Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Liam Byrne, Honorary Fellow, School of Historical and Philosophical Studies, The University of Melbourne
Democratic Party delegates from across the United States will gather in Chicago for the Democratic National Convention (DNC) this week.
While the usual purpose of a convention is for delegates from around the country to confirm the party’s nominee for a presidential election, this time around, Kamala Harris has already been confirmed by a virtual roll call.
Presidential nominees these days have usually been decided through the party’s primary voting process by the time the convention arrives. As a result, modern conventions are primarily a media opportunity. It’s often where a vice-presidential candidate is introduced to a national audience and the “ticket” publicly stands together for the first time.
Conventions also help to mobilise the party and its voting base, inspiring people to volunteer, encouraging party unity and, perhaps most importantly, boosting fundraising for the campaign.
These huge events, which usually go for nearly a week, are also a rare opportunity for a party to attract a broad, prime-time audience. The nominees’ speeches are subject to a great deal of scrutiny.This means that, like presidential debates, conventions tend not to matter until they do. A good convention speech can make or break a politician’s career. At the 2004 DNC in Boston, for example, then-Senator Barack Obama’s keynote address launched his national political career. Four years later, he was the party’s presidential nominee.
This DNC is different from those past, largely due to incumbent President Joe Biden’s decision to step aside last month and endorse Harris. And Harris has already announced and started campaigning with her running mate, Tim Walz. Stability has been secured, in an unprecedented manner.
After the tensions and ruptures of recent weeks, the Democrats now need to demonstrate their unity. The fact that a national convention in Chicago is their best opportunity to do so, however, is filled with political resonance.
Chicago’s meaning for the Democratic Party.
Coincidentally, the last time a sitting Democratic president, Lyndon B. Johnson, decided not to run for a second term (in 1968), the DNC also met in Chicago to anoint his successor.
This was the last “brokered convention”, where the presidential nominee was decided by an open vote. That 1968 convention was a traumatic experience for the party, marked by turmoil inside the convention and clashes between protesters and police outside on the streets.
But Chicago has also been a site of hope and promise for the party. After all, this was where Obama, as a young Harvard graduate and community organiser, started his career in politics.
Obama became the 2008 presidential nominee following a bruising Democratic primary against Hillary Clinton. But the party coalesced around him in an ultimately successful campaign. The 2008 convention was pivotal for the party, demonstrating how it could restore unity after a period of discord.
Just a few short weeks ago, it seemed as though this Chicago convention would mirror that of 1968. But after much internal debate over Biden’s candidacy, the Democrats have coalesced behind a new chosen candidate.
So, there will be echoes of both 1968 and 2008 in Chicago this week. And knowing this history is vital to understanding the current state of the Democratic Party.
The ghosts of 1968
The 1968 Democratic National Convention came at a pivotal moment in the country’s devastating war in Vietnam.
In January of that year, the Tet offensive undermined the assurances Johnson had been giving the nation that the US was in the ascendancy and the end of the conflict was in sight. Facing mounting pressure, Johnson was challenged by anti-war candidate Eugene McCarthy in the Democratic primaries.
The strength of McCarthy’s showing in the New Hampshire primary in March rocked the party. Four days later, Robert F. Kennedy announced he was entering the contest. By the end of the month, Johnson had decided to step aside.
There were also widespread protests outside the party’s ranks – most of it targeted at the Democratic administration. The anti-war movement overlapped with students demanding greater control over their lives and American society, Black Power activists determined to resist what they considered a system of racialised violence, and the burgeoning women’s liberation movement.
Together, these groups believed there was serious decay at the heart of American political life. And for many, the Democratic Party under Johnson came to represent everything they were against.
In a year of such dramatic social upheaval and polarisation, both Kennedy and
Martin Luther King Junior were targets of political violence. After King was assassinated in April, protests and riots broke out in many cities, shaking the nation.
Months later at the DNC, protesters were waiting for the delegates when they arrived. Chicago Mayor Richard Daly was a hardened and traditional Democratic Party boss with no sympathy for the anti-war generation. His police force was empowered to quell the protests with violence if it deemed it necessary.
And they did just that. Throughout the convention, the city’s streets were consumed by protests and violence. Republicans eagerly seized upon this, promising further discord if the Democrats were allowed to continue to govern.
Meanwhile, inside the arena, the party’s bruising battles over its identity and purpose were exposed to an eager media. This included physical altercations on the convention floor.
With the strong support of the party establishment, Vice President Hubert Humphrey won the nomination – to the anger of anti-war activists. Humphrey had been anointed by party bosses without contesting a single primary, prompting changes to how the party chose its presidential nominees.
Humphrey would go on to lose the presidential election that November to Richard Nixon.
Return to the ‘windy city’
Returning to Chicago over half a century later, Democrats will be hoping for a very different outcome.
This convention will offer its own tour through the party’s history. Among the early speakers will be Biden, Obama and Bill and Hillary Clinton. The rest of the convention will mark a changing of the guard: Walz, followed by Harris.
The proceedings will most likely treat the past with respect, while also looking to the future. In that way, while avoiding shallow comparisons, the convention may seek to echo the joyful hope of Obama’s 2008 campaign.
No doubt conscious of the party’s catastrophic failure to present a realistic and compelling vision of the future in 1968, Harris and Walz will seek to contrast their vision of hope, joy and freedom with the dark tones of their Republican rivals, Donald Trump and J.D. Vance.
Haunted by 1968, Harris and her predecessors will also emphasise a message of unity. As Democrats once more return to Chicago, it remains to be seen if the homecoming will be a sweet one.
Emma Shortis is Senior Researcher in International and Security Affairs at The Australia Institute, an independent think tank.
Liam Byrne does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. Sweet home, Chicago: the Democrats return to the site of their most tumultuous convention. This time, they are united – https://theconversation.com/sweet-home-chicago-the-democrats-return-to-the-site-of-their-most-tumultuous-convention-this-time-they-are-united-236866
