The Democrats Shift Focus from the Working Class to a ‘Grievance Olympics’ Centered on Identity Politics

I have decided to part ways with the Democratic Party.

After voting for Kamala Harris, I left the party I had been affiliated with for many years, largely due to its extreme response to the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act, as I discussed in an earlier piece.

The Democratic stance on transgender rights reflects a broader issue: their adoption of a “woke” ideology.

To be woke indicates an unquestioning acceptance of the demands made by various identity groups that seek special treatment.

Historically, the Democrats were advocates for working-class individuals and labor unions. They focused on closing the gap between the wealthy and the impoverished, aiming for practical solutions rooted in class issues. Now, it seems their attention has shifted away from class entirely.

In the 1960s, Democrats rightly recognized that discrimination was a major obstacle to progress.

They proposed affirmative action, aimed at ensuring that qualifications for positions considered race, color, religion, or national origin. The intention was to create a fairer distinction among qualified applicants.

However, over time affirmative action morphed into an imprecise tool for determining hiring instead of fostering a more nuanced review of applicants’ skills, many of whom came from historically marginalized communities.

The narrative shifted from “We should hire X because both X and Y are equally qualified, and choosing X, a minority, enhances diversity” to “We should hire X based solely on her or his race or gender, even if Y is more qualified.” Critics labeled this as reverse discrimination.

Affirmative action began to prioritize group membership as a key qualification for employment.

Merit discussions became irrelevant—indeed, offensive—because any merit interpretation not favoring a group member could easily be dismissed as a form of discrimination. Each group set its own standards, primarily based on membership and internal evaluations.

Democrats claimed that any further merit discussion was an attempt by “elites” or “racists” to restore the previous discriminatory order.

This paved the way for the emergence of “identity politics.”

“Woke” transformed from a term used by people of color to signify awareness of subtle racism into a derogatory label describing a refusal to criticize or question the grievances of various groups hoping to climb the discrimination hierarchy. Such demands must be accepted by anyone identifying as “progressive.”

The Democratic Party essentially created a “Grievance Olympics,” where different groups vie to be recognized as the most victimized.

When I assert that trans ideology is misogynistic because it posits that men can define what constitutes a “woman,” and that allowing males into private spaces poses safety risks for women, I encounter significant backlash and accusations of being “transphobic.” The response is often that trans individuals face greater discrimination and thus should be prioritized over women.

Anyone claiming to have never witnessed a hiring discussion focused solely on diversity, with little regard for merit, is likely not being honest.

Having taught at universities for four decades, I have seen firsthand the negative ramifications of this focus.

I support affirmative action. Discriminating against a qualified candidate based on race or sex is unjust, and distinguishing among equally qualified candidates by considering race or sex holds merit—a viewpoint the Supreme Court has recently rejected concerning race in college admissions. However, group membership should never serve as the sole qualification.

I find the identity politics endorsed by Democrats to be damaging. Many November voters seemed to agree.

Moreover, the Democrats appear to have overlooked that in a diverse society, disagreements and potentially offensive statements are inevitable. The “progressive” viewpoint frequently advocates for speech restrictions.

Take the debate surrounding the mandatory use of “preferred pronouns” in transgender discussions. This requirement essentially compels individuals to address others in ways that may not align with their own beliefs.

Expressing legitimate concerns about immigration, for instance, leads to being labeled a “bigot” or “xenophobe,” regardless of the thoughtfulness of your argument. Questioning the woke narrative became unacceptable.

If you voice worries about how the rising obesity rates are jeopardizing national health and escalating medical costs, you’re brushed off as “fat-shaming.”

This mindset is wreaking havoc on our universities, transforming them into “safe spaces” designed to limit student exposure to conflicting ideas. Faculty members are often prompted to provide “trigger warnings” for any material that might cause discomfort.

While campuses should ensure physical safety for students, they must also encourage an environment where all perspectives are welcome.

It used to be a fundamental principle of progressive thought that the response to disagreeable speech is more speech. That notion seems to have vanished.

It’s an obvious reality that the woke mentality has stifled many voices within academic settings.

Ultimately, social justice for the Democrats has devolved into mere virtue signaling.

Instead of attempting to address the wealth gap, the Democrats have shifted focus toward trivial matters, like urging local coffee shops to adopt gender-neutral restrooms.

Working-class individuals are leaving the Democratic Party in significant numbers, feeling abandoned in favor of those who drive Priuses adorned with coexistence bumper stickers.

While coexistence and climate change are crucial issues, they won’t be significantly advanced by bumper stickers. There are also pressing issues like economic disparity and class that the Democratic Party once addressed but has noticeably neglected.

Consider this: West Virginia was one of only six states to support Jimmy Carter in 1980. In contrast, Donald Trump won 70% of the vote in the Mountain State in the recent election.

The Democratic Party has turned its back on working individuals, and as a result, they have walked away from the party.

For the Democrats to regain support, they need to adopt a more inclusive understanding of what being “woke” truly means—being aware of the needs of all citizens, not just those who are the most vocal in the Grievance Olympics.

Gary L. Francione is Board of Governors professor emeritus at Rutgers University Law School. His latest book is “Why Veganism Matters: The Moral Value of Animals.”