Boztopia.com

Welcome to my bastard delight night, gents
Where everything has a meaning but none of it makes sense
Living is so demeaning but rappers still wanna offer
Fake aliens…from lying saucers
I don’t have the time, man
I’m searching for bigger answers

– “No Kings,” El-P

I initially didn’t have much of an opinion about the idea of Caroline Kennedy being appointed to fill Hillary Clinton’s seat for the remainder of her term, but the more I heard about it, the more it bothered me. Not because she’s a woman–indeed, the idea that her gender somehow disqualifies her simply because her potential predecessor was a woman is ludicrous. And I certainly don’t cotton to the idea that she’s somehow deserving of fairer treatment than Barracuda Sarah, as douche rags like Jonah Goldberg seem to think, simply because she’s progressive and Palin is a fundamentalist wacknut who can see Russia from her house but can’t find it on a map.

No, what bothers me is that, coming on the heels of the first election of a guy who isn’t part of a political dynasty or the founder of one in the last two decades, that we’re immediately sliding back into this worship of the aristocracy as natural leaders. Sorry, but if there’s one thing that Bush II should have taught us, it’s that the lucky miracle of being born into privilege does NOT give you the natural skills to be a leader.

Let’s be clear. I have nothing but admiration, love, and respect for the Kennedy family, for all they’ve endured, lost, suffered, and won for the good of our nation. But they earned that adoration through hard work, dedication, and adherence to the ideals we all venerate them for. They may have grown up in privilege, but that doesn’t inherently entitle them to leadership.

Yet there are still too many people out there who get hot flashes at the idea of Camelot or some other vestige of the American aristocracy, and think that it makes for a better fairy tale story if there’s always someone with the last name of Kennedy, or Bush, or whomever, in the limelight. I’d expect this sort of thinking from institutional propaganda arms like the Washington Post.

More brutally to the point, crying at the funeral of your legendary father does not make you qualified to fill his shoes. There’s been far too much breathless hand-fanning about her “mystique” and “name recognition,” and less about her actual politics and accomplishments–the latter of which are very thin indeed, though she does have the right set of beliefs, it seems.

Right now, New York is suffering a major financial meltdown because of the endless greed and corruption of its financial elite, but Governor Patterson, refusing to punish the elites, is instead proposing a truly draconian budget that’s going to hit working families in New York State where it hurts–and this includes my sister and her family especially. What kind of message does it send to the country that Patterson would appoint a member of this country’s aristocracy–who has, in all likelihood, never starved or worried about how to pay for her childrens’ school or health care–at the same time he’s breaking the backs of the people who truly pay his salary?

And what does it say about the American psyche that so many are willing to accept that? As Kathleen Parker notes:

We don’t do birthright in this country — except when we do. John Quincy Adams and George W. Bush come to mind. We don’t elect people on the basis of a recognizable name — except when we do. Who, after all, was Hillary Clinton other than the wife of a governor and president before being elected to the U.S. Senate from a state where she established a token residency?

There’s still too much of a tendency in our culture to venerate those who are above us simply for being above us. “Well, they’re rich and I’m not, so they must be right.” No, that certainly isn’t true. Just ask everyone from Mark Cuban to Bernard Madoff how well that line of thinking works out.

We want an all-seeing God Father (or Mother) to lead us and protect us–it’s the reason why we invest so much power and deference in the executive branch of the Presidency, why we idolize CEOs, coaches, and even movie directors–we want that single vector to funnel our hopes and dreams (and fears) into.

But America was born to be a democracy, a meritocracy, where someone could achieve fame through talent, hard work, and dumb luck. Adam Bonin wrote a great post yesterday pointing out how the democratizing factor of the Internet and its technologies have enabled average, ordinary, everyday people to do the extraordinary–to really make a difference in the lives of each other, their communities, and the world. Working hard and being successful at it–what a concept!

Barack Obama succeeded not in spite of his lack of experience, but because of it–because he brought fresh vision, new hope, and the courage to demand change in place of the same old, same old. If Caroline Kennedy can do the same, then she should prove it in the trenches, since that seat will be open not once, but twice in the next four years. Let her earn the rights to the legacy she bears, and prove worthy of the name she carries, by campaigning, debating, and running the race–not by simply expecting the door to open and the key to the kingdom to be handed to her. This is America, and again, if there’s one thing the reign of the Decider should have taught us, it’s that we don’t tolerate the rule of those who think they are above the law, above the process, and above those who are the true leaders of the nation.