As cruelty, vindictiveness, and habitual lying rapidly reestablish themselves as the only “political norms” in the authoritarian hellscape that is the unfolding Trump 2.0 era, it is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore another uncomfortable reality: the Democratic Party isn’t the principled opposition or the engine of progress it claims to be—it’s an aging institution, drifting on inertia in a system that no longer relies on it for anything beyond keeping up appearances. Its irrelevance isn’t necessarily the result of incompetence or conspiracy, but something even more insidious: the inevitable outcome of a political structure where real power resides in corporate boardrooms and lavish fundraising events for wealthy donors, not legislative chambers. The Democrats’ function has become, intentionally or otherwise, to preserve the illusion of choice, offering symbolic public gestures of “resistance” to Trump in grand speeches and repetitive fundraising emails while privately falling in line with the new regime. Consider Senator Tim Kaine’s vote to confirm Kristi Noem, a figure emblematic of right-wing extremism, as Secretary of Homeland Security. The public backlash was immediate, yet Kaine remains silent—because he can. Meanwhile, the party clings to outdated tactics: corporate-speak fundraising emails, exclusive donor events that feel more transactional than political, and door-knocking campaigns that often alienate more than they mobilize. They win elections, sometimes. They hold office, occasionally. What they do not do is fundamentally shift the landscape—not because they’re incapable, but because they have become beholden to the system’s continued operation, even when that system edges closer to the brink of constitutional collapse and dictatorship.
I. The Illusion of Opposition
The foundational myth of American democracy rests on the premise of two competing ideologies: liberalism versus conservatism, Democrats versus Republicans. However, the veneer of this dichotomy has been wearing thin for decades. The election of Joe Biden in 2020, following the chaotic and authoritarian leanings of Donald Trump’s first term, was heralded by many as a restoration of democratic norms. Yet, Biden’s presidency exposed the hollow core of the Democratic establishment. Despite controlling the White House, the House, and the Senate (albeit narrowly), the party failed to pass significant reforms on healthcare, voting rights, climate change, and police accountability—issues that had galvanized millions during the Trump years.
The failure to codify Roe v. Wade, despite years of warnings about its precarious standing, epitomized the party’s impotence. When the Supreme Court overturned Roe in 2022, Democratic leaders like Nancy Pelosi responded with performative gestures—quoting poetry, sending out a barrage of fundraising emails, and urging voters to “just vote harder,” as if the problem were civic apathy rather than systemic rot. This response laid bare an uncomfortable truth: the Democratic Party does not function as an opposition party because, at its core, it fundamentally agrees with the Republican Party on the structures that govern American life. Their conflicts are theatrical, designed to create the illusion of choice, while both sides work within a framework that prioritizes corporate interests and maintains the status quo.
II. The Neoliberal Consensus: A Bipartisan Project
The post-Cold War era cemented neoliberalism as the dominant economic ideology in the United States. Bill Clinton’s presidency in the 1990s marked the Democratic Party’s full embrace of free-market capitalism, deregulation, welfare reform, and mass incarceration. The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999, championed by Clinton and his Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, dismantled the separation between commercial and investment banking, setting the stage for the 2008 financial crisis.
Barack Obama’s ascent to the presidency in 2008 promised hope and change amid the wreckage of neoliberal policies. Yet, his administration did nothing to undo the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and continued to bail out Wall Street while leaving Main Street to fend for itself. Key figures like Timothy Geithner and Rahm Emanuel prioritized stabilizing the financial system over addressing the needs of ordinary Americans. The Affordable Care Act, while a significant legislative achievement that expanded Medicaid to provide insurance to millions of poor Americans, also entrenched private insurance companies’ control over healthcare rather than challenging the for-profit model.
By 2024, the Democratic Party had fully internalized its role as the manager of capitalism with a human face. Figures like Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, and Kamala Harris, Vice President, embodied a technocratic, corporate-friendly approach that prioritized efficiency over equity. The party’s leadership was less concerned with systemic change and more focused on maintaining the status quo with superficial reforms. They became a sort of GOP-lite, and the election results reflected the lack of appetite for such a pointless creature.
III. The Culture Wars as a Distraction
In the absence of meaningful economic policy differences, the Democratic Party leaned heavily into cultural liberalism to distinguish itself. Issues like diversity in corporate boardrooms, symbolic gestures of inclusion, and identity politics became central to the party’s messaging. While these issues are not inherently trivial, they often served as a veneer, deployed to distract from the party’s consistent failure to address material conditions and systemic inequalities.
For example, during the 2020 protests following George Floyd’s murder, Democratic leaders in Congress donned Kente cloths and kneeled in solidarity—a gesture that garnered headlines but did nothing to confront systemic police violence or advance tangible reforms. At the same time, Democratic mayors like Eric Garcetti in Los Angeles and Lori Lightfoot in Chicago oversaw aggressive police crackdowns on protesters, starkly contradicting the party’s performative displays of allyship. This reliance on symbolic gestures over substantive policy changes became a hallmark of the party’s strategy, revealing a deep-seated preference for optics over outcomes.
IV. The Donor Class and Corporate Capture
The Democratic Party’s superfluity is also a product of its deep entanglement with the corporate donor class. Politicians like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema exemplified this dynamic, blocking key parts of Biden’s agenda while maintaining lucrative relationships with industry lobbyists. However, the problem extends beyond individual bad actors. The entire party infrastructure is designed to be responsive to corporate interests, from Silicon Valley to Wall Street.
Campaign finance reform, once a rallying cry for Democrats, has been largely abandoned. The party relies on the same dark money networks and Super PACs as Republicans. This dependence ensures that any policy threatening corporate profits, such as Medicare for All or the Green New Deal, is dead on arrival.
V. The Role of the Media in Sustaining the Illusion
Mainstream media, often criticized as “liberal,” plays a crucial role in perpetuating the myth of Democratic relevance. Outlets like CNN and MSNBC frame political discourse around horse-race coverage and personality-driven narratives rather than substantive policy debates. For example, CNN’s relentless focus on Donald Trump’s every tweet during his first presidency amplified his messaging without critically engaging with the underlying policies. Similarly, MSNBC’s obsession with the Russia investigation dominated airtime from 2017 to 2019, sidelining coverage of issues like healthcare reform and economic inequality. The network’s coverage of figures like Pete Buttigieg often focuses on his persona as a polished, articulate technocrat, while glossing over his ties to corporate donors and lack of substantive policy proposals. This focus creates the illusion of fierce partisan conflict while obscuring the bipartisan consensus on key issues like military spending, surveillance, and economic policy, as seen in the largely uncritical reporting on record-breaking defense budgets passed with overwhelming support from both parties.
VI. Conclusion: A Party Without a Purpose
The Democratic Party of 2025 is superfluous not because it has failed to achieve its goals, but because it has no goals beyond self-preservation within a system that no longer requires its active participation. It serves as a political brand rather than a movement, a placeholder that absorbs progressive energy and channels it into dead-end electoral contests.
In the absence of genuine leftist opposition, the Democratic Party functions as a stabilizing force for a system in crisis. Its continued existence depends on its ability to perform the role of the loyal opposition without ever truly opposing the structures that sustain American capitalism and imperialism. In this way, the party is not a failure—it is performing exactly as the system requires: superfluous by default.