Can Democrats Seize the Crisis?
A New Governance Model to Win the Fourth Turning
History Doesn't Repeat Itself, but It Often Rhymes
— Mark Twain
We are living through a moment of profound historical reckoning — not just politically, but culturally, economically, and spiritually. According to the Strauss–Howe generational theory, we’re in the Crisis Turning, a period where old institutions collapse and new ones must rise from the rubble. In every such turning in American history - from the Revolution to the Civil War to the Great Depression and World War II - the party that emerges dominant is the one that offers a compelling, coherent vision for a new order.
Right now, the Democratic Party is not that party. Democrats Must Choose Between Evolution and Extinction. And there’s reason for hope - if we're willing to face some uncomfortable truths.
What’s Working (Sort Of)
Let’s start with the good news: At each previous Fourth Turning, the more progressive wing of American politics has won the ideological battle. FDR’s New Deal redefined governance during the last great crisis. The Progressive movement before it reshaped labor and anti-trust policy. Even the Whigs/Republicans under Lincoln laid the groundwork for modern federal power. These weren’t just policy shifts - they were philosophical revolutions.
Today, Democrats have taken modest steps toward addressing systemic problems like monopolies, bureaucratic inertia, and regulatory capture. They’ve begun talking about housing affordability, tech regulation, and rebuilding supply chains. But these are still incremental fixes - bandages on a system that needs open-heart surgery.
Where We’re Losing Ground
Now the bad news - and there’s a lot of it.
First, the Democratic Party is not fundamentally changing how we govern. Proposals around YIMBYism1 and border enforcement are tactical adjustments, not strategic transformations. They don’t answer the deeper question: What does 21st-century governance look like?
Meanwhile, MAGA Republicans may be winning the short-term narrative - but their model is built entirely around Donald Trump’s personality cult. There’s no durable philosophy beneath it. That’s both a weakness and an opportunity. Yet, if Democrats don’t offer a bold alternative, disillusioned voters will default to whatever feels decisive - even if it's authoritarian.
Even scarier: figures like Josh Hawley and Peter Thiel are already articulating a post-democratic model - one rooted in nationalism, corporate paternalism, and elite-driven governance. If they succeed in framing this as the next era’s dominant paradigm, Democrats could find themselves outflanked and out-thought.
The Path Forward (If We Dare)
To win this turning, Democrats need to do what FDR did: invent a new governing model that doesn’t just tweak the system but redefines it.
This means moving beyond a checklist of policies and building a unifying framework - one that answers the existential questions of our time:
How do we restore faith in institutions without clinging to broken ones?
What should the government be responsible for, and to what degree?
And how do we make it effective & efficient?
How do we empower citizens while reclaiming the state from corporate capture?
How do we rebuild community in a digital world that atomizes us?
The answers can’t be a mishmash of climate plans, optimized regulatory review, and healthcare tweaks. Those are necessary - but insufficient. We need a new social contract, forged in the fire of crisis.
That might mean embracing radical decentralization of certain powers while strengthening federal oversight in others. It might mean rethinking citizenship, civic service, and economic participation. It might mean confronting the fact that our current political structure was designed for a pre-hi-tech society - and it’s showing its age.
Why This Is So Hard
Because here’s the truth: A real transformation would alienate much of the current Democratic leadership. It would challenge donors, technocrats, and institutionalists who see politics as a game of optimization, not reinvention.2 It would demand courage, clarity, and a willingness to lose some battles now in order to win the war.
The zeitgeist is shifting. The Force is restless. Republicans are betting on division and control; Democrats can bet on connection and empowerment. But it’ll take courage - a willingness to sell a model that feels uncomfortable, even scary, to the party’s old guard. If they do, they could lead America into a new era, not just winning elections but defining the next three generations.
But if Democrats fail to lead this turning, they’ll become the minority party for decades - just as Republicans were after FDR, when even GOP presidents had to accept the New Deal as the new baseline.
Final Thought
History is accelerating. The Fourth Turning isn’t a metaphor - it’s a structural reality. And the party that defines the next era will shape America for generations.
Democrats still have time. But not much.3
We need to stop asking “What policies poll well?” and start asking “What kind of country do we want to build?”
Only then can we begin to answer the most important question of all:
Will we lead the future - or be buried by it?
Yes In My Backyard
FDR didn’t just pass policies; he rewrote the rules of governance, creating a system that empowered workers, rebuilt trust, and dominated for decades.
If we look at history, the new paradigm will be largely accepted by 2030.
Full disclosure: I am a conservative-leaning "soft" libertarian, 0 for 3 voting for Trump, and sympathetic to many liberal causes.
I have said many times that the party that puts forth a compelling vision of the future first wins. MAGA is inherently backwards looking (it's in the name!) and dusting off the New Deal isn't any better.
Some ideas for a vibrant future Democratic platform:
1) Relinquishing some areas of federal control (such as education beyond setting and enforcing standards) and gaining others (such as healthcare financing and other social safety nets).
2) What kind of foreign policy would make sense to preserve and extend the Pax Americana?
3) The national debt is a sword of Damocles for this country. Cutting government spending and across-the-board tax hikes are baked in at this point, as is currency devaluation. How can we put forth a plan that evenly spreads the pain, protects the most vulnerable, and gets all hands on deck to see us through? Defense spending should be focused on 21st-century needs and not keeping a plane factory in some congressperson's district running for the sake of jobs.
4) Beware of zero-sum approaches, where some groups lose by design so that others can gain by design. Awareness of the plight of minorities both historically and here-and-now is good. Punishing some so that others can benefit is not. Everyone should feel invested and welcome in playing a productive part in addressing America's past and current sins.
5) What kinds of environmental preservation/remediation approaches are meaningful and what is mere virtue-signaling? We need a Manhattan Project to nuclearify the American power grid, which also needs updating and hardening against enemies. Environmental policies should not be onerous to the point where beneficial projects are blocked with no reasonable path to resolution.
6) What kind of trade policy is most beneficial to America and Americans? We should consider both producer and consumer needs, as well as national security needs. Let's target decoupling from hostile/potentially hostile nations like the PRC, while increasing trade with friendly nations from Canada to Vietnam. Cutting PRC Belt and Road nations away from the PRC and towards American mutual benefit would also be useful.
7) What would an appropriate immigration policy look like? America has been at its best when we allow more rather than fewer people in, as long as those people join the American project and aren't here to cause us fiscal, criminal, or national security problems. Secure the border and make the front door easy and not onerous to negotiate, get rid of quotas leading to decades-long waiting lists, and set up systems to quickly and thoroughly vet immigrants.
In any case, be wary about replacing one kind of authoritarianism with another. Corporate power abuses are definitely a thing, but government has the same temptations (we're all human, after all) and while the ballot box is one defense, governments typically have sovereign immunity that corporations do not. Ensure accountability in both the private and public sectors.
Excellent post. first found this on Daily Kos. then linked to here. Clearly we are in the Climax Phase of the 4th Turning. the Catalyst isn't just one thing, but Trump, unlawful and unconstitutional executive orders, the public's response, and the rise of AI cars, AI robots, and AI to replace white collar workers. the convergence of many disruptors will accelerate the transformation of America and Global economy, society, and produce a new social contract with government.