All the talk about Caroline Kennedy being appointed to Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat has stirred up mixed feelings in me.
I love the Kennedy legacy, yet I feel this kind of multigenerational star power appointment could be de facto racism because there’s no chance for most qualified minorities to compete with the sheer awe of the Kennedy name and place in history. According to most reports, by announcing her interest in the seat, Ms. Kennedy has put enormous pressure on Governor Paterson to appoint her, eclipsing other candidates. Once she’s in, the seat could be locked up within a patrician family for decades in this very multicultural state. And what about the multicultural elected officials who have paid their dues to merit a shot at this opportunity to represent their diverse region? What if there are other great thinkers, entrepreneurs, and social advocates who might be equally or more qualified for the position? Is it fair that the Kennedy name eclipse them all, thrusting their hard work and potential into the shadows of Camelot? Is it racism?
Let me reiterate that I cherish the Kennedy legacy. Not only did I grow up admiring John F. Kennedy and his family’s progressive ideals, I actually occupied the same dorm as JFK while at Harvard. Then I earned my Masters in Public Policy at the Kennedy School of Government. Inspired by President Kennedy’s vision, I emerged from Harvard with a burning passion to serve America and make the world a better place. Grateful for the family’s contributions, when Caroline Kennedy announced her interest I was initially enthused.
But the more I thought about it, the worse I felt about the candidates shoved to the sidelines, hard-working and accomplished people with qualifications but inconsequential family names. And what about those who would be inspired by the choice of a multicultural candidate, someone who cut his or her teeth in the hard-scrabble barrios, ‘hoods and public schools rather than at private academies and on museum boards? Not only would a multicultural appointment send a great message to New York’s diverse populace but also to those demonstrating deadly aversion to that diversity, perpetrating hate crimes like the recent killing of an Ecuadorian immigrant in Brooklyn. The message would be that New York belongs to all types of people, not just those with aristocratic pedigrees.
I actually lived in the City recently before returning to my native Texas. In that time, I witnessed a talented pool of diverse leaders who are serious contenders based on their credentials, among them: Representative Nydia Velazquez (D-Brooklyn), Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrion, Jr., and Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown. All three have proven their mettle in electoral politics and devoted years to public service in their communities. Rep. Velazquez, originally considered a front-runner for the spot, withdrew her name from consideration after Ms. Kennedy’s announcement. Could it be that Ms. Velazquez recognized how badly the odds were stacked against her once the Kennedy star power appeared on the horizon?
Arjun Jaikumar, Contributing Editor for the Daily Kos, writes:
Kennedy and Cuomo (Andrew) are probably the frontrunners at this point. Which means, that…(Paterson) is picking between the daughter of a former president and the son of a former governor and frequently touted presidential candidate, to succeed the wife of a former president in the U.S. Senate. What chance do mere mortals have?
This scenario represents the vestiges of feudalism thriving in America. If mere mortals have little chance, how about those who hail from traditionally underserved, underfunded, and emerging communities?
What concerns me is not whether Ms. Kennedy would be a competent Senator, as I’m sure she would be, but whether we are enabling de facto racism via an aristocratic approach to this appointment. You see, for the time being, no Ruiz or Rodriguez can leverage generations of American wealth, leadership and celebrity to attain a powerful, prestigious position simply because we want it. So while appointing a qualified Park Avenue heiress is not blatantly, proactively racist, it de facto leaves qualified minorities toiling in the shadows, overpowered by the legacy of the long-ruling elite. Perhaps if Ms. Kennedy ends up withdrawing her name from consideration, Ms. Velazquez would reconsider jumping back in the fray. I’m not sure, but I’d welcome a chance to learn whether change in America will thrive only in Washington or reach all the way to the boondocks of New York.
Todos estos rumores acerca del posible nombramiento de Caroline Kennedy a cubrir el escaño que deja Hillary Clinton en el Senado me han provocado emociones conflictivas.
Yo amo el legado Kennedy, pero no puedo evitar pensar que este tipo de nombramiento influenciado por el brillo del nombre puede ser de hecho racista, ya que las personas calificadas pertenecientes a las minorías no tienen oportunidad de competir al ser opacadas por el enorme poder del nombre Kennedy y su indiscutible sitio en la historia. De acuerdo a la mayoría de los reportes, con el solo anuncio de su interés en el puesto, la Sra. Kennedy ejerce una enorme presión sobre el Gobernador Paterson para otorgar el nombramiento a ella, eliminando a los otros candidatos. Y es muy posible que una vez que ella haya obtenido el nombramiento, el escaño quede en poder de una aristocrática familia por décadas, a pesar de ser Nueva York un estado multicultural. Y qué de todos aquellos funcionarios que han sido electos a sus puestos y han hecho méritos para aspirar a la oportunidad de representar a su diversa región? Qué tal si hay otros grandes pensadores, empresarios y abogados de las causas sociales que pueden estar tan o aún mejor calificados para el puesto? Es justo que el solo nombre de Kennedy los eclipse, relegando todo su potencial y su ardua labor a la sombra de Camelot? Es esto racista?
Permítame reiterar que yo amo el legado Kennedy. No solo crecí admirando a John F. Kennedy y los ideales progresistas de su familia, hasta ocupé el mismo dormitorio que JFK durante mi estancia en Harvard. Después estudié una Maestría en Política Pública en la Escuela Kennedy de Gobierno. Inspirado por la visión del Presidente Kennedy, salí de Harvard infundido de una gran pasión por servir al país y hacer del mundo un sitio mejor. Agradecido por las contribuciones de la familia, cuando Caroline Kennedy anunció su interés por llenar el puesto que Hillary Clinton dejó vacante, me sentí entusiasmado.
Pero mientras más lo pensaba, más mal me sentía pensando en los candidatos que quedaban relegados; personas muy trabajadoras y realizadas, más que calificadas, pero que llevan apellidos inconsecuentes. Y qué hay de todos aquellos que se sentirían inspirados por la selección de un candidato multicultural, alguien que se hubiere fogueado en los barrios, en las vecindades predominantemente negras y en las escuelas públicas, en vez de educarse en exclusivas academias privadas y servir en los consejos directivos de museos? El nombramiento de un candidato multicultural enviaría un fuerte mensaje no solo al populacho del estado de Nueva York sino también a todos aquellos que demuestran una aversión mortal a la diversidad, aquellos que impulsados por el odio y el prejuicio cometen crímenes abominables como el reciente asesinato de un inmigrante Ecuatoriano en Brooklyn. El mensaje sería que Nueva York pertenece a toda clase de gente, no únicamente a aquellos que provienen de la aristocracia.
Yo viví en la Ciudad (entiéndase Nueva York) recientemente, antes de regresar a Texas que es mi hogar. Durante ese tiempo yo pude observar un grupo de líderes talentosos que serían fuertes candidatos al puesto gracias a sus méritos, por ejemplo: la Representante Nydia Velazquez (Demócrata de Brooklyn), el presidente del distrito del Bronx, Adolfo Carrion, Jr. Y el presidente municipal de Buffalo, Byron Brown. Los tres han demostrado su temple en la política electoral y han dedicado años al servicio público en sus respectivas comunidades. La Representante Velazquez, que era originalmente considerada como el principal candidato a suplir a Hillary Clinton, retiró su nombre de la contienda tras el anuncio de la Sra. Kennedy. Será que la Sra. Velazquez reconoce que no tendría oportunidad en contra del brillo y el poder del nombre Kennedy?
Arjun Jaikumar, Editor contribuyente del Daily Kos, escribe:
Kennedy y Cuomo (Andrew) son probablemente los candidatos más fuertes hasta el momento. Lo que significa que . . . . (Paterson) escogería entre la hija de un ex presidente y el hijo de un ex gobernador frecuentemente mencionado como candidato presidencial, para substituir a la esposa de un ex presidente en el Senado de los Estados Unidos. Qué oportunidad tendrían los simples mortales?
Este estado de cosas es un vestigio de feudalismo que aún prospera en nuestro país. Si los simples mortales tienen poca oportunidad, qué pueden esperar aquellos que provienen de las comunidades emergentes que tradicionalmente han padecido la falta de servicios y recursos?
No me preocupa que la Sra. Kennedy pueda tener un buen desempeño como Senadora, yo estoy seguro que lo tendría; lo que me preocupa es si de hecho estamos colaborando al racismo al optar por el candidato más aristocrático. El caso es que por ahora, ningún Ruiz ni Rodríguez puede ejercer presión contra generaciones de riqueza, liderazgo y celebridad americana para lograr un puesto poderoso y prestigiado solo porque lo deseamos. Así que, aun si el hecho de elegir a una rica heredera residente de la elegante Park Avenue, por más calificada que esté, no es de por sí un acto de flagrante racismo, sí tiene el efecto de relegar a las minorías capacitadas a seguir laborando en la sombra, opacados por el legado de la élite que ha llevado las riendas del poder por muchos años. Quizás si la Sra. Kennedy retirase su nombre de la contienda, la Sra. Velazquez consideraría regresar a la contienda. No estoy seguro, pero me encantaría la oportunidad de comprobar si el cambio en América florecerá únicamente en Washington o llegará hasta los confines de Nueva York.
December 19th, 2008 at 4:37 pm
The question is “Are Legacy Appointments Racist?” I think the answer is no. And yes.
In the case of Caroline Kennedy, I don’t feel that there is any racial motivation behind her possible appointment. There is no overt agenda against any race of people in this country that would be advanced by her becoming New York’s new Senator. Let’s keep in mind also that her appointment would be granted by Governor Paterson, a minority on two counts – his race and his disability.
That being said, appointing Kennedy to the Senate would perpetuate an enduring legacy of racism, classism, and celebrity worship that undermine the core principles of our democracy.
What has Caroline Kennedy done that would give anyone reason to believe that she is the most qualified person for this job? She is an attorney, giving her some knowledge of the finer points of law, which is certainly a plus for serving in the legislative branch. She has worked for private organizations that sought to better the public education system in New York, but I don’t know what her successes were in that capacity, if any. She is an author whose works I have never read, so she may well be a wise and insightful person, but I could not say for sure. I’ve never lived in New York so I have good reason to be somewhat ignorant of her accomplishments. I bet, though, that most of the residents of New York know just as little as (or less than) I do.
Kennedy’s true role in national politics has been as a sort of ambassador for her own family. With her brother gone, Caroline is the one left to carry the torch of Camelot into the present day. America loves us some JFK, and she’s the last living part of him that connects us today with what was taken from us 45 years ago. But she’s not her dad. She’s not either of her uncles. She’s not even her brother. She’s famous and known because of what they did, and her opportunities throughout life, especially the possibility of becoming a Senator, have existed because of what they did. Not because of what she has done.
America’s love of celebrity is to our own detriment. No one would know or care who Caroline Kennedy is if she didn’t have that wonderful family tree. She isn’t being judged on her own merit, but instead by the projections of what people imagine she could be. This line of reasoning has given us politicians like Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and George W. Bush. Also, appropriately enough, Hillary Clinton.
Our country has always been governed by the wealthy, and the families with the wealth and power have an interest in keeping that wealth and power. I would go so far as to say that our founders intended it to be that way. They don’t want new faces at the table. A new face means less influence for those that were already there. This is where the racism and classism begin to demonstrate themselves. Our founders were wealthy white men and many of them owned other people. That immoral and inhumane ownership made the playing field in our nation permanently unlevel. As some were forced to work for free and own nothing, their labor generated wealth for the ruling class at such an exponential rate that their money would sustain many generations to come. We have never –NEVER – truly had a government of the people by the people, and for the people. The potential appointment of Caroline Kennedy does not work to reverse this trend.
Our national legislature should be a reflection of the national populace. It is, after all, supposed to be a representative government. The paucity of minority representation is a testament to the overpowering wealth that the rich use to keep the United States operating for their own benefit, even if it comes at the cost of We, the People. The Kennedys have enough money that even if Caroline’s celebrity status was erased, their finances could be used as a bludgeon against a more qualified candidate with shallower pockets. This is effectively class warfare at a base level. The rules will never benefit the underclass because they’ll never really have a chance to shape those rules. The ruling class certainly has no impetus to change them.
Caroline Kennedy’s possible appointment is not racist, except when you realize that our nation’s history of racism, classism, and reward by pedigree rather than merit, has put her in the position to be considered for that appointment.
July 6th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
You know, I don’t read blogs. But yours is really worth beeing read.