Will This be Enough?
The short answer is no. The election of Harris will remove the immediate existential threat to the American Republic that Trump and Vance pose. But it will not solve America’s problems.
America faces deep structural and societal problems.
In terms of structural problems, the election of Harris will not overcome the structural impediments to greater enfranchisement. First among these is the fact America is not a democracy; it is a republic. As such its institutions have been designed to segment people and create divisions among groups. Think about the Electoral College and the Supreme Court. These are institutions that fundamentally establish, protect, and secure placement of the ruling classes – wealthy individuals, elected officials, etc. And then you have a two-party system, which serves to diminish the voice of the people by forcing nonaligned individuals to vote for predetermined individuals not representing their interests. The election of Harris will also provide some time to engage and possibly pass proposals put forth to reign in the U.S. Supreme Court, but it will not address the Electoral College or the two-party system.
In term of societal problems, the election of Harris will not address the cultural issues that divide the country – in fact, it may exacerbate them. This is due to the probability that Trump would likely disavow the election results if they don’t favor him and call for supporters to once again rise in protest. Grievances are, in large part, what define contemporary America. Unless Harris can find a way to address the grievances of people across America, unless she can find a way to mitigate the issues the underpin so much of the resentment and anger upon which Trump and MAGA supporters feed, violence and the further entrenchments of interest may well define her first term and threaten a second.
Change is threatening to people. As Fareed Zakaria has noted in his recent book, The Age of Revolutions, Progress and Backlash from 1600 to the Present, when change comes too fast, people yearn for a similar time: “As the Dutch economy ballooned, liberal ideas and practices powered the nation forward but destabilized it internally. The pace of change was so fast that many people simply wanted to return to normalcy.”13 As it was with the Dutch, so, too, do MAGA republicans turn reactionary: they believe technology and immigrants are costing them their jobs and their prospects. Trump plays into their fears to advance this own agenda. As Zakaria says, “Donald Trump sees himself as a revolutionary, but one who wants to bring back the world of the 1950s.”14 Harris must lean into one of her campaign slogans, ‘Not turning back,’ through proper rhetoric and example, as to why going back is not an option. She must reach out to and convince the Republican base that she and the Democratic party not only see but hear people who petition for resolution of their grievance.
The Age of Grievance
Why is that? Why not just rest on the laurels of victory?
Precisely because America is so divided. Prior to the assassination attempt America was almost evenly split between Democrats and Republicans, with each griping about the other’s beliefs, policies, and actions. And the
The election of Harris will remove the immediate existential threat to the American Republic that Trump and Vance pose. But it will not solve America’s problems. America faces deep structural and societal problems.
97