In a recent commentary, activists Xi Van Fleet and Sasha Gong have drawn parallels between the current language trends among Democrats and the tactics used during Mao Zedong’s Cultural Revolution in China. They argue that Democrats’ recent use of vulgar language is not just a misguided attempt to connect with voters but reflects deeper revolutionary strategies.
Van Fleet and Gong, both survivors of Mao’s regime, suggest that after the 2024 election, Democrats misidentified their challenges. Instead of addressing their policies or ideology, they believed their communication style was the issue. They observed that Donald Trump resonated with many voters through his blunt language and thought Democrats could regain support by adopting a similar approach.
However, the authors note that many Democratic leaders struggle to pull off this shift. They describe the awkwardness with which some lawmakers have embraced profanity, suggesting that it feels unnatural to them. This has led to public mockery, as audiences see through the insincerity of their attempts.
The authors emphasize a more troubling aspect of this trend. They recall how, during the Cultural Revolution, Mao encouraged the use of coarse language to rally the masses and suppress traditional values. In that era, vulgarity became a marker of loyalty to the revolutionary cause, while refined speech was deemed bourgeois and counter-revolutionary. This shift in language was accompanied by violence and societal upheaval.
Van Fleet and Gong argue that Democrats are mistakenly following this path. They believe that by adopting crude language, Democrats are not empowering the working class but rather trapping them in a cycle of cultural degradation. They contend that real empowerment comes from elevating language and culture, not debasing it.
The authors also critique the misconception that Trump’s appeal lies in his coarseness. They assert that his success stems from his candidness and authenticity. Trump speaks openly about issues that matter to everyday people, contrasting with the Democrats’ scripted and often awkward attempts to mimic his style.
In conclusion, Van Fleet and Gong warn that Democrats risk alienating voters further by embracing vulgarity. They argue that language has the power to uplift or destroy, and if Democrats do not change course, they may continue to harm their relationship with the very people they seek to represent.
