By Clara Page
I’m going to start by breaking the fourth wall a bit:
This essay was incredibly difficult for me to write. After my initial research, which included reading hate comments directed at Ms. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, I was nauseated by the prospect.
A quick glance at AOC’s Instagram comments reveals that she is regularly, personally attacked. Strangers call her an “egomaniac” and a “delusional idiot.” Everyday, people remind her that she “belong[s] in a restaurant.” Even the President of the United States refers to her as a “young bartender.”
In short, it is difficult to have this debate because it is not a political one. There are plenty of congressmen, congresswomen, and senators with intensely liberal views. The controversy about Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is rooted in racism, misogyny, and elitism, not in political ideology.
Ironically, those who defend the American dream most fervently are the ones who most aggressively attack AOC, the modern incarnation of it. She began her political career while she was still a waitress, struggling to support herself. From there, she rose to notoriety in part to due viral video clips, but mostly due to her radical agenda and the fervor with which she defends it.
Today, AOC is a household name. However, that name means vastly different things to different people. To some, her three letter initialism inspires hope for a better future. To others, it sounds like danger incarnate.
Since taking office, Ms. Ocasio Cortez has been repeatedly attacked for simply meeting the requirements of her job. During one of her first weeks in congress, a journalist noted that her “jacket and coat don’t look like a girl who struggles.” She was then forced to defend her decision to spend money on clothing appropriate for her office.
Indeed, Ocasio Cortez’s opponents are obsessed with proving she hasn’t experienced poverty or hardship. One example of this was the debacle over her housing.
After her initial election, AOC commented on how difficult it would be for her to afford an apartment in D.C. until her first paycheck came in. Several months later, the news was flooded with with reports of her renting a luxury condo. To say she was crucified for this would be an understatement.
When you look at the facts, though, it’s clear that only half the story was told.
Her rent is actually only $2,000 to $5,000, and likely towards the lower end of the scale. Given that the average rent in the D.C. area is actually $2,710, this is reasonable. There was no scandal.
Another critique is that she lied about not being able to afford an apartment in the first place, given her previously disclosed $15,000 of savings. However, that argument doesn’t take into account her time living off those savings while on the campaign trail.
Finally, opponents complain that her PAC violated campaign finance law. This is unproven and likely untrue. Her campaign did, like most others, take advantage of looseness in regulation. That said, none of their actions are likely to result in more than a “paperwork violation,” according to the experts at Bloomberg.
This mistruth is particularly dangerous, because it was partially created by her opponents’ reports, so networks could report on the “alleged” scandal.
Overall, it’s clear that AOC has, on multiple occasions, been the victim of a vendetta. News where she is concerned is often distorted and misreported.
Through it all, however, she has remained the picture of grace. And, frankly, she’s been good at her job. The questions she asked during Michael Cohen’s testimony were praised by Democrats for their specificity and the doors they opened. Her extreme transparency via social media has allowed her constituents and thousands of other Americans to become more educated about politics.
Recently, she supported a massive piece of legislation called the Green New Deal. Although this legislation did not pass, it was one of the first comprehensive, innovate solutions to address climate change. It was also widely criticized, mainly by unions worried about job loss and others claiming the bill lacked specificity.
To address the job loss first: the Green New Deal included massive provisions for job growth, just in clean energy. The government has supported employment on that level before.
Secondly, the bill lacked specificity for the sake of negotiation and innovation.
And, as Ocasio Cortez says, until anyone else makes an effort to solve this pressing issue, she’s the boss.
Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is hated because she is powerful woman that does not fear the existing political establishment. She is loved because she is powerful woman that does not fear the existing political establishment.
Two sides of the same coin.
Which one do you land on?
Comments