The 2024 election exposed the limits of electoral politics, showing that real change requires grassroots action beyond voting for ‘lesser evil’ candidates.

The 2024 election highlighted a critical truth: voting alone won’t bring the transformative change people need. Electing a “lesser evil” candidate fails to address the deeply rooted issues in a system designed to serve corporate and elite interests. As scholar Cedric J. Robinson argues in Black Marxism, electoral politics often reinforce capitalist structures rather than dismantle them, making it nearly impossible for candidates within this framework to enact meaningful change.

The Biden-Harris administration’s “economic recovery” rhetoric felt hollow to many, as voters saw little relief in their day-to-day lives. Although officials touted improvements in inflation and GDP growth, those gains didn’t translate into higher wages or lower living costs for most. These economic “successes” often feel distant from the struggles faced by working-class people, which highlight how the Democratic Party’s focus on quantitative metrics obscures the material realities of the masses. Mike Davis, in Old Gods, New Enigmas, similarly critiques this fixation on GDP growth, which often fails to trickle down to those most in need.

Meanwhile, Democratic rhetoric about “protecting democracy” rings hollow, often used to shield elite interests rather than address critical issues. As Noam Chomsky has argued, U.S. democracy is frequently invoked as a defense of policies that maintain elite control over the public sphere, leaving key issues like wealth inequality, police violence, and healthcare unaddressed. For those facing systemic injustices, Michael Parenti’s Democracy for the Few suggests that this kind of democracy largely operates as a tool to serve the wealthy, sidelining genuine justice for marginalized communities.

Harris’s loss of support among Black and Latino voters further underscores the limitations of symbolic representation without structural change. Representation alone, as Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor argues in From #BlackLivesMatter to Black Liberation, is insufficient if the conditions facing marginalized communities remain the same. Without serious action on issues like housing crises, economic justice, and police reform, representation becomes mere spectacle. The Pew Research Center similarly shows a decline in support from these demographics, noting that many Black and Latino voters now feel Democrats don’t deliver tangible improvements in their communities.

Moreover, the Democratic Party’s international complicity in injustices, particularly in its support of Israel, has alienated progressive and internationalist voters. The Biden-Harris administration’s backing of Israel, even amidst the widely criticized actions in Gaza, has led many to see the U.S. as complicit in what is an ongoing genocide against Palestinians.

U.S. military aid has been a critical factor in perpetuating human rights abuses in Palestine, revealing a bipartisan foreign policy stance that continually disregards Palestinian suffering. As highlighted in The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine by Rashid Khalidi, Harris’s support for these policies contradicts any claim to moral leadership, troubling advocates of justice.

Trump’s base, meanwhile, didn’t rally behind him for real change but because he offered an illusion of disruption. Sheldon Wolin, in Democracy Incorporated, notes how populist rhetoric often masks policies that ultimately serve corporate interests, leaving voters without a true alternative. The Democrats’ failure to challenge this alignment with elites underscores Anand Giridharadas’s argument in Winners Take All: both parties are invested in preserving wealth and power, often at the public’s expense.

The ongoing commitment of the Democratic Party to neoliberal centrism shows it’s ill-equipped to address the needs of working people or marginalized communities. Without a radical shift toward policies like universal healthcare, labor rights, and wealth redistribution, the belief that “the right person” will bring progress is, as Parenti points out, merely a distraction from systemic inequities.

This election demonstrates a need to move beyond electoralism and toward grassroots organizing. David Graeber, in The Democracy Project, argues that real change comes from collective action, not from systems designed to protect elites. Arundhati Roy, in her essay The NGO-ization of Resistance, stresses that meaningful change demands grassroots movements that stand outside institutional politics. Harris’s loss isn’t a fluke; it’s the product of a system that perpetuates inequality and oppression. For those committed to justice, building collective power beyond the ballot box is the only path forward.