How Democrats snatched ‘freedom’ back from Trump and the Republicans

In 2006, the linguist and cognitive scientist George Lakoff published a book to address a striking political development: The quintessentially American concept of “freedom” had recently been commandeered by the right.

“There are two very different views of freedom in America today, arising from two very different moral and political worldviews,” he wrote. The traditional view of freedom, as he saw it, was inherently progressive, all about broadening and upholding opportunities and rights for a growing range of Americans. But in the second view, freedom was a way of describing the case against this expansion, casting it as an imposition by government against an older libertarian, imperialist, pro-Christian way of life to which we needed to return.

After the patriotic rallying that followed 9/11, freedom became a “frame,” as Lakoff uses the term — a metaphor that shapes how we think about things — associated primarily with conservatives. The era gave us Operation Iraqi Freedom and “freedom fries,” renamed to mock the French for their resistance to the invasion, and later the far-right Freedom Caucus in Congress. The effects of hearing this frame over and over were deep. By the time Donald Trump was elected, Democrats had had to accept “freedom of religion” as a basis on which to contest same-sex marriage, “freedom to bear arms” as an argument for Americans having to live under an omnipresent threat from assault weapons, and “freedom from regulation” as a reason to let corporations pollute waterways. To some extent, they ceded the case. When President Joe Biden argued against the Trump agenda this year, he more frequently cited “democracy” as the American value most in peril.

But since Biden stepped aside in favor of Vice President Kamala Harris — incredibly, just over a month ago — “freedom” has come roaring back into fashion for Democrats, part of what seems to be a wholesale renovation of the party’s persuasive language. A Post analysis found that on the first night of the Democratic National Convention alone, speakers referenced “freedom” more than 100 times — and that was before they got to Wednesday night, billed as “A Fight for our Freedoms.” The Harris campaign received the gift from Beyoncé of a banger of an anthem called “Freedom,” whose defiant refrain is now heard in ads and rallies: “I’m a keep running, ’cause a winner don’t quit on themselves.” That traditional, progressive vision of freedom, it seems, is back in style.

Why is this resonating? One reason is what’s on the other side. With decidedly restrictive Republican measures proliferating — bans on emergency abortion care, censorship of topics and books in schools, proposed political loyalty tests for federal bureaucrats, support for autocrats abroad, “Mass Deportation Now!” signs at their convention — the Trump campaign is having a harder time arguing that what they’re proposing is, in fact, freedom. American voters, with their attachment to their votes actually being counted, were mostly not fans of Trump’s refusal to accept election results in 2020 or a potential second loss in 2024. To many, Trump doesn’t sound like an avatar of liberty or self-determination. He sounds like an autocrat.

The overnight reembrace of freedom among Democrats pushes all of that back into its place. What if freedom was, all along, the bending-toward-justice model so many generations of Americans fought for? This reclaimed vision of American liberty fits comfortably with other slogans that have come with Harris’s rise to the top of the ticket. “Mind your own damn business!” said Tim Walz from the DNC stage, to roars of approval: that’s a cry for privacy, historically a priority of freedom-minded, small-government Republicans. “We’re not going back!” said Oprah: that’s a direct rejection of “Make America Great Again” from the people whose last century of rights gains are being targeted for reversal. Even the slam of certain Trump and JD Vance statements as “weird” is at some level about freedom, most often attaching to proposed social engineering meant to bring Americans into white Christian national conformity as opposed to the liberty to be, say, childless cat ladies.

There are reportedly experienced strategists telling the Harris campaign that this language is a bad idea. “First, … stop saying, ‘We’re not going back.’ It wasn’t focused enough on the future. … Second, lay off all the ‘weird’ talk — too negative,” a CNN article summarized the advice. The campaign ignored it, and wisely so. Honestly, this is a situation where Harris is better off listening to the “feral 25-year-olds” running her social media accounts, as one deputy campaign manager described them this week. When we all live on the clapback-happy internet, are you really going to convince voters afraid of losing their liberties that they should just smile?

That’s the thing about freedom: generations of people have died for it. Though “freedom” stands to do for Harris what “hope” did for Obama, it’s more than inspirational — it is a galvanizing signal to people who feel like they barely made it through one Trump administration that Harris sees and shares their fears.

Elections are not won on messaging alone. But snatching back the mantle of freedom after nearly a quarter-century suggests that Democrats have, at this late date, found a clear statement of purpose.