secured approximately 53% of the national popular vote and achieved a landslide victory, even winning Florida, known as a swing state, and Indiana and North Carolina, which were Republican strongholds. Four years later, in 2012, Obama won re-election despite numerous challenges. His national popular vote share was again around 51%, and he secured 332 electoral votes, indicating a comfortable victory.

Having produced the first African American president in U.S. history and seen him re-elected, the Democratic Party came to believe that a kind of liberal consensus had formed among American voters. They concluded that change was underway, with historically marginalized minorities actively participating in the political process. Consequently, an implicit agreement was formed to elect Clinton in 2016, aiming to produce the first female president, and to further reflect the voices of Hispanics, Asians, and LGBTQ+ individuals in politics. This assessment was influenced by the perception of demographic changes, with the white population steadily decreasing. However, the problem was that the white, working-class, high school educated demographic, once the mainstream in America, felt alienated during this process. As this group, a traditional Democratic constituency, shifted towards Trump in 2016, the plan to elect the first female president failed.

Following the unexpected defeat in 2016, the politicians at the core of the Democratic Party's power faced a difficult reality. There was no suitable candidate within the party to appease the backlash from low-income, less-educated white voters. The prominent politicians who ran in the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries were almost all individuals with weak appeal to the traditional white middle-class base. The field, composed of a Black man (Cory Booker), a Black woman (Kamala Harris), white women (Amy Klobuchar, Elizabeth Warren), an openly gay man (Pete Buttigieg), a Hispanic man (Julián Castro), and an Asian American man (Andrew Yang), could not effectively challenge Trump. Therefore, Biden, an elderly white male politician who could be seen as a regression compared to the election of President Obama in 2008, and Bernie Sanders, competed until the end, with Biden ultimately securing the presidential nomination and defeating Trump in the general election.

This dynamic persists in 2024. To win the votes of the less-educated white working class, a key demographic in the crucial swing states of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania that President Biden must win, minority or LGBTQ+ candidates are not viable. The so-called identity politics, led by progressives in the socio-cultural sphere, has currently hit a roadblock. If identity politics are emphasized, the Republican backlash will intensify, leading directly to a Democratic defeat. Biden is the politician who is barely keeping the Democratic Party afloat amidst the maelstrom of ideological conflict. While no one knows how long this situation will last, it is clear that the Democratic Party's identity, which has transformed over the past decade, requires further change.

II. The Maelstrom of Ideological Conflict

To thoroughly examine the issues surrounding the 2024 presidential election, it is necessary to understand the ideological conflicts observed in recent American society. While it is true that the stances of the Republican and Democratic parties, or Trump and Biden, differ significantly, and the rhetoric of the politicians representing each party tends to incite division and conflict, a calm discussion is needed regarding why such phenomena are frequently observed in recent American politics. At the core of this discussion lies the difference in stances on socio-cultural issues, specifically concerning race, LGBTQ+ rights, women, and immigration. While differences between the Republican and Democratic parties are also observable regarding economic and international political issues, the impact on American voters is more clearly felt in socio-cultural matters. The voices advocating for the rights of racial, gender, and sexual orientation minorities, who have long been in subordinate positions, have steadily grown over the past two decades, and the backlash against these movements is a characteristic of current American political polarization. The conflict between progressives and conservatives on socio-cultural issues is observed not only among voters but also among politicians.

1. Racial Issues

When President Obama was elected in 2008, many rejoiced at the election of the first African American president in U.S. history and expected a transition to a post-racial society. However, paradoxically, Obama's election led to an intensification of racism within American society. Firstly, there was a movement within the Republican Party to deny Obama's legitimacy as president. The sense of otherness towards Obama was considerable, to the extent that false news spread among Republican supporters during McCain's campaign that Obama was a Muslim. The backlash against Obama intensified further after his re-election in 2012. For example, the conspiracy theory that Obama was not born in the United States and was therefore ineligible to be president gained traction among Republican supporters. One of the ringleaders of this conspiracy theory was Donald Trump.

From the outset of his presidency, Obama was aware that emphasizing his race could provoke the deep-seated racial tensions in American society, and thus deliberately refrained from making race-related remarks. However, with the emergence of the Black Lives Matter movement, President Obama began to publicly voice concerns about racial discrimination in the United States. The Black Lives Matter movement, triggered by the acquittal of a Hispanic-white suspect who murdered a 17-year-old Black youth in 2012, steadily expanded its influence through incidents such as the deaths of Black individuals due to police brutality in Missouri and Staten Island, New York, in 2014; the suspicious death of a Black suspect in police custody in Baltimore in 2015; and the mass shooting at a Black church by a white supremacist in Charleston, South Carolina, in 2015.

Racial tensions escalated further after President Trump's election in 2016. Trump courted controversy in 2017 with remarks that seemed to condone white supremacists who had gathered to protest in Charlottesville, Virginia. Racial tensions reached a peak in 2020 with the death of George Floyd, an African American man, due to police brutality in Minneapolis. Trump, who styled himself as a 'law and order' president, showed little reaction to this event. Following President Biden's election in 2020, the government's perspective on racial issues changed noticeably. For instance, President Biden designated June 19th (Juneteenth), the symbolic date of the abolition of slavery, as a federal holiday in 2021. The nomination of Kamala Harris, an African American woman, as Vice President can also be understood in this context.

2. LGBTQ+ Issues

LGBTQ+ issues have recently come to the forefront of American politics. The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), signed into law by President Clinton in 1996, defined marriage exclusively as a union between 'one man and one woman.' However, some states subsequently began to recognize same-sex marriage. In 2015, the Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling (Obergefell v. Hodges), declaring that state laws prohibiting same-sex marriage were unconstitutional. While major media outlets emphasized the historical significance of this ruling, it is true that a considerable number of Americans were dissatisfied with it. Evangelical Christians, in particular, reacted against the decision.

As if in response to this backlash, the Supreme Court's subsequent actions showed a different approach. For example, in a 2018 ruling (Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission), the Court held that a baker's refusal to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, based on religious objections to homosexuality, was permissible. The reasoning was based on the individual's freedom of religion guaranteed by the First Amendment. Subsequently, in another ruling in 2023 (303 Creative LLC v. Elenis), the Supreme Court reaffirmed that actions treating same-sex couples differently, based on individual freedom, do not violate the First Amendment.

What is important to note here is the Respect for Marriage Act, passed by Congress in 2022. This law fundamentally upholds the Supreme Court's 2015 ruling that same-sex marriage is constitutional. However, Section 6 of the law, which explicitly states that it must not infringe upon an individual's freedom of religion or the autonomy of religious organizations, is particularly interesting. In essence, while same-sex marriage is constitutional at the federal level, it is permissible for individuals (or non-profit religious organizations) to treat same-sex couples differently from opposite-sex couples for religious reasons.

3. Women's Issues

The recent resurgence of the women's movement was sparked by the #MeToo movement. The phrase #MeToo began to be widely used following the revelations of sexual harassment and assault by Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein in 2017. The #MeToo movement spread beyond the film industry, encompassing the military, private companies, churches, Silicon Valley, the sports industry, and politics. Consequently, standards for sexual harassment and assault were strengthened, and gender equality education became more rigorous in political and educational institutions. However, these changes were not without resistance.

Before the #MeToo movement subsided, in 2022, the Supreme Court overturned its landmark 1973 ruling on abortion rights (Roe v. Wade) with its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. The ruling stated that the decision on abortion rights should be made at the state level, not the federal level. This led to the widespread perception that women's rights would be significantly curtailed, as many states planned to enact laws restricting the autonomy previously permitted under the 1973 ruling. Indeed, legislation is progressing in states where the Republican Party holds a majority in the state legislature to ensure more restricted abortion access. For example, in April 2024, Arizona revived an 1864 law that makes it difficult to obtain an abortion even in cases of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest, causing significant controversy. The conflict over women's reproductive rights is undoubtedly one of the key dividing lines between Republicans and Democrats, and conservatives and progressives.

4. Immigration Issues

The current U.S. immigration policy is based on the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which is known for advocating the most open immigration policy in American history. However, in the 2000s, undocumented immigrants crossing the Mexico-U.S. border began to be perceived as a social problem. While the logical approach would be to identify and deport all undocumented immigrants, their sheer numbers and the difficulty of completely sealing the border led to political efforts to seek alternative solutions. Additionally, the Bush administration attempted a more flexible approach by seeking to provide legal permanent residency to undocumented immigrants who arrived as children (1.5 generation immigrants) and grew up in the United States.

The consideration of such flexible immigration policies was politically motivated. The Bush administration sought to attract Hispanic voters to the Republican Party. The strategy was to punish adults who knowingly immigrated illegally while providing a legal pathway to permanent residency or citizenship for Hispanics who, as children, crossed the border illegally, received a U.S. public education, and lived as model citizens. This bill (The Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act: The DREAM Act) was debated in Congress for a long time but ultimately failed during the Obama administration due to opposition from conservative Republicans.

President Obama, who sympathized with the basic intent of the DREAM Act, implemented parts of its provisions through executive order (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals: DACA) after the bill failed to pass. This executive order, excluding the possibility of obtaining permanent residency for 1.5 generation undocumented immigrants, granted renewable work permits to those who met certain conditions. President Trump, who had vowed to abolish this executive order since his candidacy and attempted to do so, was blocked by the federal judiciary, and with the inauguration of President Biden, the situation remains unresolved. The Biden administration has made efforts to avoid publicly addressing immigration issues as much as possible. Nevertheless, Republican governors in strongly conservative states like Florida and Texas have officially expressed their stance on strengthening border security by relocating undocumented immigrants to immigration-friendly states like California and Massachusetts, indicating that immigration issues have the potential to escalate into a core political issue at any time.

III. The Path Forward for the Democratic Party

In summary, recent developments in the United States have seen the formation of dividing lines between Republicans and Democrats, and conservatives and progressives, based on: (1) progressive resistance to discrimination against Black individuals by law enforcement and Trump's racially charged remarks; (2) institutional efforts to guarantee the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals and conservative resistance to these efforts; (3) legal and political debates surrounding women's rights; and (4) debates concerning immigration (particularly undocumented immigrants). This situation can be broadly described as a 'culture war.'

These issues ultimately lead to fundamental questions such as 'Who is an American?' or 'What is the identity of America?' Conservatives believe that the advancement of rights for Black people, LGBTQ+ individuals, and immigrants threatens the American identity, and that the advancement of women's rights (particularly regarding abortion) threatens America's religious identity. The progressive perspective, which aims for a more inclusive identity, differs significantly.

The problem has manifested in public education. Resistance has emerged to curricula emphasizing the promotion of rights for racial minorities, immigrants, women, and LGBTQ+ individuals. For example, historical education that posits the United States was not sufficiently race-equal or gender-equal from its inception because its founders were all white men, and education suggesting that parental intervention is unnecessary because gender identity as LGBTQ+ can be autonomously formed at a young age, have become subjects of intense debate. Conservative Republican politicians have effectively leveraged this ideological conflict. Notable examples include Governor Glenn Youngkin of Virginia and Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida.

However, it remains questionable whether an overt counterattack against political correctness can be an effective election strategy. While opinion polls do show significant gaps between Republican and Democratic supporters regarding race, gender identity, and America's standing (patriotism), it cannot be denied that politicians who effectively utilized this situation have achieved some success at the state level. Whether it is an effective strategy at the national level is unclear. The fact that DeSantis, once a frontrunner in the Republican primaries, was eliminated without a fight, despite his strong stance against identity politics being his sole perceived strength, supports this concern.

The reality facing the Democratic Party today is the need to minimize the backlash generated by identity politics based on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). First and foremost, the party needs to protect itself from the backlash that arises from proactively raising socio-cultural issues. Furthermore, to win the votes of the low-income, less-educated white working class, who have emerged as the most crucial voter demographic since the 2016 election, the order of priorities must change. President Biden is a politician suited to this changing landscape. The image of an elderly white man is appropriate for dispelling the perception of the Democratic Party as a party for women, LGBTQ+ individuals, and racial minorities. Moreover, Biden's success in framing the landmark legislation passed since his inauguration (the Inflation Reduction Act, the CHIPS Act, the Infrastructure Act, etc.) in terms of benefits for the less-educated white working class is not unrelated to his image. However, it remains uncertain how long this shift in the Democratic Party's stance will be maintained. Whether this is merely a change in priorities while embracing white workers, racial minorities, and LGBTQ+ individuals, or whether one group must be sacrificed to embrace another, will require time to ascertain. Alternatively, this may be a matter that the Democratic Party must decide decisively. ■

References

Judis, John B., and Ruy Teixeira. 2023. Where Have All the Democrats Gone? The Soul of the Party in the Age of Extremes. New York: Holt.

Lilla, Mark. 2017. The Once and Future Liberal: After Identity Politics. New York: Harper.

Sides, John, Michael Tesler, and Lynn Vavreck. 2018. Identity Crisis: The 2016 Presidential Campaign and the Battle for the Meaning of America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Sides, John, Chris Tausanovitch, and Lynn Vavreck. 2022. The Bitter End: The 2020 Presidential Campaign and the Challenge to American Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

■ Ha Sang-eung_Professor of Political Science and International Relations, Sogang University.

■ Managed and Edited by: Park Han-soo_EAI Researcher

    Inquiries: 02 2277 1683 (ext. 204) | hspark@eai.or.kr