Crowley is Seen as a "Moderate"
David Crowley is the Democratic candidate for the position
of governor of Wisconsin after beating Francisca 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.
