"In her May issue editor's letter, ELLE Editor-in-Chief Robbie Myers writes: "There is something innately regal about Chelsea—a kind of grace that doesn't seem practiced, or trotted out just for public consumption. She's a person of substance for sure, a young woman who, while measured in her manner, has a fierceness of conviction, and a calling to make the world a better place."
No Ceilings is emblematic of the work Chelsea says she felt called to do. It was an idea she and her mother dreamed up together, looking back at the United Nations' World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995, where Hillary, then First Lady, made her famous declaration that "human rights are women's rights and women's rights are human rights." Chelsea says she wanted to use the 20th anniversary of that historic event to provide perspective on the status of women's rights, and last month she was able to do just that as she officially released the No Ceilings Full Participation Reportat an event in New York City, alongside her mother and Melinda Gates (The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation joined forces with the No Ceilings initiative of the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation to create the report)."
==========
The above is a preamble to a gushing Elle Magazine article on Chelsea Clinton that makes me want to vomit.
If Chelsea Clinton is not a member of an emerging American aristocracy then I'll eat my hat. By any analysis of her background and career, she has to be on a trajectory to public office, as are many others of her ilk.
As most would know, with a little money, the credentials for a public persona can be purchased - a few years teaching in an undeveloped country, notable adventures, expeditions to far off places, Board appointments, charity "work", your own book, etc. it's all for sale these days. I had one colleague who deeds of derring do were trumpeted in puff pieces this way - I found that every Australian Consulate and Embassy had been primed to look after him on his "expedition."
Lest you think this is unimportant; How long can "The American Dream" be pedalled to the public in the face of this?
How long can commentators pass off the abject poverty and lack of opportunity of sections of the community as the result of "Choices" they made for themselves? As if they could have been neurosurgeons if they had wished it so?
All you have to do is work hard and dream big, yeah, sure.
How long before the community at large understands that the game is rigged?
Will this unrepresentative aristocratic swill end up like French or Russian aristocracies? The tools of repression in their favour already exist.
Sorry, my egalitarian streak is showing this morning.
walrus
http://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/news/a27707/chelsea-clinton-may-2015/
I see the slow downward economic and social spiral accelerating. Prices are up and wages down. We don't make it here anymore. The drought in California will play havoc on food prices, prices up wages down for the not so affluent. The only break to the working class in the last 30 years, is the price of fuel down a bit.
When President Obama leaves office, how long till he is worth 300 million, then 500 million, and then over a Billion?
Posted by: Peter C | 11 April 2015 at 07:39 PM
NOBLISSE OBLIGE?
Some estimates of Clinton family net worth range to $200M!
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 11 April 2015 at 07:56 PM
Walrus:
I like Elle magazine, it teaches women how to dress properly - all through out their lives.
And it does carry book reviews and assorted other cultural coverage.
What would all those clueless women who have been victims of mass Wal-Martization of America do without Elle?
Furthermore, what is wrong with aristocracy; how else can people learn correct speech, style, breeding etc.
I invite you to take a trip to Las Vegas and see for yourself what decades of rebellious egalitarianism has done to Americans.
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 11 April 2015 at 08:51 PM
Hereditary oligarchy now, feudalism soon.
Posted by: volney | 11 April 2015 at 09:16 PM
Walrus
We have always had an aristocracy, but the old money WASP hegemons often had the grace to think that public service was a gentleman's obligation and that making money was largely a prerequisite for the freedom to do the public good. A certain reticence was also thought wise. If you look around Washington you will find grand old houses now filled with conference centers, think tanks, clubs, embassies and the like. These were once the residences of US public servants. The older sons went into diplomatic work and the younger ones in the Army and Navy. That is all gone now with the exception of a few isolated remnants like Lincoln Chafee. The old aristocracy hides in the countryside behind their stone walls and winding avenues. The New People are of the river boat gambler school of ambition and grasping self service. Their rise to power is a sign of the impending doom of the Republic. How many sons and daughters of the "Duke, and the Dauphin" and the Snopeses risen to great wealth now serve in the armed forces? Tennessee William's play "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" now seems prophecy. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 11 April 2015 at 09:28 PM
couthiness is analogous to truthiness, i'nit???
"correct speech, style, breeding etc." Holy Jumping Jane Austen (or Henry James) Bab.Mak.!!!!
Posted by: rjj | 11 April 2015 at 09:37 PM
Walrus,
Wait until you get to see the spectacle of the Media trying to drag Hillary's carcass across the finish line of the Presidency. If this makes you vomit you better have an anti-emetic on a drip line.
Posted by: Tyler | 11 April 2015 at 09:44 PM
Walrus,
".. a calling to make the world a better place. ... emblematic of the work Chelsea says she felt called to do."
You will notice that The United States of America doesn't make the list of countries Chelsea felt a calling to serve. Yep, we are all Trayvon now. Democratic politicians (or New Yorkers) don't give a damn about us until we dead - if we were shot by a white police officer and happen to be black - and they need our votes; or they need to distract us from another rip-off they are orchestrating. I wonder how soon she'll be jumping on the rape culture band wagon that Rolling Stone was trying to help gin up with that fake story about UVA?
Posted by: Fred | 11 April 2015 at 09:46 PM
Walrus,
I'm not convinced a bit of aristocracy is a bad thing. Indeed I lean towards the opposite. None at all is worse, even doomed to failure. I can't damn the girl for seeking refinement and achieving a measure of it no matter how I might disagree with her policies. Label us hypocrites if you wish, but mindless adherence to ideals is not what we are about.
I am under the impression that nearly all of our old aristocracy was built on fortunes compiled by mud puddle shallow money worshiping scoundrels. They were sniffed at by the British aristocracy, justifiably so, but eventually some gained a enough depth to suffice for the conditions they encountered. I suspect Jacksonian revolutions are required to create new aristocracy every so often, if for no other reason than to check excessive inbreeding, but I dread them. Maybe Zorba is right, "Life is trouble."
Posted by: Mark Logan | 11 April 2015 at 10:39 PM
I remember George Kennan telling a story in his memoir of being required to chaperon a young, petulant John Kennedy around Europe in the late 1930's.
And of course, Kennedy also did the book thing.
Posted by: CSP | 11 April 2015 at 11:43 PM
Mark Logan
"... sniffed at by the British aristocracy, justifiably so, but eventually some gained a enough depth to suffice for the conditions they encountered." Yes, but the British aristocracy had gained their elevated positions from ancestors who were every bit as grubby in their road to power and wealth. what matters is what such classes become in terms of service to the common good, not how their ancestors grubbed for money and won. IMO the Clintons and their kind represent a very early stage in that process, and the "dead souls" in places like the NSC Staff and State are just sad. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 12 April 2015 at 12:04 AM
CSP
Yes, that is a perfect example of what we are talking about. JFK's earnest striving is sad in retrospect even unto his marriage to a daughter of the establishment and his subsequent betrayal of her. Kennedy's father so much wanted the transition to real status that he was willing to sacrifice anyone and anything to have it. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 12 April 2015 at 12:08 AM
This raises the question why the two parties cannot find someone other than a Bush or a Clinton (in the past a Kennedy).
Posted by: Hank Foresman | 12 April 2015 at 06:25 AM
"The older sons went into diplomatic work and the younger ones in the Army and Navy."
I would think such an arrangement is more likely to be sustained with a conscription army and a diplomatic service that does not appear to put up some percentage of available posts to the least qualified bidders from among the self-made crowd.
The place of conscription seems to have been taken by the Great American Self-Recruitment Drive For Internships On Wall Street And In Silicon Valley, as all other kinds of service and experience are clearly inferior, if not completely worthless. (I don't know if I misremember the beginning of The Great Gatsby, but doesn't the narrator end up in the bond business precisely because he is somewhat aimless, undecided and mainly focused on avoiding the default career choices before him?)
Posted by: elev8 | 12 April 2015 at 07:22 AM
elev8
I was thinking of the fairly small number of children of the elites who went to "elite" colleges (including the service academies) and chose to be career officers. These were important leavening because of their understanding of what was really going on outside the fairly closed world of career officers as well as their ability to communicate service points of view to the actual nomenklatura. At the same time there were well educated men among the draftee enlisted who chose to serve in tough options. I had a radio operator as a platoon leader who had an MA from NYU. There were several such among my 43 men. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 12 April 2015 at 08:44 AM
Hank F.
IMO the present moneyed rabble have not yet evolved into a genuine ruling class. Thus the rats are still c]scrabbling in an unseemly manner for the cheese. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 12 April 2015 at 08:51 AM
What better goal in a society than a carpenter with a masters in english lit.
Posted by: Brad Ruble | 12 April 2015 at 09:04 AM
P.L. Restrictions on outside EARNED INCOME for federal officers and employees did not exist before signing into law the DUAL COMPENSATION ACT OF 1947 but that law seldom enforced since access to federal income tax returns are denied to all federal ethics officials including OGE [OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS--established 1989]!
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 12 April 2015 at 09:06 AM
Hey she was the partner signing off on Web Hubbell's billings and Bill Clinton's numerous affairs!
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 12 April 2015 at 09:08 AM
ALL GREAT FORTUNES START WITH A CRIME?
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 12 April 2015 at 09:09 AM
Agree!
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 12 April 2015 at 09:11 AM
Brad Ruble
I had a cabinetmaker work in my house for a year who had a BA in English from Brown and who had been an apprentice at Taliesin West. He was a splendid man and a fine citizen. I sense a disdain for the Humanities in your comment. you are in Wyoming. Perhaps Cheney might have been a better man if he had been a Humanities educated person. As for my radio operator his MA was in in criminology. He went into the NYPD when he was discharged. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 12 April 2015 at 09:16 AM
Contributors to Presidential candidates want to invest to the extent possible in candidates vetted over a long period for sharing values--specifically what issues or policies they are willingly to adopt to pay off contributors. IMO of course.
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 12 April 2015 at 09:33 AM
You aptly used the term "nomenkaltura"- a great choice of words. I can recall serving with several officers who came from elite families- concur that they were important additions - especially in branches like infantry and nuclear submarines.
Posted by: oofda | 12 April 2015 at 10:00 AM
Walrus,
I think you mistake celebrity for aristocracy here. America clearly has a celebrity class, though I truly doubt it has an actual aristocracy. In the article you cite, all the 'regalness' demonstrated by Chelsea Clinton can easily be attributed to a lifetime in front of the eye of media. After a lifetime of it, I would be surprised if anyone were unable to play the part, as it were. If she is destined for future office, it is due to name recognition and again, a lifetime worth of meeting and dealing with wealthy donors.
All one needs to do to realize there is no privileged aristocracy in America is to visit your local DMV office. You will see all sorts of people of different races and classes, all treated with equal disdain by the State's bureaucracy.
Posted by: nick b | 12 April 2015 at 10:59 AM