David Hogg speaking at
the ‘March for Our Lives’
rally in Washington, D.C.,
June 11, 2022
David Hogg, once a symbol of youth-led activism in the aftermath of the Parkland school shooting, has been appointed Vice Chair of the Democratic National Committee. On paper, this might seem like a bold move to infuse young energy into a party too often criticized for being stale. In reality, it’s a misstep rooted in optics over substance.
Not All Experience is Equal
Let’s clarify: surviving a traumatic event and becoming a public activist is commendable. However, trauma and Twitter followers don’t equate to leadership experience or strategic insight. Hogg has not demonstrated the legislative, organizational, or political depth required to help steer a national political party. The DNC Vice Chair isn’t a ceremonial role. It’s a position that demands a steady hand, coalition-building finesse, and the maturity to navigate complex ideological terrain. Hogg simply isn’t there.
A History of Qualified Leadership
Traditionally, DNC Vice Chairs have been seasoned political veterans with deep roots in the party’s infrastructure or state-level leadership. Figures like Donna Brazile, who served multiple terms, brought decades of campaign experience, media savvy, and a keen understanding of the party’s machinery. Even more recent picks have had substantial law, activism, and state politics backgrounds. These individuals know how to maneuver in high-stakes environments, communicate across demographics, and push policy without imploding the message.
Appointing Hogg to this role at a time when the party is trying to claw back control from extremist forces is not just tone-deaf. It’s a gamble the Democrats can’t afford. We need strategists, not signals. Leaders who understand the legislative process, grassroots coalition building, and how to articulate vision without stepping into rhetorical landmines.
Defending Democracy: A Misguided Critique
Recently, Hogg criticized the Democratic Party’s emphasis on “defending democracy,” bizarrely linking the concept of democracy to the existence of school shootings. That kind of rhetoric is not just uninformed. It’s politically reckless. Republicans will eat that soundbite for breakfast and spin it as proof that Democrats are anti-American and out of touch. Whether he meant it that way or not, the damage is done when it hits social media.
The real issue is this. There are dozens of functioning democracies around the world that don’t suffer from the exact epidemic of gun violence the United States faces. Countries like Japan, Germany, Australia, and the United Kingdom have strong democratic systems. Yet, they manage to protect their citizens from rampant shootings through smart legislation and a cultural rejection of militarized paranoia. Blaming democracy for school shootings is not only historically inaccurate, but it also dismisses decades of policy failures and a gun lobby that has hijacked our political system. It also gives the impression that the concept of democracy itself is to blame for a uniquely American crisis, which is not just false, but dangerously misleading.
When Democrats talk about defending democracy, they are not defending the status quo. They are defending a system that allows accountability, peaceful transfer of power, and civic participation. These principles are essential to fighting authoritarianism. To reject that framing is to reject the very tools needed to fix what’s broken.
Democracy is not perfect, but it’s the only framework through which lasting change can occur. Our democracy, while flawed, is not what causes mass shootings. The issue lies with corrupt lobbying, weak political will, and a culture of fear exploited by firearms manufacturers. There are countries with far healthier democratic systems and exponentially lower rates of gun violence. What we suffer from is a uniquely American failure to act. Hogg’s argument, intentionally or not, betrays that context. It’s the sort of half-thought take that discredits the broader mission and helps the opposition paint the entire left as unserious.
Symbolism Versus Substance
This isn’t about age. There are plenty of sharp, young voices in the progressive movement with real organizing wins and intellectual heft. But Hogg has become more known for his emotional outbursts and bad takes than for any meaningful political work. If anything, this appointment plays directly into the right’s caricature of the left as unserious and ideologically confused.
We should elevate young leaders who are not just loud but effective, leaders who know how to channel emotion into results, not into impulsive tweets that backfire. Symbolism matters, but competence matters
Final Thought
If the Democratic Party wants to win back working-class trust and battle rising authoritarianism, it can’t afford to hand out power as a participation trophy. Leadership must be earned, and David Hogg hasn’t earned it.
Support The Virtus Press
The Virtus Press is committed to bold, honest commentary that challenges the left and right alike. If it needs to be said, we say it.
If you enjoy our content, please consider donating to help us continue doing what we do best.
Your contributions allow us to sustain and enhance our mission.
Follow me on Bluesky for updates on this and other topics that shape our nation’s identity.
