Wake Up!

Cross-Cutting Conflicts Mask Class Divisions

A few weeks ago, an article appeared on line to talk about why baby boomers are hoarding their wealth instead of sharing it. I think that the article is mostly nonsense, but it is a symptom of something really important, which is the tendency of American progressives to split into cross-cutting groups along lines that prevent progressives from focusing on fundamental class conflicts. 

Young vs. Old

One of those lines is generational. The split is between the aging baby boomers and younger generations like gen-X or the millennials. On the one hand, we have articles that accuse old people of hoarding the wealth that they gained because they were born and grew up at a time when our expanding economy provided exceptional opportunities. We read that the fifties were a golden age in which a family could live well on one income, and we read that today’s young people face much higher barriers to the accumulation of wealth than the boomers did. On the other side of the divide, we see articles saying that old people should not have to pay property taxes on their homes because – it is said – the old people have already paid their dues. Both versions set up a conflict between the young and the old.

Men vs. Women

Then, there is the gender divide in which men are accused of oppressing women through the dominance of a patriarchy. Again, there is truth in this. Most positions of authority in the United States are held by men, but this argument obscures the fact that most men do not hold such positions. Most men are workers who are oppressed, but many of us do not see that. As a result, instead of rising together, men and women fight with each other.

White vs. Black

We also have a divide based on race. Again, it is real. People of color are and have been oppressed in our country since its founding. Policies like “red-lining” are or at least were real. Seniority policies promoted by unions have worked against people of color who became “the last hired and the first fired.” The difference in wealth between white people and people of color in our country is real, but who are the real oppressors? Remember that in the Civil War, poor white southerners died by the thousands to protect the plantation system that oppressed them.

Oligarchy

These political divisions come together in the phrase that says that political leaders in the United States are “pale, male and stale.” There is truth in this, too, but the phrase lacks an important adjective, and that adjective is “rich.” Our country is an oligarchy, and the oligarchs are rich people who use their money to control our electoral system and the representatives we elect. Some of the oligarchs are young, and some are old; some are men and a few are women; most are white, but a few are black. The oligarchy’s control is not perfect, but the oligarchs are working on that.

The oppression of young people, women or racial minorities is not the oligarchs' goal although, they can live with oppression. Their goal is to protect and increase their wealth. However, the oligarchs are happy to have the rest of us fighting among ourselves - men against women, black against white, young against old – because as long as we are doing that, the oligarchs can pick our pockets at their leisure, and they can run the country for their benefit. We need to wake up.

We Need to Wake Up

The oligarchs' current instrument for keeping us fighting among ourselves is the MAGA movement. The MAGA movement is in essence an immense diversionary tactic. It promotes the divisions that mask the oligarchy and blames women and minorities for the problems of working Americans. It also promotes a conflict between immigrants and native-born Americans.  MAGA focuses attention on cultural issues too. It works to make sure that voters focus on anything rather than the oligarchs.

The MAGA movement does these things while in the background, its leaders reduce income taxes and increase tariffs, which are consumption taxes, to shift the tax burden onto ordinary, working Americans. It eliminates environmental regulations that reduce the profits of corporations. MAGA's leaders hope that if they can keep the rest of us fighting among ourselves, they can continue to pick our pockets at leisure. We need to stop being suckered into fighting with each other and focus our attention on our real enemies. Wake up!

Hispanics as Americans

 Who Can Be an American?

This month we are celebrating Hispanic Heritage Month, and the celebration can teach us something about what it means to be American. Anyone can become an American because we Americans invented the idea of citizenship as a voluntary commitment.  We believe in the idea that anyone who accepts the responsibilities and duties of citizenship can be an American citizen, and we have no other definition of what it means to be American. Most other countries are different. If I moved to France, I could become a French citizen, but that would not make me a Frenchman; if I moved to Mexico, I might become a Mexican citizen, but that would not make me a Mexican; but the United States is different, a person who moves here can really become an American. American society is very open.

Our Openness Has Made Us Strong

Our openness to has made us strong. We have attracted people from all over the world, and they have built our society and our economy. The army that fought in World War II was made up in large part of children and grandchildren of immigrants. We had no shortage of people who could speak the languages of our enemies: German, Italian and Japanese.

Our definition of citizenship has made it possible for millions of people to become Americans without giving up elements of their ethnic heritages that they cherished. The Irish immigrants, who were scorned when they arrived, constructed an entire alternative school system to allow them to maintain their Catholic religious heritage in a largely Protestant country. It is not an accident that Notre Dame’s football team is known as the “fighting Irish.” The school system that the Irish created later helped millions of Italian and Polish immigrants to adjust to American life and to become Americans.

So, Let Us Celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month

So, it will be with the Hispanic heritage. Hispanic immigrants and their children will work to maintain parts of their heritage even as they integrate into American life. The children of Mexican immigrants will remember the Virgin of Guadalupe and their mothers' guisados even as they gradually lose the ability to speak Spanish, and their food will enrich our culture. Indeed, Mexican food has already become a part of American culture just as pizza and egg rolls did at an earlier time.

That is what we can learn from Hispanic Heritage Month. The maintenance of the Hispanic heritage does not make Hispanic immigrants less American in any way. The Hispanic immigrants are following the well-worn path that other immigrant groups followed before them, and the fact that they are able to do that will make us strong, and it will enrich our culture. So, let us join in the celebration of Hispanic Heritage secure in the knowledge that such celebrations are the secret of our success as a country.

Progressive Ideas Can Win With Crowley

 Crowley is Seen as a "Moderate"

David Crowley is the Democratic candidate for the position of governor of Wisconsin after beating Francesca Hong in the primary election.  Crowley is widely seen as a candidate from the “establishment” or “moderate” wing of the Democratic Party, while Hong is a Democratic Socialist who comes from the “liberal” wing of the party. It is worth taking a few minutes to explore the real nature of the difference between them because it is not nearly as great as it seems.

Crowley Comes From Milwaukee's Black Working-Class

In a way, Crowley ought to be the radical. He comes from a genuine, working-class family. His father was an electrician. His grandparents were part of the “Great Migration” that brought millions of black Americans fleeing from the violence and terrorism of Jim Crow to the cities of the North. Hong, on the other hand, comes from an upper middle class immigrant family. Her father is a social scientist at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. She grew up in an academic family, and she has owned a small business.

Crowley’s political base is in Milwaukee, where the city’s working class has been devasted by the loss of manufacturing jobs. In Milwaukee, workers have real grievances. Moreover, Crowley is a black man in a city with a history of difficult race relations. In contrast, Hong’s political base is in Madison, a center of intellectual liberalism. The people among whom Hong grew up have not been affected much by the loss of manufacturing jobs, and they have not suffered from housing segregation as Crowley’s people have. (There is housing segregation in Madison, but the academic community around the university has not been much affected by it.)

Crowley's Positions on Issues Are Not Very Different From Hong's

In spite of their different backgrounds, Crowley’s positions on “kitchen table” issues are not very different from Hong’s as you will see if you visit their campaign web sites. The details are different in some cases, but they both propose policies to increase economic justice and fairness in Wisconsin.  Crowley talks more about housing than Hong does, while she talks more about labor unions. She is more opposed to the building of data centers than he is, while he makes a point of making sure that they are built in a way that provides good jobs for workers. Both are in favor of investments in Green Energy. Yet Crowley is seen as the “establishment” candidate, while Hong ran as a Democratic Socialist and is seen as a “radical.” 

I suggest that the difference between these candidates is mainly a difference in vocabulary and identity. Hong identifies as a Democratic Socialist, and she uses the vocabulary of class conflict. She talks like a member of the intellectual, liberal community she grew up in. So, for example, she favors breaking up “big ag” and promoting agricultural cooperatives, while Crowley is silent on these topics. He talks like the big-city politician that he is. He stresses the need for cooperation and unity. However, for the most part, their positions on the “kitchen table” issues that affect working Americans directly are similar, but there are big stylistic differences between them.  Hong says that her positions are socialist positions, while Crowley does not. He joins James Talarico in promoting social justice without the language of revolution. Hong presents her positions as radical, while Crowley does not.

Progressive Ideas Can Win

In short, Hong is perceived as a radical because she says that she is radical and because the Republicans are happy to paint her as more radical than she really is. David Crowley is perceived as a “moderate” because he talks like one, but if you go to his campaign website, you will find that he supports policies that Republicans would like to paint as radical. In Wisconsin, at least, a Democratic Socialist was unable to win against a perceived moderate, but progressive ideas are another story. They can win. So, let's get busy and make sure that they win.