If you must fake it, fake yourself rich: On the George Santos hoax

Comment published on New York Times blog in response to opinion essay by David Brooks, “The sad tales of George Santos,” December 28, 2022:

That a candidacy can be made of a fantasy is today little surprise, but what the fantasies are about also matters. It seems much of it had to do with being poor and wanting to appear rich to voters. He may have assumed that to be a successful politician it helps to be rich, and it would hurt his chances if the public knew the truth of his personal economics: he had bad debts, worked at low-paying jobs, and owed money to a landlord. The respectable, admirable person he wanted to be seen as had to be wealthy, for the poor are not respectable.

Will any of his detractors in the Democratic Party call attention to the curious contradiction involved here, that the cause of his dishonesty is bound up with the ideological claim that poverty is a disgrace and wealth an honor? Who will run for his seat saying, "I am poor and proud of it"? (Not "I am a minority brought up in poverty who climbed to wealth through hard work and sacrifice.") The situation is an opportunity for people on the left to try to change an important pillar of political discourse, including in the Democratic Party. Someone ought to run for his seat, after it is vacated (or in the next congressional elect two years hence), in part just to make this crucial point. A candidate who claims achievements that are not monetized (I note that many adjunct professors fall into this category) and is unashamed to have a low income or have had marginal jobs.