By Matt Underwood The DNC chair’s statement that the Trump administration is “trying to march” the US “toward full-on fascism” has sparked a wave of strong reactions, and frankly, it’s hard to disagree with the core sentiment. It’s a sentiment echoing a sense of profound frustration and a feeling that the moment for decisive action has long passed. The phrase “trying” feels like a massive understatement, a gentle tap when what’s needed is a resounding alarm bell.
The prevalent view seems to be that the march is not just underway but that the destination has already been reached or is perilously close. The consistent use of forceful language like “We are already there,” “The feet have been moving in lockstep for months,” and “We have arrived” underscores a widespread belief that the situation is far more critical than the DNC chair’s words suggest. Many feel the current state of affairs is not a gradual progression, but a precipitous slide, and that the so-called “march” is more akin to a sprint.
The timing of the statement is a source of significant ire. The criticism suggests a sense of being behind the curve, of belatedly acknowledging a reality that has been evident for a considerable time. The question is: why now? Why are these concerns only being vocalized with such apparent seriousness, given the perceived dangers and the extended period over which they have materialized? This question is not just about words, it’s about action, or the perceived lack thereof.
The lack of concrete action and the perceived softness of the response are a constant theme. The core criticism revolves around a perceived lack of urgency and a willingness to confront the situation head-on. The feeling is that the Democrats have had numerous opportunities to take decisive action, but have instead chosen a path of moderation, compromise, and, at times, inaction. The idea of “trying” feels inadequate when compared to the gravity of the perceived threat.
A recurring point is the alleged unwillingness of the DNC to fully embrace progressive candidates and policies, combined with an apparent comfort level with the status quo and, in some cases, even an implicit collaboration with forces that are actively contributing to the perceived slide into fascism. Some suggest that the party’s financial donors and the relentless focus on maintaining power have led to a reluctance to take strong stances or to fully leverage the available tools to combat the current circumstances.
The focus on the “trying” aspect of the chair’s comment is seen as a gross mischaracterization of reality, as if the movement toward fascism were a hypothetical. The sentiment is that the DNC has been slow to recognize the danger and take the necessary steps to counteract it. This frustration extends to the perceived shortcomings of the DNC’s leadership, which is criticized for being out of touch, unwilling to make difficult choices, and possibly even complicit in the current state of affairs.
The idea of not denouncing those who would seek help from those considered a threat to democracy only reinforces the perception of a party that is hesitant to take a firm stance. There are accusations of having the wrong priorities and ultimately prioritizing preserving a position in the established order rather than actively fighting against threats to democracy.
The anger extends to the perceived strategic blunders of the past, including the handling of the 2016 election and the handling of those potentially responsible for January 6th. There is also the consistent undermining of progressive candidates and policies, which is seen as a betrayal of core Democratic values. These actions, coupled with the delayed and seemingly tepid response, have fueled a widespread sense of betrayal and a belief that the party is not equipped to handle the severity of the current challenges.
There is a desperate plea for action, for leadership that is not afraid to fight for the country’s values. The response to the DNC chair’s statement is a resounding call for a fundamental change in approach, a complete overhaul of the party’s priorities, and a willingness to fight for the core values of democracy.