As we find ourselves back in Chicago, the city evokes a spectrum of political memories — from the high of Obama’s post-election speech in Grant Park to the tumultuous 1968 Democratic Convention marked by a notorious police riot. Today, as the Democrats converge once again in this storied city, the echoes of 1968 are impossible to ignore, especially with the Democratic National Convention on the horizon and the current geopolitical tensions mirroring past controversies.
Echoes of 1968:
Several parallels between today’s political climate and that of 1968 stand out:
• Both years followed the decision of a sitting president not to seek re-election — LBJ in March of 1968 and Joe Biden in July 2024.
• Each saw the Vice President step in as the Democratic Party’s official candidate.
• Both administrations were noted for significant domestic advancements yet were marred by unpopular foreign entanglements — Vietnam for LBJ and Gaza for Biden, both resulting in substantial civilian casualties and domestic and international backlash.
• In both instances, these foreign policies sparked massive protests outside the convention, challenging the Vice Presidents associated with these policies to distance themselves without alienating the administration’s base.
The Crucial Questions:
Today’s pressing questions center around Vice President Kamala Harris’s ability to navigate the complex legacy of Biden’s foreign policy decisions. Can President Biden afford to deviate from his established policies to boost Democratic chances in the upcoming election? This dilemma mirrors LBJ’s rigid stance in 1968, which ultimately constrained Humphrey until it was too late to effectively distance himself from LBJ’s Vietnam policies, contributing to Nixon’s victory under a “law and order” platform and prolonging the war.
Complex Political and Economic Interests:
The stakes are complicated by significant economic and political interests:
• The military-industrial complex stands to profit immensely from ongoing conflicts like Gaza, similar to past wars.
• Energy companies are capitalizing on supplying oil and gas to Europe amidst disruptions from traditional suppliers.
• Political influence from groups like AIPAC, aligned with Israel and Netanyahu, continues to shape U.S. foreign policy debates, making any deviation from current Gaza policies a high-risk maneuver politically.
Electoral Alternatives:
For voters disillusioned with the Democratic stance on Gaza, candidates like Jill Stein of the Green Party offer an unequivocal commitment to ending the conflict, appealing to those seeking a definitive shift in U.S. foreign policy.
A Cynical Calculus:
Behind these political maneuvers is a calculation about leveraging ordinary American voters:
• Democrats may hope robust domestic policies supporting the middle class will overshadow contentious foreign engagements.
• Republicans aim to channel voter disenchantment towards a conservative agenda focused on curtailing liberal social policies.
Navigating Troubled Waters:
If Harris cannot adeptly navigate the complex issue of Gaza, it may become a critical vulnerability, potentially leading to a scenario reminiscent of 1968. Her challenge is to chart a path that aligns with American values of humanitarian leadership and preference for peace over military intervention.
A Warning:
A victory for Harris that leads to a continuation of Biden’s policies in Gaza without significant change could feel like a profound betrayal to those who supported her while expecting a new direction.
In an electoral landscape often framed as choosing the lesser of two evils, the stakes are high, and the political waters treacherous. The decisions made now could resonate through American politics for years to come, much as they did after 1968.
