The Liberal Strikes Back: Why Biden Masquerading as a Leftist Isn’t Just Inaccurate, It’s Dangerous
Since Joe Biden’s inauguration, there have been a slew of op-eds hailing (or alternately, demonizing) him for his “radical left” policies:
- From The Hill: “What’s really behind Joe Biden’s far-left swing?”
- From The Washington Post: “How Joe Biden tamed the left–at least for now”
- From Bloomberg: “Biden surprises with left-leaning policies progressives laud”
- From The Guardian: “Joe Biden is giving left parties the world over a masterclass in how to use power” with the titillating caption, “He ran as a moderate but is governing as a transforming radical. That’s not a paradox – it’s a winning method.”
Joe Biden’s so called radical leftism is a narrative that has been pushed since the 2020 primaries, with those on the right claiming he wasn’t fit to be the Democratic nominee because he embodied socialism along the likes of Bernie Sanders and those in the center claiming he was the only viable candidate and could be pushed toward more progressive policies once in office.
But Biden himself never claimed to be a progressive, always distancing himself from more progressive candidates like Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Biden ran on a message of unity and sold himself as the “safe, pragmatic” choice that voters could rely on. He posed himself as the boy from Scranton, Pennsylvania; the loyal ally to Barack Obama; the long-standing senator; the father, husband, and son; the thrice nominee who only ran to save the soul of the nation from Donald Trump. Indeed, one of his campaign’s greatest hurdles was not alienating moderates and Republicans who didn’t want to vote for Trump but didn’t want to vote for a Democrat, either. One can still conjure Biden’s direct-to-camera pleas to everyday Americans during the debates and his constant rhetoric of decency and service.
So why are people rebranding him as a leftist and what impact will it have on progressive policies?
It could be, perhaps, the media’s misguided reaction to the pendulum swinging in favor of Democrats after four years of Donald Trump. More likely, though, is it stems from a general lack of understanding of what leftism is and its erroneous conflation with American liberalism. John Broich, a professor at Case Western University, wrote for Salon before the 2020 Democratic primaries, “Voters need to understand the fundamental differences between liberalism and leftism. It’s the difference between a [liberal] candidate who believes capitalism, with just a little refereeing, will eventually provide what working people need, versus a [leftist] candidate who believes serious intervention in the capitalist economy is necessary.” Leftist framework is transformational; it reimagines our current systems to create a context in which they are not needed. Liberalism, on the other hand, works within the system in a much more conservative way.
Many of the policies Biden is being lauded for are progressive or progressive-leaning on face value, but don’t have the long-lasting, infrastructure-changing impact leftist ideology mandates. ABC News’ Jonathan Karl characterized Biden’s stimulus and infrastructure bills as “the biggest expansion of government since [Lyndon B. Johnson].” But this characterization is simply false. The Atlantic’s Adam Serwer points out, “I get why some people like this hyperbole but it’s simply false—the Biden stimulus was better than the Obama stimulus, but the [Affordable Care Act] and [Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act] were permanent expansions of the welfare and regulatory states and Biden has yet to do anything equivalent to either.”
Furthermore, in spite of the media’s coverage, Biden is on track to be one of the most conservative presidents in modern history on refugee and immigrant policy. During the campaign and shortly after his inauguration, Biden’s rhetoric and legislative promises were decidedly pro-refugee and pro-immigrant. At his first CNN Presidential Town Hall he said, “We, the United States, used to do our part. We were part of that [welcoming refugees into the country]. ‘Send me your huddled masses.’”
Biden promised to quadruple Trump’s record-low ceiling for fiscal year 2021 from 15,000 to 62,500, as well as remove Trump’s discriminatory eligibility criteria that barred nearly all refugees from African and Muslim countries from resettling in the United States. In early February, the State department submitted a report on the new ceiling and eligibility criteria only for Biden himself to never sign the paperwork. Then, on April 16, the White House announced they would keep Trump’s 15,000 refugee ceiling in direct contradiction to his earlier promises. It was only after they received intense backlash from allies and immigrant justice advocates that they walked back the announcement and said they would raise the cap by May 15.
Beyond this, immigrant detention centers continue to be in similar conditions as they were under the Trump administration with “hundreds of immigrant children and teenagers” being detained at facilities in overcrowded conditions. “Despite concerns about the coronavirus, the children are kept so closely together that they can touch the person next to them,” AP reports. “Some have to wait five days or more to shower, and there isn’t always soap available, just shampoo.”
Biden has also kept the asylum ban at the U.S.-Mexico border enacted by Trump in place, and many migrants, encouraged by Biden’s rhetoric, are paying for it. Rather than paving the way for legal migration, the Biden administration is stalling and blaming the global pandemic, saying, “[I]t’s going to take time to rebuild robust asylum processing infrastructure at our borders.” The initial asylum ban was named by many advocates as “the culmination of a deliberate, yearslong effort to reduce, or even stop, people from being able to seek refuge in the U.S.” and now the Biden administration still has offered no solution.
Despite being hailed for his ambitious climate plan, Biden has also walked back on his campaign promise to shut down the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL), which has been operating since 2017. Earlier this year, the Department of Justice found the construction of the pipeline violated federal law when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers erroneously issued permits for construction beneath the Missouri River. Since 2016, activists have been fighting to shut DAPL down due to its threat to Sioux tribal lands and the Missouri River, a key water source whose watershed includes roughly a quarter of all agricultural land in the United States. The continued operation of DAPL stands in direct opposition to Biden’s agenda to make the U.S. carbon neutral by 2035.
Michael Brune, the executive director of the Sierra Club, said about Biden’s decision, “President Biden’s actions today fail to live up to the climate and Tribal commitments he made, nor is it in line with the bold action he has taken since taking office. The climate crisis demands that President Biden and his administration seize every opportunity to confront it. Today’s decision is deeply disappointing, and we expect the courts to rightfully put an end to the Dakota Access Pipeline, just as we expect the President’s future actions to meet his rhetoric and commitments.”
Despite the election of a Democratic president into office, some of the worst atrocities of the Trump administration have still gone unaddressed. Yet the facade of progressivism has allowed many to shut the watchful eye of accountability. This “return to normalcy” is really just another imperialist administration lulling the public into a false sense of security and perpetuating the carceral state.
Biden was praised for nominating Alejandro Mayorkas as the first Latino and immigrant for Secretary of Homeland Security, yet he does nothing to substantially help immigrants and refugees. In response to the rise in anti-Asian hate crimes, he appointed Erika Moritsugu as the White House Asian American and Pacific Islander liaison, yet will likely support greater policing of AAPI communities, further upholding carceral and violent systems. Perhaps the most prominent example of face-value representation, Vice President Kamala Harris claims to speak for Black and South Asian communities, yet has a criminal justice record of being “tough on crime.” During her time as California attorney general, she championed laws that disproportionately impacted low income communities of color, appealed Orange County’s ruling that the death penalty was unconstitutional, opposed investigations of police shootings, and much more.
These appointments further display the false, face-value progressivism the Biden administration has been employing since his campaign. What’s worse is this is a strategic choice. Praising Democrats as progressives “doing the work” to lull the public into a false sense of security is a time old tactic liberal politicians have used again and again. Similar rhetoric appeared after Trump’s victory in 2016 with the slogan, “If Hillary had won, we’d be at brunch.” The idea that if only Hillary Clinton had won the election, all injustice would disappear from the country is as dangerous as it is fantastical.
Now, in 2021, we exist at a critical junction of opportunity in which Democrats have power over both the executive and legislative bodies and we must enact real change to safeguard the future. The Republican party continues to radicalize as QAnon supporters and white supremacists are elected to Congress. Somehow, Mitt Romney and Liz Cheney have become the “decent” Republicans, acting as reference points for the old school, “moderate” wing of the party.
2021 has become a record year for anti-transgender legislation with 82 anti-transgender bills introduced in legislative sessions as of March 13. 2020 was a record year for federal executions, with the government executing 10 people, the most since 1896. The World Economic Forum reported on the exacerbated effects of COVID-19 and the climate crisis in their 2021 Global Risks report. “The COVID-19 pandemic is increasing disparities and social fragmentation, in the next 3-5 years will threaten the economy, and in the next 5-10 years will weaken geopolitical stability,” they said.
Now is not a time for the status quo or a “return to normalcy,” especially when the “normalcy” in question is just the same violent, inequitable systems that have failed us time and time again. As we approach Biden’s 100th day in office, the limitations of the Democratic party have never been more clear. Not only has the administration itself failed to deliver its promises or uphold progressive agendas, Democrats in Congress are also posing road blocks for legislation that should have long passed.
Senator Joe Manchin’s (D-W. Va) staunch opposition to raising the federal minimum wage killed the effort in Congress despite two-thirds of Americans supporting it. Similarly, Senator Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) was another of the eight Democratic senators who voted against including the $15 minimum wage in the COVID relief package, despite running on the progressive politics associated with being the first openly bisexual member of the Senate, first female, and first Democratic senator from Arizona since 1995. In response to backlash from her vote, Sinema’s staff has called the criticism “sexist” for the way it commented on her body language while voting and Sinema herself has inhabited a kind of “girl boss” personality, posting a picture on social media of her drinking while wearing a ring with the words “F*** Off” clearly displayed. Rather than responding to the ideological and legislative criticism, Sinema has hidden behind performative feminist rhetoric without holding herself accountable to her constituents. Again and again, we see Democratic senators running on progressive values yet bending to conservative votes once elected, hiding behind their position and privileges and hoarding power.
These are the challenges we are facing as we wade deeper into the Biden administration. Yet despite these hypocrisies, betrayals, and pointless peacocking, many liberal Democrats are insisting we are witnessing the most radically leftist administration in recent history.
Democrats love to quote Michaelle Obama’s famous catchphrase, “When they go low, we go high.” Well, the time for moral high ground might be over. Republicans didn’t take the moral high ground when they blocked Merrick Garland’s Supreme Court nomination at the end of Obama’s term yet rushed Amy Coney Barrett’s at the end of Trump’s. They didn’t take the moral high ground when white supremacists stormed the U.S. Capitol. And they continue to abandon the moral high ground as they pass voter suppression laws to make it harder to turn states Democratic without a second thought.
Democrats finally have power. To squander that in favor of “normalcy,” “pragmatism,” and “compromise” knowing the realities of today; knowing the pain, suffering, and violence the United States has and continues to commit on a daily basis; knowing the impending and existential threat of the climate crisis; knowing the fear marginalized communities face every day; knowing the desperate need for racial, economic, reproductive, and immigrant justice; knowing all of it and still doing nothing in the face of it? Well, that is simply criminal.