We all should have a profound sense of gratitude for the many blessings our nation has given us.
Editors’ Note
This a lightly edited version of Vice President Vance’s remarks as prepared for the Claremont Institute’s 2025 Statesmanship Award Dinner.
California generally—and Claremont in particular—has produced some of the most profound and revolutionary conservative thinkers of the last half-century.
And for a great many of them, it’s because they understood what’s at stake if we abandon our American identity.
And we’re lucky enough to have a few of them, like Michael Anton, now working in the administration with us.
Now, Claremont Institute President Ryan Williams asked me to speak a little bit about statesmanship and, more to the point, about how to respond to some of the challenges our movement will need to confront in the years to come.
It’s an interesting question.
And I think it’s useful to reflect on the state of the Left in 2025’s America.
Last week, a 33-year-old Communist running an insurgent campaign beat a multimillion-dollar establishment machine in the New York City Democratic mayoral primary.
I don’t want to harp on a municipal election, but there were two interesting threads. The first is that it drives home how much the voters in each party have changed.
If our victory in 2024 was rooted in a broad, working- and middle-class coalition, Mamdani’s coalition is the inverse.
Look at his electoral performance, which the Left is already talking about as a blueprint for future electoral success. The guy won high-income and college-educated New Yorkers—and especially both young and highly educated voters—but was weakest among blacks and those without a college degree. He did better in Bangladeshi areas of New York, and worse in Chinese areas.
Mamdani’s strongest vote share was in New York’s gentrifying neighborhoods, like Ridgewood and Bushwick.
His victory was the product of a lot of young people who live reasonably comfortable lives but see that their elite degrees aren’t really delivering what they expected. And so their own prospects, with all the college debt, may not in fact be greater than those of their parents.
And I think in the results, we can start to see the future of the Democrats: as the party not of dispossession, but of elite disaffection.
The party of highly educated but downwardly mobile elites who comprise a highly energetic activist base—one, critically, supplemented by carefully selected ethnic blocs carved out of the electorate, using identity politics as the knife.
That, by the way, explains all of Mamdani’s bizarre appeals to foreign politics intended to signal to one diaspora community or another in New York.
Why is a mayoral candidate in our nation’s biggest city whining about banning Bibi Netanyahu from visiting and threatening to arrest him if he tries? Or attacking Narendra Modi as a “war criminal”? Why is he talking about “globalizing the intifada”? What the hell does that even mean in Manhattan?
But what might seem like a contradiction makes sense if you peel back the onion a bit. Consider: a movement that rails against the billionaire class despite the fact that the billionaire class remains firmly in its corner. It idolizes foreign religions even as it rejects the teachings of those faiths. It rails against white people even as many of its funders and grassroots activists are privileged whites.
I was once comforted by these contradictions. How could privileged whites march around decrying white privilege? How could progressives pretend to love Muslims despite their cultural views on gender and sexuality?
But the answer is obvious, isn’t it? The radicals of the far Left don’t need a unifying ideology of what they’re for, because they know very well what they’re against.
What unites Islamists, gender studies majors, socially liberal white urbanites, and Big Pharma lobbyists? It isn’t the ideas of Thomas Jefferson or even Karl Marx. It’s hatred. They hate the people in this room, they hate the president of the United States, and most of all, they hate the people who voted for him.
This is the animating principle of the American far Left. It isn’t true of most of the people who vote for Democrats, of course. Most of them are good people, even if they’re misguided in their politics. But pay attention to what their leadership says outside of glossy campaign ads or general election-tested messaging, and it’s obvious that this is what animates the modern Democratic Party.
The far Left doesn’t care that BLM led to a spike in violent crime in urban black neighborhoods, because it also led to anarchy in middle-class white neighborhoods.
They don’t care that Islamism hates gays and subjugates women, because for now it is a useful tool of death against Americans.
They don’t care that too many pharma companies are getting rich from experimental hormonal therapies, because it destroys the “gender binary” that has structured social relations between the genders for the whole of Western civilization.
They don’t care that deporting low-wage immigrants will raise the wages of the native-born, because they don’t mean to create higher living standards for those born and raised here—black, white, or any other skin color. They mean to replace them with people who will listen to their increasingly bizarre ethnic and r
eligious appeals.
They are arsonists, and they will make common cause with anyone else willing to light the match. It’s why Mamdani himself is such an appealing instrument to the Left. He captures so many of the movement’s apparent contradictions in a single human being: a guy who describes the Palestinian cause as “central” to his identity, yet holds views—abortion-on-demand and using taxpayer money to fund transgender surgeries for minors, for example—that would be incomprehensible on the streets of Gaza.
This politics doesn’t make sense as a positive political program. But it’s very effective at tearing down the things the Left hates.
One task of statesmanship is to recognize what the Left wishes to do to American society. But the most important thing is to be for something. And that’s the second thread I want to touch on today: if the Left wishes to destroy, we must create.
The most obvious way to do that is to ensure that the people we serve have a better life in the country their grandparents built. This is why the president cares so much about tariffs—in a globalized economy, we must be willing to penalize those who would build outside of our own nation.
And it’s why he worked so hard to pass the OBBBA—if tariffs are the stick, then lower taxes and regulations are the carrots. We want to make it easy to save and invest in America, to build a business in America, and most of all: to work a dignified job and earn the kind of wage that can support a family in comfort.
But this is not a purely material question, because we are not just producers and consumers. We are human beings, made in the image of God, who love our home not just because we earn a living here but because we discover our purpose and meaning here.
Every Western society has demographic problems. There is something about Western liberalism that is socially suicidal or parasitic—that tends to feed off of a healthy host until there’s nothing left.
America in 2025 is more diverse than it has ever been. And yet the institutions that form culture are also weaker. We are confronted with a society that has less in common than ever, and whose cultural leaders seem totally uninterested in fixing that.
Just four years ago we had people promoting alternative national anthems at one of the few remaining national pastimes that transcend ethnic and cultural differences. Too many of our current crop of statesmen remain unable to break out of that moment, destined to erode the very thing that makes Americans put on a uniform and sacrifice their lives for something.
Part of the solution—the most important part of the solution—is to stop the bleeding. This is why President Trump’s immigration policies are so important. Social bonds form among people who have something in common. If you stop importing millions of foreigners, you allow social cohesion to form naturally.
But even so: if you were to ask yourself in 2025 what an American is, very few of our leaders would have a good answer. Is it purely agreement with the creedal principles of America?
That definition is overinclusive and underinclusive. It would include hundreds of millions, maybe billions, of foreigners. Must we admit them tomorrow? But, at the same time, that answer would also reject a lot of people the ADL would label domestic extremists, even though their own ancestors were here at the time of the Revolutionary War.
So perhaps the most pressing thing to build now is the meaning of American citizenship in the 21st century.
The Right needs to do a better job articulating what that means. And while I don’t have a comprehensive answer for you, there are a few things I’d suggest off the top of my head:
For one, it means sovereignty. More precisely, American citizenship must mean belonging to a nation that guards the sovereignty of its people, especially from a modern world that’s hellbent on dissolving borders and differences in national character.
That means having a government that vigorously defends the basic qualities of sovereignty—that secures the border from foreign invasion; that protects its citizens and their enterprises against unfair foreign tax schemes; that erects tariff walls and similar barriers to protect its people’s industry; that avoids needlessly entangling them in prolonged, distant wars.
media reports, never once publicly mentioned America’s Independence Day in earnest. But when he did so this year, this is what he said:
“America is beautiful, contradictory, unfinished. I am proud of our country even as we constantly strive to make it better.”
There is no gratitude here. No sense of owing something to this land and the people who turned its wilderness into the most powerful nation in the world.
Zohran Mamdani’s father fled Uganda when the tyrant Idi Amin decided to ethnically cleanse his nation’s Indian population. Mamdani’s family fled violent racial hatred only for him to come to this country—a country built by people he never knew, overflowing with generosity to his family, offering a haven from the kind of violent ethnic conflict that is commonplace in world history.
And he dares, on its 249th birthday, to congratulate it by paying homage to its incompleteness, and to its, as he calls it, “contradiction.” Has he ever read the letters from boy soldiers in the Union Army to parents and sweethearts they’d never see again? Has he ever visited a gravesite of a loved one who gave their life to build the kind of society where his family could escape theft and violence? Has he ever looked in the mirror and recognized that he might not be alive were it not for the generosity of a country he dares to insult on its most sacred day?
Who the hell do these people think they are?
Yesterday, I visited the construction site for the Teddy Roosevelt presidential library. We went hiking in the badlands of North Dakota. My five-year-old so desperately wanted to see a buffalo, and he saw a dozen of them. My eight-year-old spotted a bald eagle perched on a low cliff. And my three-year-old brought me a dandelion.
Her little lungs weren’t strong enough to send the dandelion seeds over the hillside, and so she asked me to do it. Watching her face light up as she watched those seeds blow over the hills, I felt a profound sense of gratitude for this country. For its natural beauty, the settlers who carved a civilization out of the wilderness. For making the love story of that little girl’s mother and father possible. For the common yet profound joy of watching a three-year-old’s beautiful eyes light up as she watched a dandelion’s seeds dance in the wind against an ancient rock formation.
This country is not a contradiction. It’s a nation of countless, extraordinary people across many generations, a land of profound ingenuity and tradition and beauty. But more importantly, it’s home. For the vast bulk of Americans, it’s where we’re born, it’s where we will raise our children and grandchildren, and it’s where we ourselves will one day be buried. And when that day comes, I hope my kids can take solace knowing that their inheritance as Americans is not some unfinished or contradictory project, but a home that provided their parents shelter, and sustenance, and endless amounts of love.
Thank you, and God bless you.
Vice-President J. D. Vance
THE ARTFUL DILETTANTE 