Introduction

The Democrats’ devastating 2024 electoral defeat revealed and deepened long-standing divisions within the American Left. Upon the Democrats’ November 2025 government shutdown defeat, Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA- 17) called for “a total makeover of the Democratic Party,” and declared: “there is no establishment. The powers that be are weaker than they’ve ever been before.”¹ As described by several outlets, various factions of the Left have descended into a state of “civil war.”² The outcome of this internal struggle will determine the electoral competitiveness and policy agenda of the Democratic Party. 

To inform the decisions of business and other leaders charged with managing political risk, Baron undertook a detailed qualitative analysis to understand the major divides that drive the current era of intra-Left competition, the most consequential factions of the Left, and the scenarios most likely to result from this competition during the coming two presidential election cycles. 

Overview

• The core disagreements currently dividing the Left – on economics, whether to pursue government-directed redistribution or government-managed market growth, and on culture, whether to prioritize class consciousness or identitarian projects to liberate the individual – create a fragmented balance of power; 
• The most likely alliances among the various factions would fail to achieve a dominant consensus regardless of the combination, in each case excluding powerful factions poised to exercise a “veto” undermining the goal of unity. This contrasts with the Trump-led Right, where the factions within the Populist-Nationalist bloc hold a commanding position that compels the other factions to concede; 
• No clear factor or figure stands to unify the factions, as the Left’s previous all-encompassing goal – defeating President Trump and casting him in the historical narrative as an unpopular, quasi-illegitimate figure – was shattered by his reelection and popular vote victory. 

The Three Major Blocks

The following three blocs, formed from approximately eight factions, now compete for hegemony (see figure 1): 

Progressives – composed of Vanguard Progressives and Mainstream Progressives – advocate a greater emphasis on mobilizing specific identity groups. They seek to unite these groups around collectivist and identitarian positions broadly centered on ‘equity’ – social and economic – and maximized individual self-actualization. To the Progressive bloc, “voters didn’t reject Harris because of leftist rhetoric or activist slogans.”³ This is the group on the Left most committed to ‘woke’ ideology. 

Class Populists – composed of Left Populists, the Labor Left, and the Neobrandeisians – argue that the American Left must unite the working class to deliver “an economy that works for all.”⁴ Their proposal for achieving this centers on redistribution of wealth and breaking up large corporations. For the Class Populists, the Democrats lost because they “abandoned working class people.”⁵ Many see the Progressives’ focus on identity politics as potentially imperiling or distracting from a redistributionist and anti-corporate agenda.

Center-Left – composed of Blue MAGA, the Abundance Left, and the remnant Neoliberal Left – argue for deemphasizing identity and other cultural issues in favor of a platform of growth via government-managed markets for America’s middle and working classes. The Abundance Left contends that progressive citizen activists have derailed efforts to address green energy deployment and affordable housing.⁶ For the Center-Left, the 2024 Election was lost by progressive special interest groups who “impose[d] the rigid mores and vocabulary of college-educated elites, placing a hard ceiling on Democrats’ appeal and fatally wounding them.”⁷ The Democratic “establishment accepted as gospel the myth that elections are won by mobilizing the ‘base’ through appeals to group, not individual identities,”⁸ a strategy complicated by the inherent conflicts between some of these groups. 

The Class Populists and Center-Left agree that a successful politics must focus on the working class. They disagree, however, on whether to achieve their goals by government compulsion or market-friendly means respectively. While the Class Populists and the Progressives broadly agree on redistribution, they disagree on whether this should occur along identitarian or class lines. As a result, these three blocs hold uneasily reconciled positions. Resolution of this divide will define the party’s future; two of the blocs must reach a power-sharing settlement. Understanding how the intra-Left stalemate will resolve requires mapping the eight factions of the American Left that compose the larger three blocs described above: 

Progressives 

1. Mainstream Progressives 
2. Vanguard Progressives 

Class Populists 

1. Labor Left 
2. Left Populists 
3. Neobrandeisians 

Center-Left 

1. Abundance Left 
2. Neoliberals 
3. Blue MAGA 

The Eight Factions

1. Mainstream Progressives (Key figure: Former Vice President Kamala Harris) 

The Mainstream Progressives operate as a big-tent coalition of voters, institutions, and politicians who argue that “government must be the great equalizer of opportunity for everyone” by dismantling “institutional barriers.”⁹ The central goal: electoral victory for the Democratic Party via adherence to the broad principles of contemporary progressivism while encompassing as wide an electoral coalition as possible. Increasing the minimum wage, raising taxes, expanding Medicare, protecting abortion rights, opposing what they see as Republican ‘authoritarianism,’ and pursuing racial and gender ‘equity’ are their policy mainstays. This is the faction of most Democratic politicians, counseling greater pragmatism relative to the Vanguard Progressives. Sociologically, Mainstream Progressives value the material fruits and elite prestige amassed under the status quo and seek to affect a manageable rate of change while maintaining credibility with their more vociferous Vanguard Progressive partners. Key actors include Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY-8), Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA-11), Former Vice President Kamala Harris, and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). 

2. Vanguard Progressives (Key figure: Rep. Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez, D-NY-14) 

The Vanguard Progressives consists of particularly activist members of Congress and aligned ideological interest groups. This faction aspires to shift the Democratic Party leftward, especially on issues of identity politics and a philosophy of maximizing individual self-actualization; electoral victory ranks second to ideological purity. Vanguard Progressives contend that a truly “emancipatory” working class politics incorporates “non-class structures” that include “race, gender, citizenship, and place” and seeks to use them as “building blocks.”¹⁰ They argue that “the Democratic Party has long been shaped” by “corporate interests, lobbyists, and consultants – whose influence has neglected the real crises facing everyday Americans.”¹¹ The Vanguard Progressives champion trans participation in women’s sports, slavery reparations, abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and the Green New Deal. Groups within this faction – including intersectional feminists, pro- Palestinian activists, racial identitarians, and environmentalists – feel bound together in solidarity. Vanguard Progressive institutions such as the Working Families Party or the Sunshine Movement act as “tugboats” to move the larger, slower mainstream leftwards.¹² This faction frequently contends that the mainstream sells out “the people” to big business and capital. Notable politicians and institutions include Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY-14), Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN-5), strategist Waleed Shahid, and the Justice Democrats. 

3. Labor Left (Key figure: Sean O’Brien) 

While having suffered a protracted decline in broader influence, the Labor Left and associated unions retain elements of legal, electoral, and nostalgic power. They aim to reclaim power within the Left and the Democratic Party from the identitarian factions that have been ascendant in recent decades. The Labor Left organizes for increased wages, improved working conditions, and increased sick leave: “Rebuilding worker power is not just good policy—it is a democratic imperative.”¹³ Union officials view their struggle as being aligned with other progressive causes, but, increasingly, rank-and-file members do not agree.¹⁴ Teamsters President Sean O’Brien has noted how the Democrats’ 2024 “narrative of the social justice issues … didn’t identify with our members.”¹⁵ Recently, major labor unions have moved towards the Neobrandeisians, synergizing intellectual dynamism with a large voter base.¹⁶ Additionally, some on the Labor Left signal concern about increasing union skepticism on the Abundance Left.¹⁷ Key players include Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Rep. Donald Norcross (D-NJ-1), Amazon union leader Chris Smalls, and the Economic Policy Institute. 

4. Left Populists (Key figure: Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-VT) 

Left Populists champion an explicitly socialist redistribution of wealth to fulfill an ideological ideal for the American experiment. Their supporters are often voters who have attained educational credentials but not success; this group reflects the growing share of white-collar workers who confront the prospect of achieving a lower standard of living than their parents’ generation. Reacting against the perceived rise of oligarchy and the cost of living, this faction seeks class-based economic redistribution to “create an economy that works for all, not just the very wealthy.”¹⁸ As opposed to the Vanguard Progressives, Left Populists speak primarily in the language of class, rather than identity; while they do not disavow identity politics, their primary focus is economic rather than identitarian. They advocate student loan forgiveness, price caps for prescription drugs, and rent control. Such policies often put them at odds with corporate interests allied with Mainstream Progressives and Neoliberals. Important players include Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), New York Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani, and the Democratic Socialists of America. 

5. Neobrandeisians (Key figure: Former FTC Chair Lina Khan) 

The Neobrandeisians enlist antitrust theories of the early-20th century in pursuit of their vision of economic populism. Inspired by Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis (1856 – 1941),¹⁹ they seek government intervention – by regulation, legal ruling, or legislation – to break up large corporations such as Amazon, Meta, Blackrock, Disney, and many others. They almost singularly blame concentration of corporate power for America’s most serious challenges, from stagnant real wages to stalled innovation to rising prices. Neobrandeisians contend that, in the words of commentator Matt Stoller, “America’s fundamental political vision [has] transformed: from protecting citizen sovereignty to maximizing consumer welfare.”²⁰ According to this faction, antitrust tools must therefore be robustly deployed to “promote fair competition, prevent market concentration, and ensure that economic power is distributed broadly rather than concentrated in the hands of a few.”²¹ Former FTC Chair Lina Khan was the highest profile Biden Administration Neobrandeisian, attacking “the neoliberal scaffolding that has directed wealth to the top and concentrated economic power in the hands of a few.”²² This faction has clashed with the Abundance Left over big business’s ability to solve America’s problems.²³ Other notable politicians and institutions include Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-PA-17), the Open Markets Institute, the American Economic Liberties Project, former USTR Katherine Tai, and former CFPB Director Rohit Chopra. 

6. The Abundance Left (Key figure: Ezra Klein) 

The Abundance Left encompasses YIMBY (Yes-In-My-Backyard) activists, policy wonks, and journalists, arising in response to the perceived failures of progressive governance in states, especially California. They believe that the Left will achieve victory by a total policy focus on lowering costs for basic material necessities, particularly energy and housing. The Abundance Left seeks to “escape from a political economy defined by artificial scarcity, to create a world in which we solve problems primarily by unlocking supply.”²⁴ Abundance argues that progressive citizen-activists have used legal machinery like NEPA to hinder broader liberal-progressive goals.²⁵ Thus, they champion selective deregulation on zoning and permitting reform. Many Progressives and Neobrandeisians have been critical of the Abundance Movement as simply a rebranding of the Clinton-era neoliberalism abhorred by so much of the redistributionist-identitarian Left. Prominent figures and institutions include journalists Ezra Klein and Matt Yglesias, Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY-15), and WelcomePAC. 

7. Neoliberals (Key figure: Governor-elect Abigail Spanberger, D-VA) 

The Neoliberals consist of left-of-center politicians and institutions “motivated by a deep love of country grounded in … mainstream American values … and a commitment to democratic capitalism.”²⁶ They defend the Clinton-era Democratic status quo, believing that a return to a pro-market but socially progressive vision will restore the left-of-center’s electoral success. As an older and struggling faction, it might soon be subsumed into the Abundance Left. Neoliberals support moderate increases in the social safety net, globalization to reduce prices, workforce development, and continued western intervention in Ukraine to support the American-led global security and trade system. They support most progressive social views, although they place less emphasis on them. The Progressive bloc criticizes the Neoliberals for pulling the Democratic Party rightward, which they believe disheartens the base and results in electoral failure. Prominent members and institutions include Governor-elect Abigail Spanberger (D-VA), former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Third Way, and the Progressive Policy Institute. 

8. Blue MAGA (Key figure: Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-WA-3) 

An emerging faction, Blue MAGA mixes a familiar style of Blue Dog Democrat with newer heterodox institutions. Their vision of victory consists of winning center-right voters by appealing to rural and exurban aesthetics and sensibilities. Gaining prominence in swing districts and responding to Democrats’ hemorrhaging of blue-collar voters, Blue MAGA desires a “politics centered on delivering the American dream through simple, concrete action rather than race and group-based identity politics.”²⁷ Blue MAGA politicians hail largely, but not exclusively, from more rural and purple districts suffering from deindustrialization and trade shocks. Rep. Ro Khanna, who jokingly coined the term ‘Blue MAGA,’ argues for an “economic patriotism” leveraging industrial policy, “strategic tariffs,” and a “national development bank” to combat China and restore working-class dynamism. ²⁸ These politicians have appeared at centrist and abundance-related events such as WelcomeFest, and been attacked by Vanguard Progressives as too ‘conservative.’ Notable politicians and institutions include Rep. Jared Golden (D-ME-2), Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-WA-3), Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), and the Searchlight Institute. 

Three Possible Outcomes of Competition

Revolution 
The Class Populists and Progressive blocs fully unite in favoring redistributionism and opposing big business, while reaching a modus vivendi on identity politics and cultural issues. Propelled by economic volatility and labor displacement generated by the AI revolution, this alliance mobilizes key voting groups and integrates them into a larger working-class movement, producing electoral victories. This surge in support for redistributionist goals leads to a new progressive social contract that includes much higher levels of unionization, wealth taxes, aggressive antitrust enforcement, a nationalized healthcare system, and punitive individual and corporate tax rates. This leftist victory further emboldens its use of power to coerce other factions, either through guilt or intimidation, to embrace increasingly aggressive measures. These would include ending the filibuster, statehood for the District of Columbia, packing the Supreme Court, enabling mass illegal immigration, and defunding law enforcement. The post-Trump Right strengthens this trend by adopting extreme positions opposed to freedom of religion and nominating candidates who hold racist sympathies. The result: an enduring era of left-of-center dominance akin to a modern version of the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt. 

Clinton Redux
The Progressive bloc succeeds in dominating the Democratic Party’s presidential nominating contest but then suffers stinging electoral defeats in 2028 and 2032, losses attributed to the identitarian extremism of Vanguard Progressives and their willing accomplices among Mainstream Progressives. The Center-Left, aligned with the Class Populists, marginalize the progressive identitarian interest groups and implicitly surrender on key social issues. This approach attracts many wealthy donors in finance and tech and some working-class voters in purple swing districts. This reprise of the 1992 campaign of then-Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton produces a center-left presidential election victory, followed by a governing agenda of tech-friendly regulation, moderate antitrust enforcement limited mainly to the food and healthcare sectors, limited permitting reform for housing and green energy, only moderately higher taxes on top income earners and the largest corporations, and an industrial policy fueled by nuclear power to provide working class jobs.

 
Collapse 
Through broad and sustained party primary victories and the power of deep blue cities, the Progressive bloc compels the Democratic Party to adhere to radical positions, eroding its electoral competitiveness in growing swaths of the country and putting an Electoral College majority out of reach. This cycle of failure creates an unbridgeable divide between the Class Populists and Progressive bloc, as the Center Left follows corporate America into forging a long-term – even if imperfect – alliance of convenience with the Populist Right. The most extreme elements of the Left react with a frustration that increasingly turns into violence, discrediting the entire left-of-center cause and producing long-term dominance by the Right. 

Conclusion

Arguably since 2016, the factions of the Left have been in a stalemate. No clear leader with the ability to unite the blocs has yet emerged, and no faction enjoys a strong enough position to achieve control and lead the Left against the Populist Right. This relegates the Left, at least temporarily, to a reactive posture. Although a providential transformational leader or civilization-shaking crisis could upend the competitive landscape, the American Left has not confronted such challenges in decades. 

Endnotes

1. Shadi Hamid, “8 senators caved. This California Democrat has had enough,” The Washington Post, November 12, 2025, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/11/12/ro-khanna-senate-democrats-shutdown-schumer. 
2. Andrew Stanton, “The Democratic Civil War Is Escalating,” Newsweek, April 16, 2025, https:// www.newsweek.com/democratic-civil-war-david-hogg-incumbent-primaries-2060649; Jonathan Chait, “The Coming Democratic Civil War,” The Atlantic, May 25, 2025, https://www.theatlantic. com/ideas/archive/2025/05/abundance-democrats-political-power/682929; and Harold Meyerson, “The Real Democratic Civil War,” The American Prospect, June 16, 2025, https://prospect.org/ politics/2025-06-16-real-democratic-civil-war. 
3. Waleed Shahid, “The Left Didn’t Sink Kamala Harris. Here’s What Did.,” The Nation, November 18, 2024, https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/corporate-democrats-not-woke-activists-doomed-kamala-harris. 
4. Prokop Andrew, “Read Bernie Sanders’s Speech on Democratic Socialism in the United States,” Vox, November 19, 2015, https://www.vox.com/2015/11/19/9762028/bernie-sanders-democratic-socialism. 
5. Bernie Sanders, X, November 6, 2024, https://x.com/BernieSanders/ status/1854271157135941698?lang=en. 
6. Chait, “The Coming Democratic Civil War,” ibid. 
7. Adam Jentleson, “When Will Democrats Learn to Say No?,” The New York Times, November 16, 2024, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/16/opinion/democrats-interest-groups-majority.html. 
8. Seth London, “Seth London to Discouraged Democrats,” November 11, 2024, https:// rockhardcauc.us/london-memo.pdf. 
9. The Congressional Progressive Caucus, “The Progressive Promise,” https://progressives.house. gov/the-progressive-promise. 
10. Michael McCarthy, “The False Choice Between Identity Politics and Economic Populism,” Hammer&Hope No. 7 (Summer 2025), https://hammerandhope.org/article/identity-politics-class. 
11. Shahid, “The Left Didn’t Sink Kamala Harris. Here’s What Did.,” ibid. 
12. Jentleson, “When Will Democrats Learn to Say No?,” ibid. 
13. Celine McNicholas et al., Unions Aren’t Just Good for Workers—They Also Benefit Communities and Democracy (Economic Policy Institute, 2025), https://www.epi.org/publication/ unions-arent-just-good-for-workers-they-also-benefit-communities-and-democracy/#full-report. 
14. Kellen Browning, “Union Leaders Get Tough With Democrats as Members Drift Toward Trump,” The New York Times, August 9, 2025, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/09/us/politics/ democrats-labor-unions-nevada.html. 
15. The Free Press, “‘Democrats and AOC No Longer Represent Working People’ | Teamsters President Sean O’Brien,” YouTube, August 5, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=FjFCrm5MITU. 
16. “Anti-Monopoly Summit 2025,” https://antimonopolysummit.org. 
17. Dylan Gyauch-Lewis, “The Anti-Labor Forces Pushing the Abundance Movement,” In These Times, July 8, 2025, https://inthesetimes.com/article/labor-unions-abundance-klein-thompson-cato. 
18. Andrew, “Read Bernie Sanders’s Speech on Democratic Socialism in the United States.,” ibid. 
19. David McCabe, “Lina Khan Revamped Antitrust. Now She’s Pushing the Democratic Party.,” The New York Times, September 14, 2025, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/14/technology/lina-khan-democratic-party.html. 
20. Matt Stoller, “How Democrats Killed Their Populist Soul,” The Atlantic, October 24, 2016, https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/10/how-democrats-killed-their-populist-soul/504710. 
21. Zephyr Teachout, “Zephyr Teachout: ‘The Long Future of the Neo-Brandeisian Movement, in Three Parts,’” The Network Law Review, July 24, 2024, https://www.networklawreview.org/ teachout-future-neobrandeis. 
22. Freddie Hayward, “Lina Khan: ‘You Can Only Undo so Much in Three and a Half Years,’” The New Statesman, August 27, 2025, https://www.newstatesman.com/international-politics/ economy-international-politics/2025/08/lina-khan-interview-you-can-only-undo-so-much-in-three-and-a-half-years. 
23. Brian Callaci et al., Debunking the Abundance Agenda (Open Market Institute and the Revolving Door Project, 2025), https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5e449c8c3ef68d752f3e70dc/t/68a c6ae99a64022e4755fae9/1756130025855/2025-08-05+Debunking+the+Abundance+Agen da-FAST.pdf. 
24. Steve Teles, Varieties of Abundance (Niskanen Center, 2025), https://www.niskanencenter.org/ abundance-varieties. 
25. Chait, “The Coming Democratic Civil War,” ibid. 
26. Third Way, “Our Mission,” accessed September 24, 2025, https://www.thirdway.org/about. 
27. London, “Seth London to Discouraged Democrats,” ibid. 
28. Joe Hagan, “Ro Khanna Really Believes ‘Blue MAGA’ Can Save the Dems—and Steve Bannon Loves It,” Vanity Fair, May 19, 2025, https://www.vanityfair.com/news/ro-khanna-steve-bannon-blue-maga?srsltid=AfmBOopKvgfYkSF_AI3ayPVaThk2sDr-82Je1Z5HpLano7JUty8DsoCI and Rep. Ro Khanna, “Khanna: New Economic Patriotism,” The Columbian, June 13, 2025, https://www. columbian.com/news/2025/jun/13/khanna-new-economic-patriotism.