ACRE
The Rise and Fall of Midwest Populism
PUBLICADO
1 ano atrásem
On August 7, less than twenty-four hours after accepting an offer to become Kamala Harris’s running mate, Tim Walz took the stage in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, alongside the Democratic nominee to thunderous applause. The schoolteacher, football coach, former national guard noncommissioned officer, congressman, and governor of Minnesota brought a new spark of charisma to a Democratic campaign already reenergized after Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the race. Following the announcement, online searches for Walz skyrocketed as Americans outside his native Minnesota sought to learn more about the man taking a giant leap onto the national stage. Until that point, Walz was perhaps best known to the general public for his appearance on MSNBC when he said of Republicans, “These are weird people on the other side.”
Among the troves of information regarding Walz’s lengthy career, one acronym, unfamiliar to many, often appeared beside his name: DFL. For many Americans, this was their introduction to the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party.
The Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party (DFL) is one of only two state-level parties affiliated nationally with the Democratic Party to use a unique name. The other is the North Dakota Democratic–Nonpartisan League Party. These two parties actually share a common history, and this history explains the reasons for the distinction. Now, decades later, these names are all that remains of that history and of the populist movement that once flourished in the upper Midwest.
A rise in left-wing sentiment in North Dakota during the 1910s culminated in 1915 when Arthur C. Townley, a farmer and former organizer for the Socialist Party of America, drew up a platform to address farmers’ interests that he felt were ignored by the two-party system. He founded the Farmers Non-Party League Organization, later known as the Nonpartisan League (NPL). The League’s various goals included improved state services, women’s suffrage, and state ownership of banks, mills, and elevators. With a robust grassroots campaign, the NPL quickly grew in numbers, and by the 1916 primaries, it had effectively seized control of the state’s Republican Party, winning both houses of the state legislature as well as the governor’s office.
Its victory, however, proved short-lived. At the close of World War I, a drought and a drop in grain prices caused an agricultural recession. The League’s opponents accused it of opposing the war effort, and soon internal conflicts emerged within the coalition that formed the party’s core. The NPL lost control of the statehouse, resulting in a vote to recall governor Lynn J. Frazier. It seemed the third-party experiment was to be swept out with the prairie winds.
However, in 1918, the NPL expanded into neighboring Minnesota, where it joined forces with city worker-focused groups to form the Farmer-Labor Party (FLP). The FLP carried on the NPL’s mission while adding labor union protection to its platform, creating a broad, working-class movement statewide. The new party was a hit, partially due to the lack of “viable political opposition to the dominant Republican Party in Minnesota during this period.” Over the next twenty years, it produced three governors, four US senators, and eight US representatives, relegating the Democrats to a third party in the state.
The FLP became a case study in successful third-party politics in the American system. It was a grassroots, regional party that prioritized the needs of Minnesota voters, allowing it to focus its campaigns and tailor messaging effectively. The FLP’s coalition of urban workers and rural farmers proved key to its lasting success, building a strong regional voting bloc with national influence in presidential elections. With a foothold established, the FLP mobilized voters and endorsed candidates, steadily expanding its reach.
However, after two decades in power, internal conflicts surfaced. The unexpected death of popular governor Floyd B. Olson sparked a divisive primary campaign filled with accusations of corruption, fracturing the party before the 1938 election. The American Farm Bureau Federation, newly empowered by New Deal programs, was actively hostile to the FLP, further hindering its policy goals. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, though he had previously received FLP support, offered little help, refusing to expend political capital on the party’s behalf. The 1938 midterm elections dealt the FLP a severe blow, as Republicans made sweeping gains, resulting in the loss of all state offices, most of the state legislature, and a significant presence in Washington.
The FLP limped along for several years as a shadow of its former self. The party fielded candidates in 1940 and 1942 but failed to repeat its victories in the state legislature or win any state office. Its national standing continued to erode, with the party losing an additional senate seat in 1940 and electing only one congressman, while its vote totals steadily declined. Despite the fall of the FLP, the Minnesota Democratic Party did not rise to fill the gap, remaining a distant third in the state. One might argue that the FLP could have reestablished itself by weathering the downturn, but instead it turned to the Democrats.
After bitter losses for both parties in 1942, state Democratic chair Elmer Kelm publicly expressed interest in a merger. Early the following year, he drafted a memo to the national committee, suggesting that President Roosevelt’s odds of winning Minnesota’s electoral votes were at risk without a unified left-of-center front. The idea was encouraged by influential Minnesota Democrat Hubert Humphrey.
The FLP for was not opposed to the idea. Leaders reasoned that it made little sense for two left-leaning minority parties to continue struggling with one another with little chance of overcoming their Republican opponents in the near term. Merger negotiations began later that year and culminated in an April 1944 between Kelm and FLP leader Elmer Benson, with Humphrey chairing the discussions. When the negotiations were closed, America’s longest-running third party had folded, and the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party (DFL) was born.
While FDR did carry Minnesota in the 1944 presidential election, the DFL initially saw only minor gains in the state legislature. It wasn’t until the 1950s that the DFL began to experience real success. Fortunes began to improve. Meanwhile, the internal friction within the hastily assembled party began to show.
By the second party convention in 1946, factions had arisen between Humphrey, now the center-left mayor of Minneapolis, and the more radical socialist-leaning wing led by Benson. When Benson’s faction took over after Kelm’s resignation as party chair, Humphrey quickly geared up for war. Over the next three years, Humphrey marshaled his allies into an insurgency within the party that fought tooth and nail to reverse Benson’s consolidation of power. The conflict culminated in 1948 with the expulsion of all remaining radical and communist elements from the DFL, including Benson, who opted to move to former vice president Henry Wallace’s floundering Progressive Party. Humphrey, meanwhile, became the party’s first elected senator in Washington.
As the DFL’s star ascended, the populist elements that had made up the Farmer-Labor Party became a distant memory. In all but name, Minnesota’s left opposition had become the Democratic Party. The FLP’s gamble for short-term gains led to a Democratic takeover, with the party’s larger resources and national structure swallowing the FLP wholesale. In retrospect, the takeover seems inevitable: structural contradictions within the merged party demanded resolution. Whether the FLP leaders failed to foresee this struggle or assumed it was a fight they could win, they ultimately underestimated the ability of the Democratic Party to absorb a rival movement.
In the aftermath of the 2024 campaign, we can see shadows of this process. We can imagine the party apparatchiks working backstage to transform a once-insurgent Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez into a safe, uncontroversial convention speaker, or reshaping Tim Walz’s progressive gubernatorial achievements into a campaign centered on Liz Cheney and a right-wing turn on immigration. In the end, after being metabolized by the Democratic National Committee machine, all that remains of twentieth-century Midwest populism is the vestigial organ of an “FL,” dwarfed by the adjoining letter “D,” beside the governor’s name.
Relacionado
VOCÊ PODE GOSTAR
Ciberia
As melhores seguradoras do Brasil se destacam pela capacidade de cumprir obrigações, atender aos clientes e oferecer soluções adequadas aos riscos das empresas. No entanto, não existe uma única resposta universal. A escolha depende de critérios técnicos, regulatórios e operacionais que variam conforme a necessidade do contratante.
Como identificar as melhores seguradoras do Brasil
As melhores seguradoras devem atender a requisitos objetivos. Primeiro, precisam estar autorizadas pela Superintendência de Seguros Privados (SUSEP). Em seguida, devem demonstrar capacidade financeira para cumprir as indenizações.
Além disso, indicadores como o volume de prêmios, o índice de sinistralidade e o nível de reclamações ajudam a avaliar o desempenho.
Critérios técnicos de avaliação
Para selecionar uma seguradora, a empresa deve considerar critérios específicos:
- Solidez financeira: capacidade de pagamento de sinistros;
- Especialização: atuação em ramos como garantia ou engenharia;
- Estrutura operacional: atendimento e gestão de sinistros;
- Conformidade regulatória: adequação às normas da SUSEP.
Além disso, a aderência ao tipo de risco é determinante. Por exemplo, empresas que contratam seguro empresarial precisam avaliar se a seguradora compreende o setor em que atuam.
Segmentos relevantes no mercado brasileiro
O mercado de seguros no Brasil se divide em diferentes segmentos. Cada um atende necessidades específicas:
- Seguros patrimoniais e operacionais;
- Seguros de responsabilidade civil;
- Seguros de garantia;
- Seguros de engenharia.
Nesse contexto, o seguro-garantia se destaca em contratos públicos e privados. Ele assegura o cumprimento de obrigações contratuais.
Por outro lado, o seguro de risco de engenharia cobre danos ocorridos durante a execução das obras. Assim, ele atende empresas que atuam em construção e infraestrutura.
Ranking e indicadores do setor
Os rankings variam conforme o critério utilizado. Alguns consideram o volume de prêmios, enquanto outros analisam a satisfação do cliente ou a solvência.
Por isso, a empresa deve evitar decisões baseadas apenas no posicionamento no ranking. Em vez disso, deve analisar dados consistentes e compatíveis com sua necessidade.
Além disso, relatórios da SUSEP e de entidades do setor oferecem informações confiáveis sobre desempenho e participação de mercado.
Como escolher a seguradora adequada
Para escolher entre as melhores seguradoras do Brasil, a empresa deve seguir um processo estruturado.
Primeiro, identificar os riscos que se deseja cobrir. Em seguida, comparar coberturas disponíveis. Depois, avaliar as condições contratuais, os limites e as exclusões.
Além disso, a análise deve incluir suporte técnico e capacidade de atendimento. Isso garante que a seguradora responda adequadamente em caso de sinistro.
Portanto, a escolha não depende apenas do custo, mas da capacidade de resposta e da aderência ao risco.
Papel das seguradoras na gestão de riscos empresariais
As melhores seguradoras do Brasil atuam como parte da estratégia de gestão de riscos das empresas. Elas oferecem cobertura e transferem os impactos financeiros decorrentes de eventos inesperados.
Além disso, ao contratar seguros adequados, a empresa reduz a exposição a perdas que podem afetar sua operação. Por isso, a escolha da seguradora influencia diretamente a continuidade do negócio.
Consequentemente, avaliar a capacidade técnica e financeira da seguradora torna-se um passo necessário para garantir proteção efetiva e previsibilidade operacional.
Como escolher entre as melhores seguradoras com foco em risco e cobertura
As melhores seguradoras do Brasil se definem pela capacidade de atender às necessidades específicas de cada empresa. Ao considerar critérios técnicos e regulatórios, é possível estruturar uma proteção alinhada aos riscos e garantir maior estabilidade operacional.
Relacionado
Relacionado
PRÁTICAS PEDAGÓGICAS E AVALIAÇÃO
INCLUSIVA NO ENSINO SUPERIOR:
Desafios e Estratégias para o ensino de estudantes com deficiência e necessidades específicas
Relacionado
PESQUISE AQUI
MAIS LIDAS
ACRE7 dias agoProfessora da Ufac faz visita técnica e conduz conferência em Paris — Universidade Federal do Acre
ACRE4 dias agoSAVE THE DATE – AULA MAGNA PROFIAP
ACRE5 dias agoProint realiza atividade sobre trabalho com jovens aprendizes — Universidade Federal do Acre
ACRE4 dias agoJORNADA PEDAGÓGICA 2026
Warning: Undefined variable $user_ID in /home/u824415267/domains/acre.com.br/public_html/wp-content/themes/zox-news/comments.php on line 48
You must be logged in to post a comment Login