The Youth Are Watching: Can Democrats Reclaim Populism Before It’s Too Late?
A socialist’s win and a political murder aren’t isolated—they echo moments in U.S. and world history when stalled reform led to rupture.
Something is stirring in American politics—something old, something hopeful, and something dangerous.
A young democratic socialist just won a major mayoral primary in New York City.
Only days earlier, the speaker of the Minnesota House and a champion of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, was assassinated by a Christian nationalist extremist.
To many, these events may seem disconnected. But together, they mark a crossroads for American democracy.
One road leads to deeper division and reactionary backlash. The other opens a path toward renewal—through a revival of populist values that once united urban renters and rural farmers, workers and reformers, under a shared dream of fairness and dignity.
Today’s politically-engaged youth aren’t radicals, but they can be radicalized.
History books are filled with moments when governments ignored the pain of a generation, and chaos followed.
Right now, young Americans aren’t demanding revolution—they’re asking for recognition. They're asking for jobs, healthcare, climate action, debt relief, and a livable future.
In short: they want a party that gives a damn about them, and shows it.
Can progressives offer that?
Mixed Signals
The Democratic Party has spent years wringing its hands over how to win the youth vote. Zohran Mamdani’s mayoral primary victory in NYC, driven by energized Gen Z voters and renters, should be a wake-up call.
It’s not that young people are apathetic—they are deeply engaged. They simply aren't interested in the centrist, incrementalist politics that much of the Democratic establishment has desperately clung to… out of the (very real) fear of alienating swing voters.
It’s fair to acknowledge why some Democratic leaders hesitate to embrace a bolder leftward pivot.
The youth vote, while more progressive than older cohorts, is not a monolith.
According to the NPR youth vote breakdown, support for Donald Trump among voters under 30 increased slightly between 2020 and 2024.
In particular, younger men—and especially younger men of color—were more likely in 2024 than in 2020 to vote Republican or to report disillusionment with both parties.
Democratic strategists worry that if they lose moderate or swing voters in the process of appealing to the left, they may find themselves without enough electoral ground to win at the national level.
This Time It May Be Different
Despite all this, there’s reason to hope NYC’s mayoral primary was not a one-off event, but a bellwether. Bernie Sanders' campaigns proved that bold, left-of-center policies resonate with younger Americans.
Recent polling supports this:
Pew Research (April 2024): “In the 2024 election, voters aged 18–29 supported the Democratic candidate by a margin of 11 points. 45% identified as Democrats, compared to just 26% as Republicans.”
Tufts University – CIRCLE: “Among voters aged 18–34, a majority leaned Democratic, with strong enthusiasm around economic justice, climate change, and gun reform.”
YouGov/Cato (March 2025): “53% of Gen Z adults say they support more socialism.”
Harvard Youth Poll / NPR Summary (Spring 2025): “Young people are driven by economic stressors: mental health, housing, inflation, and climate. These are more influential than party ID.”
Axios Analysis (June 2025): “Americans under 30 still lean Democratic overall, with particularly strong support from older Gen Z voters (22–29). The exception: younger Gen Z men, some of whom shifted toward Trump.”
These figures show that not only do young Americans skew progressive in ideology, but they also turn out—and vote—on those values.
They're a politically engaged cohort seeking bold, left‑of‑center solutions, not centrist moderation.
We’ve Been Here Before: Prairie Populism and the Farmer-Labor Legacy
There’s a historical precedent we can learn from. It didn’t come from elite urban think tanks, but from the plains.
The Prairie Populists of the late 19th and early 20th centuries—and their descendants in the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party—believed in taking on corporate monopolies, defending working people, and building community wealth.
They weren’t Marxists or revolutionaries. They were working people who were on the losing end of the industrial age and demanded economic dignity.
It’s a bitter coincidence that Melissa Hortman—a leader in Minnesota’s Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party—was assassinated just days ago, introducing many Americans to her party’s name for the first time.
Her death casts a shadow over a legacy born from the Prairie Populists—one not only left unfinished, but now under direct threat.
She was targeted by a perpetrator reportedly motivated by Christian nationalist ideology.
Her death highlights the growing tension between those advocating pluralistic, progressive reforms and those who view such movements as existential threats to their cultural or religious identities.
Why the Label “Socialist” Still Sparks Fear
One of the biggest barriers to progress is a lingering Cold War-era fear of the word "socialist."
The GOP has spent years branding every left-of-center policy—from universal preschool to tax reform—as "communist."
To be clear: Marxism and democratic socialism are not the same.
American socialists advocate democratic — not corporate — control of public services. The interstate highway system, well-funded public schools, and solvent social security are familiar examples of this type of common good.
Single-payer healthcare, if we had it, would be another.
The focus of our democracy would return to the individual, versus the corporation. Billionaires would once again pay higher tax rates than their employees.
Democratic socialists don’t want state control or ownership of private assets—that would be Communism.
Because civics education in the U.S. has long been underfunded, many Americans never learned the distinctions between socialism, democratic socialism, and communism.
This is why right-wing politicians and pundits can throw these terms upon any progressive move without significant pushback.
This public confusion persists, despite the fact that millions of Americans have traveled to or lived in countries like Canada, the UK, Australia, and much of Europe, where democratic socialist or social democratic parties routinely participate in government without undermining democratic institutions or individual freedoms.
But this can change.
The success of leftist candidates like Mamdani shows that these labels don’t scare young voters anymore.
It’s time for older generations—and party leaders—to catch up.
Examples from Russia on the Danger of Ignored Reform
History shows what happens when real reform is promised but then reversed. Let’s look at history for a moment.
Czar Alexander II of Russia, known as the "Czar Liberator," enacted sweeping reforms—most notably the emancipation of the serfs in 1861.
But these reforms, while monumental, did not go far enough to satisfy a restless population hungry for greater political and social change.
Frustrated revolutionaries ultimately assassinated him in 1881. His son, Alexander III, repealed many of his father’s reforms, which inflamed the nation even more.
The result? Violent revolution, the overthrow of the monarchy, and eighty years of brutal repression under Communist dictatorship.
Germany in the 1930s saw another kind of radicalization. Communists and Nazis fought in the streets, fueled by economic despair and political betrayal.
In this case, the radical right won. But the tragedy is that both left and right-wing youth were radicalized—and the political center offered no meaningful vision.
The parallels aren’t perfect, but the warning is clear.
If America continues to ignore or roll back hard-won reforms—from abortion rights to student debt relief—we risk radicalizing the next generation.
And if gentle revolution is denied, violent upheaval may follow.
Rural America: The Forgotten Powder Keg
As many readers already know, rural America has suffered decades of neglect. While both parties share responsibility, one has clearly benefited: the GOP. Republicans have capitalized on this vacuum—not only electorally, but culturally.
Though recent legislation like 2021’s Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act included rural provisions, most rural voters are unaware of them.
Democrats have largely failed to communicate their accomplishments often simply failed to show up.
Organizationally, the Democratic Party has withdrawn from much of rural America.
Local infrastructure has collapsed, candidates often go uncontested, and millions of rural Americans now perceive the party as absent—or worse, as un-American.
As Meagan Day argues in Jacobin, this has created a vacuum the GOP has eagerly filled. Their candidates now often run unopposed, and their message has become synonymous with rural identity.
Over time, the Republican Party has rebranded itself as the party of “real America”—non-metro, working-class, and culturally conservative. This identity politics has proven powerful.
“Millions of rural voters now find themselves represented in state and national legislatures by Republicans who won election without facing organized opposition by Democrats.” — Meagan Day, Jacobin
It doesn’t have to be this way. The same populist energy that once built the New Deal coalition is waiting to be reignited—if Democrats recommit to showing up, organizing year-round, and delivering tangible results.
The Path Forward: Hope, Not Fear
The youth are eager for a direction, and ready to engage. The populist legacy is alive. The moment holds promise, but only if progressives lead with conviction.
If it wants to shape the future, the Democratic party should:
Embrace its progressive roots
Reclaim populism as a force for justice, not demagoguery
Invest in rural America as a moral and political priority
Teach the public the true history of socialism, populism, and reform
Above all, Democrats must stop being afraid of speaking boldly about progressive values.
Young voters want courage, clarity, and a vision of the future worth working toward.
The alternative is bleak. If we allow a fail to move forward with reforms, or allow progress to be rolled back with the stroke of a pen, we invite chaos—from the left, the right, or both.
But if progressives listen, invest, take courage and lead boldly, we can build a new coalition rooted in dignity, equity, and populist hope.
Let this moment be a beginning, not a warning unheeded.
If you found hope in this piece, please share it.
Hello, Enthusiast! I’m a former military intelligence analyst turned nonprofit lifer—with two decades in housing, crisis response, recovery services, disability support, and mental health advocacy. The G.I. Bill funded my M.Div., which I used to study world religions and contemplative practice.
If you’re feeling flush, please consider tossing a coin into the tip jar. Many thanks, my friend!