Kamala IS Brat

We’ve all seen it: Brat edits on social media, flashy clips and photos of Kamala Harris set to 360 by Charli XCX. It’s fun and has added to the canon of the 2024 brat summer epidemic. When Charli XCX tweeted, “ Kamala is Brat,” major news sources took note of Kamala’s Bratification and began running stories on what Brat is and what it means to the 2024 Harris election. While unique, the Bratification of Harris is no new cultural phenomenon, just a continuation in the social media of the impact of music on political campaigns in the United States. Between publishing and rights granted, artists have been leveraging their cultural power to impact political campaigns.

“Born in the USA” by Bruce Springsteen is a patriotic 4th of July classic to most Americans. Played over firework displays and barbecues, it holds a story of America–and the patriotic roots of the song hold an even deeper story. During Ronald Reagan’s re-election campaign in 1984, on a stop in New Jersey, Reagan stated that Born in the USA held a song about power of the people. However, Reagan had spent his first term disillusioning many, saying his focus was on big business and not on the needs of the American people. Two days after Regan made these comments, Springsteen, who up to that point was not outwardly political, said, “Well, the president was mentioning my name in his speech the other day, and I kind of got to wondering what his favorite album of mine must’ve been, you know? I don’t think it was the Nebraska album. I don’t think he’s been listening to this one.” Referencing Nebraska, an album full of the stories of hard working Americans who were down on their luck by their jobs and wealthy businessmen, was an under the table dig at Regan by Springsteen. While not overtly saying he did not believe in Reagan and his reelection campaign, Springsteen’s nod to his depictions of the pain Reagan and his predecessors had brought in his album, showed solidarity in the fight against Reagan era policies.

Springsteen’s political tendencies quietened until Obama’s campaign in 2008. When faced with the fact that the blue collar white male americans, a crowd that was certainly Springsteen fans, were seen as anti- Obama, Springsteen took to his website to endorse Obama. Springsteen wrote, Obama “speaks to the America I’ve envisioned in my music for the past 35 years, a generous nation with a citizenry willing to tackle nuanced and complex problems, a country that’s interested in its collective destiny and in the potential of its gathered spirit.” A comment that doubled down on his anti- Reagan comments, and decisively appealed to the hearts of Americans asking them to vote for Obama.

Beyond commenting on elections through songs and written endorsement, like Springsteen did, some artists have taken legal routes to make political commentary. In 2020, Donald Trump used YMCA at a campaign rally, and the backlash was swift. Village People, the artists, quickly stated to the press that they had sent numerous cease and desist letters to the Trump campaign asking them to not play the song at any Trump events. Due to licensing laws, Trump was able to continue to play the song. In May of 2023, a video circulated of Village People’s songs “ Macho Man”, " Go West” and “ YMCA” being performed at a Trump event in Florida. Again, Karen Willis, the manager of Village People sent a cease and desist letter to Trump’s campaign. Ironically, Village People is a band that got its roots playing to male gay audiences. The band cited their roots and how Trump’s policies were directly attacking the group’s own identities, and many of the policies that protected them and their longtime fans.

However, because campaigns get their public use licensing through BMI and ASCAP, artists rarely get to decide if a political campaign can use their music in public. However, Foo Fighters recently found a work around to this. After Trump used “ My Hero”, Foo Fighters sent a cease and desist letter to the Trump campaign who, to their dismay, had a license to play the song publicly. However Foo Fighters responded to this by saying that any royalties they gained from Trump’s public use of the song would be donated to the Harris-Waltz campaign. This work around shows one financial way that artists have found of leveraging their music to show political support. Campaigns do not have the ability to use songs on social media without artist, publishers and licensing approval. Trump was recently in hot water for this when he used Beyonce's “ Freedom” on a social media post. Because it was on social media, and not just public use, Beyonce’s team was able to get the post taken down for infringement. Soon after, the same Beyonce song was used for a Harris-Waltz campaign ad and was posted on social media channels. Beyonce has commented publicly on campaigns, but her actions on who can use her songs in campaign ads and social media are unspoken endorsements of politicians as well.

From Springsteen to Beyonce to Village People, artists have both overtly and covertly endorsed politicians for decades. While the most recent of this messaging was Charli XCX’s  tweet, ‘Kamala is Brat’, endorsements can come in the form of licensing, publishing approval and commentary during their concerts. Usage of voice and music is power and artist’s voices and tweets prove this exact point.  Whether or not you believe in Brat Green, Charli XCX’s tweet joins the ranks of Springsteen and Foo Fighters, forging powerful political power in the complex context of US election history.

‍