X Close

Democrats are not backing away from the Green New Deal

AOC's Green New Deal lives on in spirit. Credit: Getty

AOC's Green New Deal lives on in spirit. Credit: Getty

August 4 2025 - 8:00pm

As they contend with their lowest approval ratings in recent memory, Democrats may wish to reconsider some of their least popular positions. Some even suggest the party is preparing to jettison Joe Biden’s “Green New Deal” — once central to his floundering economic agenda. As Axios recently reported, Democratic lawmakers have largely stopped using the term, even as they continue their relentless attacks on all things Trump.

This is just one example of a subtle effort to distance themselves from positions such as climate alarmism, transgender ideology, reparations, and affirmative action — all increasingly out of step with their once-reliable working-class base. But this should be seen less as a genuine change in conviction and more as a tactical retreat from the loudest rhetoric that risks derailing their political recovery. After all, only a handful of Democratic members of Congress voted against the original Green New Deal and they can be expected, like good cadres, to embrace another round as soon as possible.

To date, green politics and opposition to Trump’s climate policies remain one of the most reliable bridges between the two dominant factions within the party: the oligarch-funded establishment and their progressive counterparts. Both support the idea of “net zero”, eliminating all fossil fuel production, and forced urban densification. They may differ on issues such as anti-trust, capital gains, and income redistribution, but not so much on green policies.

Of course, any shift back toward fossil fuels will meet ferocious opposition from progressives and their green allies. The progressives are aware, as the British historian James Heartfield once suggested, that “green capitalism” provides a perfect opportunity for the wealthy to maximize their returns on artificially scarcer resources. They can achieve this from land and agricultural products, notably through mandates and tax breaks for renewable energy.

Ultimately, this hurts middle- and working-class families by raising prices for housing, electricity and gasoline. California, the dominant ideological force in Democratic politics, suffers the highest energy prices in the continental US. The Golden State’s energy prices are double the national average, which has exacerbated “energy poverty”, particularly among the poor and those in the less temperate interior.

These prices reflect the real impact of climate policy. Indeed, in 2023 the California Air Resources Board disclosed that current state climate policies will disproportionately harm households earning less than $100,000 per year, while boosting incomes for those above this threshold.

Democrats, if they hope to recover these voters, will have to modify their green policies to accommodate the threat to their historic working-class base, as well as their constituencies in minority communities. The problem is that the likely Democratic president — with the possible exception of purple-state governors such as Pennsylvania’s Josh Shapiro or Kentucky’s Andy Beshear — is likely to continue the policy of their green agenda while punishing the “carbon economy”.

Of course, some more opportunistic Democrats, including Gavin Newsom, seem ready to modify their views on such things as nuclear power and keeping oil refineries open. But it is doubtful that these approaches will be accepted by the green activist base. Without a broader shift, Democrats risk alienating working-class and minority voters who bear the brunt of high energy costs. To rebuild its coalition, the party must balance environmental goals with economic realities — or face further political decline.


Joel Kotkin is a Presidential Fellow in Urban Futures at Chapman University and a Senior Research Fellow at the Civitas Institute, the University of Texas at Austin.

joelkotkin

China is threatening America in the AI race

Reports sugget Zhipu AI  has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

Reports sugget Zhipu AI has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

July 1 2026 - 10:18am

China is trying to catch up with America on artificial intelligence. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Zhipu AI — one of China’s six “AI tiger” LLMs — has released a new model that can rival leading US systems, including Anthropic’s Mythos, in cybersecurity tasks such as pinpointing security bugs. While this marks a milestone in China’s drive to catch up with Western AI capabilities, strong performance on a single benchmark does not mean it has taken the lead. Chinese models still lag behind their Western counterparts in broader capabilities, such as autonomous operation. Skepticism is therefore warranted before resorting to hysterical conclusions, but complacency about the geopolitical implications of China’s AI advances would be an even greater mistake.

On the infrastructure side, Chinese AI is still constrained by access to advanced chips, with American labs way ahead in computing capacity as well as investment. Analysis from earlier this year suggests that Chinese models are likely to be at least a few months behind those in the US. But they are still continuing to make progress, or that the geopolitical importance of AI will be decided only by whose LLM has ventured deeper into the technological frontier. The practical applications of AI, countries’ to capture foreign markets, and the application of AI into the real economy will matter just as much.

Here, China may hold an advantage. As with its dominance across many critical supply chains, Beijing may not need to produce the most advanced AI systems — only those that are affordable and widely deployable. In doing so, it could consolidate global influence by supplying functional, low-cost AI at scale.

Beijing seems to be pursuing exactly that path, developing an AI “open-source” strategy that offers affordable, widely available AI models for companies and individuals to use and modify as they wish. The production of the DeepSeek AI model, which matched the performance of Silicon Valley tools such as ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost for users, created goodwill among Chinese models with developers.

The four most popular models on OpenRouter, an AI hardware platform for developers, are now all Chinese. The goal for China is not only to win the frontier-model race, but to make its systems the default layer of AI adoption across industries and global markets. For most economies, the choice is increasingly between an affordable tool they can deploy now and a more robust one that may be out of reach.

And while the countries adopting Chinese models may be exposed to political pressure and cyber threats from Beijing, safer and more capable alternatives matter little if they are unaffordable. American AI companies are already under pressure to monetize products whose operating costs are rising. If Chinese open-source models become the cheap default for startups, universities, governments and businesses across the developing world, then America’s AI lead will be eroded from below.

Perhaps more concerning for America in the long run is how AI can give Chinese manufacturing even more strength, through the ongoing integration of AI as a general-purpose technology. China’s new Five-Year Plan mentioned AI more than 50 times and includes an “AI+” action plan aimed at spreading AI across the economy.

Beijing has been pioneering automation of its critical infrastructure for years, with promising recent results in increasing warplane production capacity. In that regard, China’s open-model strategy and manufacturing dominance will reinforce each other. Cheap, adaptable models accelerate deployment across the real economy while those deployments generate real-world data and use cases that can feed back into further model improvement.

The United States should not dismiss the importance of its lead in the AI race. That lead worries Beijing, not least because a more automated Chinese economy would also become more vulnerable to AI-generated cyber threats. But nor should Washington assume that China cannot catch up with American capabilities over time.

This AI competition represents part of a broader struggle over tech supply chains and geopolitical influence. Decisions over whether to adopt US or Chinese models could produce a more fragmented global reality, with different regions relying on different cloud providers, chips and security structures. The result will likely be a global economy which is divided into competing spheres, rather than one which produces a single winner.


Miquel Vila is a political and geopolitical risk consultant focusing on industrial strategy, critical infrastructure and global supply chains.

miquelvilam