Is “woke” the new “fascism”?  As so much of the political lexicon today is occupied with words like “woke” and “extreme,” it is indicative of the ideological puritanism which has manifested in civic discourse today.  To the right, “woke” is a term used like the left uses “fascist”—a term that is so diluted and so commonly used as to create a fusion of the vulgar and the vague.   “Wokeness” generally means something seen as a quality of being “overly politically correct” which is also vague.  What is politically correct to some is a kind of intellectual or linguistic tyranny while to others it is sensitivity and accommodation. 

As candidates routinely and, undermining confidence in democracy itself, consistently try to characterize their opponents as extreme, the divide between the aisle is deeper if not actually much wider in the true ideological sense.  There are extremes in government, to be sure, but if the whole is composed of extremists, where truly incompatible realities define the operating spaces of those leaders, then consensus is impossible and governance collapses.  What emerges is either anarchy or authoritarianism. 

Either option would be objectively horrible for day-to-day life. 

In the Second World War, the democratic (and communist) nations of the world were united against Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and the Empire of Japan.  By 1944, the Blitz was over, and the immediate threat of invasion had passed, but the UK was still being routinely bombed by German V1 and V2 weapons.  The war would last another year, but the momentum had shifted to the Allies.  That year, English author George Orwell wrote in The Tribune, “It will be seen that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print…. even the people who recklessly fling the word ‘Fascist’ in every direction attach at any rate an emotional significance to it. By ‘Fascism’ they mean, roughly speaking, something cruel, unscrupulous, arrogant, obscurantist, anti-liberal and anti-working-class. Except for the relatively small number of Fascist sympathizers, almost any English person would accept ‘bully’ as a synonym for ‘Fascist’. That is about as near to a definition as this much-abused word has come…. All one can do for the moment is to use the word with a certain amount of circumspection and not, as is usually done, degrade it to the level of a swearword.” 

Swap “fascist” with any red- or blue-preapproved slur of choice and the result is the same.  Orwell would doubtless be disappointed but not surprised if he could watch some of the campaign ads slung around in the 2022 election cycle. 

In CD-3, the atmosphere of extremism is a little more relevant, particularly coming out of the Republican primary in which Bob Healey stomped out the MAGA torch-bearer Ian Smith, who stumbled hard and continues to drown in his own legal trouble.  Bob Healey has attacked the incumbent in recent ads, asserting that Democratic Congressman Andy Kim is “soft” on crime and, taking it a step further, saying, “Andy Kim’s policies encourage crime.” 

The statement, issued on Monday, also said that Kim has “troubling affiliations with multiple far-left resistance groups” and names “Rise Stronger” a group “whose many radical positions routinely included espousing anti-law enforcement and antisemitic sentiments online.”  Kim, the Healey campaign said, “also promoted left-wing Indivisible, a group that believes ‘ICE, CBP, & police departments’ are organizations of “hate,” “uphold systemic racism,” are “rooted in white supremacy,” terrorize minorities, and must be defunded.’”  Healey said that Kim is also a member of other organizations which support cashless bail and are anti-cop in nature. 

Two days later, Healey fired again, hammering home the idea that Kim does not have the backs of the police.  “Andy’s fellow Progressive Caucus colleagues have made outrageous statements about law enforcement. Not once did Andy stand up and speak out. But it’s more than a lack of courage that explains Andy’s behavior: Andy Kim agrees with Reps. Bush, Ocasio-Cortez, Omar and Jayapal on defunding the police and feels very comfortable around his woke pals.” 

The “woke” buzzword resonates with conservatives and Healey has been using it to cultivate further support from Republicans.  Doubtless conscious that with Ocean County cut off from the district, he must avoid digging trenches that are too deep in the culture war if he means to win.  By depicting Kim as an extremist, surely the “moderate” Democrats and independents would consider voting for him.  If not, victory will be impossible. 

“Defunding” the police is a position the mainstream Democratic party does not endorse.  President Joe Biden has said on many occasions that law enforcement would not be disempowered.  Nevertheless, as a talking point, the extreme notion of reducing police resources—or getting rid of police entirely—plays into basic fears about public safety, an issue of concern to anyone, no matter which side of the aisle they occupy. 

Because of the January 6 insurrection, Andy Kim can truthfully say that he was witness to real extremism in action.  The congressman made headlines across the country when he was photographed picking up debris in the Capitol after the riot ended.  Indeed, the Smithsonian Institution even asked for the suit he wore that day for their collection.  To equate Kim with ideological extremism opens the door for a real-world counter-example.  Had Healey been beaten by Ian Smith, a diehard MAGA Republican whose name became known after defying Governor Murphy’s COVID lockdown orders and kicking down the wooden barrier put over his gym in Bellmawr, the contrasts between “woke” Kim and his “extreme” Republican opponent would have been low-hanging fruit—especially in a district which got bluer rather than redder.  Healey, however, the more moderate Republican contender, dulls the edge of that January 6 political weapon, should Kim choose to use it.  Smith has already kicked down a door on camera, been in trouble for alleged drunk driving, and has a manslaughter charge from 2007 on his record.  Healey builds yachts, practices yoga, and supports low-income families who want to attend Catholic schools. 

Kim, like Congressman Tom Malinowski who finds himself in a very competitive race against former state senator Tom Kean, Jr, has also been depicted as an extension of Nancy Pelosi, a favorite target of the Republican Party as the embodiment of everything wrong with the Democratic power establishment. 

Unlike Malinowski, however, it is harder to pin Kim as being cut from the same cloth as Pelosi ideologically.  Indeed, the differences between the two may have implications for the future, assuming either or both of them are re-elected in November. 

As Healey tries to make Kim out to be an anti-cop (and by consequence, pro-crime) liberal extremist, Kean and his allies have attacked Malinowski who found himself in hot water over a stock scandal.  Malinowski has defended himself, saying that his investments are in a blind trust now.  Kim, however, has no such (known) skeleton in his closet and took the particularly hard-line position of introducing legislation that would actually prohibit members of congress, their immediate families, and the president from owning stocks. 

Nancy Pelosi had dismissed the idea almost instantly, and one would be hard pressed to imagine this bill being anything other than dead-on-arrival. 

Nevertheless, by introducing such a bill, even if it has absolutely no hope of becoming a law, Kim can appeal to the purity of the spirit of the bill—and of course, by extension, his own.  This provides him with a concrete rebuttal against the idea that he is a Pelosi-clone.  If anything, Republicans can spin it as Kim being even farther left than Pelosi, and the Republican brand does not suffer from being characterized as pro-Wall Street.  Both parties, however, want to avoid being seen as pro-politician, presenting a double-edged sword when attacking Kim’s anti-Pelosist opposition to congressmen owning stock. 

With Governor Phil Murphy in his final term, the Democrats will be looking for their respective internal left-and-right champions.  Congressman Gottheimer is, unquestionably, one of the more conservative Democrats in the state and touts his Bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus at every opportunity.  This would theoretically make him a strong candidate to be a party torch-bearer for particularly purple segments.  Gottheimer, however, is believed by a number of insiders to have further ambitions in Washington, DC, so it is less likely to see him emerge as a leading state figure.  Congresswoman Mikie Sherrill is another likely contender.  With Paterson Mayor Andre Sayegh largely believed to be the inheritor of Congressman Bill Pascrell, Newark Mayor Ras Baraka could emerge as the champion of the New Jersey progressives, a title that could also go to Kim. 

Regardless of how “woke” or “extreme” the soft-spoken Kim might be–even if it invites smiles or eye-rolls from the moneyed machines which support him—Malinowski was tainted by his alleged stock transgressions.  Therefore, he is unlikely to have this kind of blessing from the NJ State Democratic Party should he wish to cement his state level credentials in the event of surviving the race with Kean.  Thanks to redistricting, CD-3 has become more favorable to Kim while CD-7 has become more favorable to Republicans.  State Chairman Leroy Jones told Insider NJ that Malinowski enjoys the full support of the state Democratic Party and refutes the notion that the congressman was deliberately hobbled because of redistricting.  Nevertheless, it is reasonable to speculate that Kim is best positioned to survive the mid-term election and gain further mobility within the party apparatus than Malinowski who can, at best, expect to maintain his political status quo.