Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders has spent over a decade building his politics around a single blunt idea: there is something fundamentally wrong with a political system that prioritizes the needs and wants of the wealthy over the working class.

The United States is the richest country in the history of the world, yet most of its wealth and power is held by a tiny elite class while ordinary people are left to struggle. 

This is populism at its core — separating society into “the pure people” vs. “the corrupt elite.” Sen. Sanders’ brand of economic populism highlights this central divide in American society, attempting to pit the everyday people against the 1%.  

In doing so, people can come to understand their economic frustrations as the product of concentrated wealth and power, rather than directing their anger toward immigrants, transgender individuals or other marginalized groups that are often made into scapegoats by the political right. 

As Democrats struggle to develop a political platform that expands beyond anti-Trump rhetoric, many candidates and elected officials have increasingly turned towards this Sanders-style populist messaging. 

James Talarico, the Democratic nominee for Senate in traditionally red Texas, and Georgia Senator Jon Ossoff have embraced the idea that our political and economic system is built by and for billionaires — the latter even coining the term “the Epstein Class” in reference to the ultra-wealthy. 

This turn to economic populism is not difficult to understand. When people are struggling to afford housing, childcare, healthcare and groceries, while a small group of elites continues to accumulate wealth and influence, there is a clear appeal in asking who benefits from the system and who does not.

This approach diagnoses a real problem — but left-wing populism can go even further to address the needs of the “common people.” 

In recent years, some progressive candidates — including Michigan Democratic nominee Abdul El-Sayed, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and even Sen. Sanders himself — have struggled to win broad support among Black voters in their primaries. 

It’s possible that many Black voters see themselves as more moderate than those candidates or that the candidates simply have weaker ties to majority-Black communities. 

But even accounting for these factors, an important question can be raised regarding the limited response to economic populism: is a class-based appeal enough to capture the political experiences of Black Americans? 

Populists often describe ordinary people as “working class” — but what does that actually mean? Who is a part of this working class, and is everyone equally represented under this umbrella term? 

A Black woman working a low-wage job is generally considered working class, but her experiences are likely different from those of her white, male co-worker. Both her race and gender can influence her wage, the treatment she receives in the workplace and even the circumstances that led her to that point. 

By treating the working class as a monolithic group, economic populism can overlook the intersectional ways that race, gender and other identities shape a person’s experience of class. 

Economic inequality, racism, sexism and other forms of bigotry are not mutually exclusive — in fact they often overlap and shape one another. Through Sanders’ populist framework, these issues can become additional policy concerns alongside class, rather than forces that fundamentally shape what class means in the first place.

Oftentimes, according to the Organization of American Historians, populists argue that economic reform is a tool to “solve racial, ethnic, and sectional friction,” which there is certainly truth behind. When people have better access to employment and affordable systems, many of the conditions that contribute to inequality can improve. 

But economic equality cannot address every form of inequality, especially when racial and gender disparities are embedded within many of our institutions. 

Progressives should run on the message that billionaires have amassed an extraordinary amount of wealth and power because the system is rigged against the many. But to speak for the whole public, populism has to widen its lens to include the racial and gender disparities built into our institutions. 

Let’s tax the rich while ensuring communities that have historically been disadvantaged — whether through redlining or overpolicing — get equal access to investment and opportunity. Let’s make healthcare accessible and free for all, while addressing Black maternal mortality rates and other racial disparities in medicine. 

Let’s hold corporations accountable for exploiting employees while ensuring a workplace free from discrimination or harassment. And let’s get rid of corruption in our political system while making sure all communities are heard and adequately represented. 

People are more than a label of “working class,” and focusing solely on class creates a platform that doesn’t speak to the intricacies of one’s identity or experience. Economic populism is central to overcoming our broken system, but it’s time for the left to keep going. 

Your donation will support the student journalists of Boston University. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment and cover our annual website hosting costs.