In the aftermath of the recent U.S. presidential election, where former President Donald Trump defeated Vice President Kamala Harris, an important question emerges: Was this election framed too narrowly as a moral crusade rather than a debate over policy? For many in the Democratic Party, Trump symbolized a figure whose character and behaviour stood in opposition to democratic values. This campaign approach often highlighted Trump as a moral adversary to be defeated, rather than engaging voters on issues that shape their daily lives.

The Democratic Party’s campaign strategy prominently featured moral critiques of former President Donald Trump, emphasizing themes of democracy, freedom, and ethical governance. This approach is evident in several key speeches and statements from Democratic leaders.

Former First Lady Michelle Obama delivered a compelling speech at the DNC, urging supporters to "do something" to ensure Kamala Harris’s victory. She emphasized the moral imperative of the election, stating, "It’s the contagious power of hope, the anticipation, the energy, the exhilaration of once again being on the cusp of a brighter day."

In her acceptance speech at the DNC, Vice President Kamala Harris highlighted the moral stakes of the election, asserting, "I promise to be a president for all Americans... to hold sacred America’s fundamental principles, from the rule of law to free and fair elections to the peaceful transfer of power."

President Joe Biden, in his keynote address at the DNC, celebrated Harris’s nomination and framed the election as a battle for the nation’s soul, asking, "Are you ready to vote for freedom? Are you ready to vote for democracy and for America?"

The DNC’s programming underscored themes of moral responsibility and ethical governance. Speakers like former President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton emphasized the importance of upholding democratic values and the rule of law, framing the election as a pivotal moment for the nation’s moral direction.

A line from Goethe’s Faust might offer insight into this approach: “Who are you then? I am part of that power which eternally wills evil and eternally works good.” In Faust, the character Mephistopheles — a cunning and destructive spirit — paradoxically catalyses growth and enlightenment for Faust, despite having malevolent intentions. This idea, that even actions intended as “evil” may lead to positive outcomes, invites us to rethink the moral simplifications often present in political discourse. In today’s context, Goethe’s quote encourages us to see beyond moral labelling and embrace a more nuanced understanding of political dynamics.

The philosophical lens: intention vs. outcome

Goethe’s quote raises the notion that intentions and results don’t always align. Mephistopheles’ role in Faust is complex: while he embodies chaos and temptation, his influence ultimately pushes Faust toward self-discovery and growth. In the political realm, this echoes the idea that even morally questionable figures can prompt social or political change in unexpected ways. Applying this to the recent election, Trump’s influence on U.S. politics has undeniably been divisive. Yet, it has also mobilized discussions about democracy, civic engagement, and institutional reform, sparking renewed interest in civic duty and political participation across both parties.

For Democrats, framing Trump solely as a moral adversary may have overlooked this complexity. Many voters are not swayed solely by moral arguments; they are moved by policies that impact their jobs, families, and futures. By leaning into a portrayal of Trump as an almost Mephistophelean figure, Democrats risked alienating segments of the electorate who saw Trump’s policies—regardless of their moral perception of him—as addressing practical concerns about the economy, security, and national identity.

The sociological perspective: power and unintended consequences

The line from Faust also resonates within a sociological context. The character of Mephistopheles embodies the unintended consequences of power—forces that often disrupt but can also inadvertently lead to societal growth. Historically, political figures with controversial methods or reputations have sometimes catalysed change and even positive reforms. Max Weber, a sociologist who studied power and authority, suggested that individuals, through charisma and authority, can mobilize large groups even if their intentions are self-serving. The reactions and social movements that arise in response often shift society in unforeseen and sometimes beneficial ways.

From this sociological view, political figures like Trump become catalysts, stimulating reactions and adjustments across the political landscape. This is not to ignore the morally complex or even damaging elements of such figures but to understand that they operate within a broader social framework, influencing voters not just through rhetoric but through the policies that speak directly to their concerns. The Democratic Party’s moral framing of the election, therefore, could have benefitted from a more inclusive approach, balancing ethical considerations with pragmatic policies that resonate across divides.

The 2024 election: lessons from Goethe’s insight

The results of the election suggest that a significant portion of voters prioritized policy over morality. Trump’s campaign emphasized issues like economic growth, immigration reform, and “law and order,” while Democrats tended to cast the election as a referendum on character and democratic values. For many, the Democrats’ focus on moral imperatives was less persuasive than addressing these everyday issues. This approach may have unintentionally portrayed Democrats as disconnected from voters’ lived experiences, creating a gap that Trump’s campaign effectively filled.

Goethe’s line about “willing evil and working good” serves as a reminder that the path to positive change often involves navigating moral ambiguities. The Democratic Party’s emphasis on the moral stakes of the election, while important, may have missed the opportunity to engage voters on specific policy goals. As in Faust, where the journey toward self-discovery is fraught with contradictions and compromises, so too must political campaigns engage with the messy realities of human needs and priorities.

Embracing complexity in politics

Goethe’s Faust invites readers to grapple with the idea that good and evil, right and wrong, are often intertwined. In politics, this means acknowledging that leaders, movements, and policies are rarely morally pure. Understanding this complexity enables us to engage more deeply with political realities, allowing for campaigns that balance moral imperatives with the policies that directly affect people’s lives.

For the Democratic Party, Goethe’s insight suggests a need to refine their approach. Rather than framing the opposition as a moral adversary, future campaigns could aim to address the real, practical needs of the electorate. This approach does not mean abandoning ethics or principles; instead, it recognizes that moral appeals must be rooted in tangible solutions that resonate with diverse communities. As we look to the future, Goethe’s wisdom reminds us that in politics, as in life, intentions are just the beginning. True progress lies in bridging the gap between ideals and the messy, often contradictory forces that drive society forward.