The Despicable David Brooks

Posted on Comments

 

Once upon a time, David Brooks Fisking Day was celebrated here every Tuesday. The New York Times‘ token “conservative” column was so predictably wrong about nearly everything — his political instincts are so bad — that I had to lash him around every week just to relieve my system of the excess bile generated by reading his pretentious bulls–t. At least twice, circa 2007-2008, I walked out of events where Brooks spoke; the experience of being in the same room with him was intolerable. Once, a fews years ago, I found myself in a discussion with Jonah Goldberg as to which New York Times columnist was worse, David Brooks or Thomas Friedman. Goldberg insisted Friedman was worse than Brooks, and I suppose it’s a matter of opinion, but in my opinion, Goldberg is wrong. Friedman may be demonic, but David Brooks is Satan.

“Brooks should never be argued with — he should be mocked, and often, and by someone who knows how.”

Why do I hate David Brooks so much? Because I am a populist, a Jacksonian who believes that the American people deserve a government that serves their interests, and not the interests of a decadent elite. All elites eventually become decadent and corrupt. This is what history teaches, and our country is being ruined by the sort of people David Brooks rubs elbows with during his annual pilgrimages to Davos, deracinated cosmopolitans with no loyalty to anything, devoted to no principle except the increase of their own wealth, status and power. The comprehensive wrongness of David Brooks eventually became so glaringly apparent — about the time he expressed his admiration of Barack Obama’s pants creases — that everyone realized he is Satan. Once his diabolical wrongness was universally acknowledged, everybody with a blog got in on the Brooks-fisking game, and I lost interest in the sport. Nowadays, it takes a really spectacular exercise in Brooksian douchebaggery to get my attention, and he delivered such a specimen earlier this week:

Donald Trump now looks set to be the Republican presidential nominee. So for those of us appalled by this prospect — what are we supposed to do?
Well, not what the leaders of the Republican Party are doing. They’re going down meekly and hoping for a quiet convention. They seem blithely unaware that this is a Joe McCarthy moment. People will be judged by where they stood at this time. Those who walked with Trump will be tainted forever after for the degradation of standards and the general election slaughter. . . .

OK, let me interrupt this to make an important announcement. I hadn’t been planning to do this, but I now officially endorse Donald Trump.

If David Brooks hates Donald Trump, then it is my duty as a patriotic American to love Donald Trump. And if David Brooks says the fall election will be a “slaughter” for Republicans, this means Trump will win. And now let’s return to the total wrongness of David Brooks:

The suicide rate has surged to a 30-year high — a sure sign of rampant social isolation. . . .

(No, the high suicide rate is caused by the existential despair of Americans who understand that Barack Obama has destroyed their country.)

A record number of Americans believe the American dream is out of reach. And for millennials, social trust is at historic lows.
Trump’s success grew out of that pain, but he is not the right response to it. The job for the rest of us is to figure out the right response. . . .

(Who is “the rest of us,” Mr. Brooks?  Clueless douchebags on Pinch Sulzberger’s payroll? The people you hang out with in Davos?)

I was surprised by Trump’s success because I’ve slipped into a bad pattern, spending large chunks of my life in the bourgeois strata — in professional circles with people with similar status and demographics to my own.

(Which is to say, clueless douchebags.)

It takes an act of will to rip yourself out of that and go where you feel least comfortable. But this column is going to try to do that over the next months and years. We all have some responsibility to do one activity that leaps across the chasms of segmentation that afflict this country. . . .
Up until now, America’s story has been some version of the rags-to-riches story, the lone individual who rises from the bottom through pluck and work. But that story isn’t working for people anymore, especially for people who think the system is rigged. . . .
We’ll probably need a new definition of masculinity, too. There are many groups in society who have lost an empire but not yet found a role. Men are the largest of those groups. The traditional masculine ideal isn’t working anymore. It leads to high dropout rates, high incarceration rates, low labor force participation rates. This is an economy that rewards emotional connection and verbal expressiveness. Everywhere you see men imprisoned by the old reticent, stoical ideal.

You can read the rest, but I must warn you that reading David Brooks columns can lead to existential despair and suicide. Honestly, I’d rather read Third Wave feminist theory textbooks. At least feminists are honest about hating men, hating America, hating God and everything else.

What is so despicable about David Brooks is his condescending attitude, his insuperable conviction that he is better than the rest of us, more intelligent and sensitive — all that “emotional connection and verbal expression,” you see. And as he departs on his tour of the American hinterlands, ripping himself out of the “bourgeois strata” to leap across “the chasms of segmentation,” I hope David Brooks gets what he deserves, namely to be beaten to a bloody pulp by a tattooed redneck.

This would be a triumph of social justice, really and it’s not hard to imagine how it would happen, either. Probably at a Waffle House.

“Hey, buddy, you look kinda familiar,” says the truck driver, while he’s paying at the cash register. “Don’t I know you from somewhere?”

“You’ve probably seen me on Meet the Press or PBS Newshour,” says Brooks, who has been sitting at the counter, studying the menu and wondering why there’s no espresso. “My name’s David Brooks.”

“Well, doggone it, I thought so,” laughs the trucker. “I was just thinking to myself, that fellow looks like he writes for New York Times.”

“Thanks,” says Brooks, taking this as a compliment.

“So I guess you’re out here covering the election?” asks the trucker.

“No, actually, I’ve decided to leap across the chasms of segmentation that afflict this country, to mingle with the common folks in an effort to discover why men are imprisoned by a stoical ideal.”

“Oh, really?” says the trucker. And after listening patiently to Brooks prattle on about his ideas, the trucker will gesture toward the parking lot. “You ought to come take a look at my truck. It’s a fine one.”

After he accepts this invitation, David Brooks will probably be surprised to discover that his tour of the parking lot includes an old-fashioned stoical ass-whupping, and maybe the trucker will be prosecuted for assault, but really, who could pass up such an opportunity?

Oh, there’s a reason I always walked out a room whenever David Brooks walked in. Restraining my Jacksonian populist urges requires conscious effort sometimes, and it’s best not to risk an assault charge.

Look what he’s made me do here. I’ve endorsed Trump for pure spite. The worst thing David Brooks can imagine is Donald Trump winning the Republican nomination, but what would be worse for Brooks — what he cannot even imagine — is for Donald Trump to be elected president.

Let us rekindle our Jacksonian spirit, America. Let us ignore the advice of David Brooks and ask ourselves, “What would Old Hickory do?”

If we cannot punch David Brooks in the nose — and I apologize to my readers for having passed up the chance when I had it — then what can we do to fulfill our duty to our children and to our nation’s future? How can we avenge the numerous insults that David Brooks has heaped upon us? How can we escape the condemnation of future generations if, knowing that we had a moral obligation to do the exact opposite of whatever David Brooks said we should do, we did not do it? Our honor is at stake, you see.

David Brooks, a foul stain on the history of American journalism, has thrown down the gauntlet and challenged us to prove him wrong. He has predicted “general election slaughter” for Republicans as a consequence of Donald Trump winning the GOP primary campaign, and declared: “People will be judged by where they stood at this time.” Will people stand with David Brooks? Will people join this supercilious punk in his determination to see Hillary Clinton elected? God forbid!

However crazy it seems, we cannot say it is impossible for Donald Trump to be elected president, and if it is possible to elect Trump, then we are obliged to do all we can to make this happen, if only because a victory for Donald Trump would be a defeat for David Brooks.

Don’t blame me for this. Blame David Brooks. And, also, Satan.

But I repeat myself.





 


264 comments

  2. Oh, sure they would. SEE: #3
    1, Social Justice Warriors ALWAYS lie.
    2. Social Justice Warriors ALWAYS double down.
    3. Social Justice Warriors ALWAYS project.

  4. Jolly Green was talking about Clinton supporters, so therefore when I say ‘people’ I must be talking about Trump. I could not be talking about people like you, Finrod.

  5. I piss standing up.
    I pay people what they’re worth.
    I AM the “single payer” for the health care in my sphere of influence.
    I AM the NRA, and I vote.
    I’m fighting Hillary.

  7. This will be for me personally, the most bizarre election of my lifetime. By my own choice I will not be voting for my republican Senator (Squiffy moderate Kirk) or for the (presumed) republican Presidential candidate.

    I will probably lose friends and perhaps even family. Several of my family have fallen for the snake oil salesman and they were previously Carson and Cruz supporters. (besides breathing air, the Venn diagram of Carson/trump or Cruz/trump is zero). If someone starts talking to me about trump, I will walk away. Anyone that says “Lying Ted” is likely to get a pop in the puss before I walk away. If someone admits to me that they are a trump supporter (not including people voting to defeat Hillary), I will tell them to their face that they are a fool.

    For God’s sake people, we had a once in a lifetime chance to elect a real Conservative. Of course Cruz wasn’t perfect, but we knew with great confidence where he stood.

    I’m not going to automatically love a guy that that the other side hates, that belongs to the liberals and where they foment their derangement syndromes.

  8. In case you hadn’t noticed, the violence in protest began a while ago.
    Generally, in Blue Heaven, and designated Gun Free zones.
    Waco Tx, excluded of course.

  9. Oh, indeed, there’s quite a bit we agree on, which is why I’m so dissapointed about last week. But I do hope to mend things.

  10. This is what I don’t get. If I were in charge, and I wanted full control over ME oil, I’d just send in the Marines, grab the oil fields, and set up robot machine guns at the oil field borders to keep out the jihadi and anyone else, and let the rest of the ME go hang.

    Simple, direct, brutal. What’s wrong with being an evil overlord. Why tryto be over clever?

  11. Who just “negotiated” that whiz bang “treaty” in the middle East?

    What are the “Oh, By the Way” details “we” don’t hear about from the WH spokes folks?

  12. No, if Sanders got elected, I think even most moderate GOPe Congressmen will oppose his policies.

  15. To clarify Captain, I am talking about Real Americans getting violent not Scumbag-Americans who yes have been at work for a bit.

    I have the start of one novel that starts with an Occupier raping a girl in one of their tents, and the hero trying to interfere. So yes, I’m aware.

  16. Well, God’s people are fully aware that they don’t know doodly, and they are decidedly better off letting Him captain their ship, relying on Him for all things. In contradistinction, those who don’t belong to God, by default belong to Satan, who is, as we know, the father of lies. So they think that they know stuff, they think they are equipped to set their own course, and worse, our course, too.

    What I don’t understand is this: given the hundreds of fulfilled prophecies in the Bible, some of which essentially name names and dates, you’d think that even an atheist who doesn’t believe in God would at least think that somehow, magically, prophecies get correctly prophesied by biblical prophets, and because of that, take a look and see what seems to be on the agenda for the near future and act accordingly. Or at least read the stuff that the Christians are saying about prophecy and keep that in mind. But no.

  17. It just occurred to me that my two rules can be combined:

    Have a wienie, don’t be one.

  18. Point taken. However, the USA still has (as far as I know, despite an executive power grab by the present POTUS) a representational democracy, not a dictatorship AKA federal presidential republic as Venezuela does.

  19. Just wait until Hillary installs 3 new SCOTUS justices. What do you think your “rights” will be worth then?

  20. What is so despicable about David Brooks is his condescending attitude, his insuperable conviction that he is better than the rest of us, more intelligent and sensitive.

    This is, as Voegelin would have it, the gnostic impulse. Here are the relevant sections from Wikipedia’s entry on the subject:

    Voegelin perceived similarities between ancient Gnosticism and modernist political theories, particularly communism and nazism. He identified the root of the Gnostic impulse as alienation, that is, a sense of disconnection from society and a belief that this lack is the result of the inherent disorder, or even evil, of the world. This alienation has two effects:

    The first is the belief that the disorder of the world can be transcended by extraordinary insight, learning, or knowledge, called a Gnostic Speculation by Voegelin (the Gnostics themselves referred to this as gnosis).

    The second is the desire to implement and or create a policy to actualize the speculation, or Immanentize the Eschaton, i.e., to create a sort of heaven on earth within history.

    According to Voegelin the Gnostics are really rejecting the Christian eschaton of the kingdom of God and replacing it with a human form of salvation through esoteric ritual or practice.

    The primary feature that characterizes a tendency as gnostic for Voegelin is that it is motivated by the notion that the world and humanity can be fundamentally transformed and perfected through the intervention of a chosen group of people (an elite), a man-god, or men-Gods, Übermensch, who are the chosen ones that possess a kind of special knowledge (like magic or science) about how to perfect human existence.

    ……

    In the two cases specifically analyzed by Voegelin, the totalitarian impulse is derived from the alienation of the individuals from the rest of society. This leads to a desire to dominate (libido dominandi) which has its roots not just in the Gnostic’s conviction of the imperative of his vision but also in his lack of concord with a large body of his society. As a result, there is very little regard for the welfare of those who are harmed by the resulting politics, which ranges from coercive to calamitous…

  21. Oddly, many of the same people proclaiming “Never Trump!” told us to hold our noses and vote for Romney, McCain, and a host of other RINOs. I guess it depends on who holds the reins.

  22. You won’t be able to run far enough. So no. Your preening stupidity will not work for me or anyone else.

  23. We don’t know exactly what will happen as far as the US of A is concerned, but it isn’t mentioned anywhere in Bible prophecy. It simply makes no sense that a country as powerful and influential as the US not being mentioned if it exists.

  24. There is a big difference between possessing political power and being able to buy influence.

  26. You may be correct. But I choose to believe she will not win.

    We will see. No one can predict the future.

  27. That works only as long as she holds gravity at bay, after that she’d better be really really good at raising crops or synthesizing fuel or cutting wood.

  28. Well, I was figuring maybe some some non-retarded Cocker Spaniels. They could boss DWS around.

    For that matter, they could run intellectual rings around every first rank Dem. But dogs would not be so evil. My money is on a cabal of cats running the DNC.

  29. Yellow Dogs Democrats are a myth..

    Well, they used to exist, but no longer. There is not one elected Dem that would not hop on the DNC bandwagon on a critical vote. They’re only allowed to “vote their conscience” on safe votes.

  30. As Yogi Berra said, “Prediction is always hard, especially about the future.”

  31. I was wondering why you thought Brooks would be a Caporegime, until I figured it was a mistranslation.

    But yeah, Brooks wouldn’t even make the Totenkopf-SS. At best he’d be a Kapo.

  32. Problem with that “broken clock” analogy is that while true, you have no way of knowing when those two times a day are.

  33. Maybe we don’t matter, because it’s not like we’re helping Israel out or anything? And maybe the US is devastated post-rapture and has its own problems separate from what’s happening in the ME? More likely, Cankles totally disrupts the economy and drives the country into the ground.

  34. I think we will be out of things economically before the rapture takes place. When the country falls I think it will break apart. The smaller countries will have a much harder time resisting outside influences and the 10 groups will become a reality when the beast is able to take over and organize things.

  35. Soros probably trained him.

    Seriously, I know the proper spelling, but lately I’ve seen it misspelled so many time (usually in RE: Soros) that I misspelled it too. Sorry for the confusion.

  36. Um, that’s pretty much what a Yellow Dog Democrat is. The title comes from the saying….He’d vote for a yellow dog if it was a Democrat.

  37. That makes it sound like a long time in the future. D:
    I don’t want it to be a long time in the future!

  40. They wouldn’t have to lie and we couldn’t call them on it if it was Trump running the country into the ground.

  41. Neither Romney nor McCain were grossly inept, unlike Trump. Did you hear that his plan for US debt is to simply default on it?

    Hard to predict I know, coming from a man who uses bankruptcy law like most people use toilet paper.

  42. “With respect, folks, it’s not over just yet.”

    It is for me. I’m gonna get drunk on November 7th and sleep it off on November 8th.

  44. I understand. It’s not what I would choose, but I admit that voting in this election is unlikely to make a difference.

    The question is what about the next election?

  46. *nods*

    Without major changes though, that won’t be enough. Even if you took ten million of your nearest and best friends with you.

    Long story short, there’s a bigger incentive for the parties and politicos to maintain their own power and that of their opponents than there is to answer to the constituents. There’s a reason why competition keeps us honest.

  48. It may, but….
    1. A lot of what conservatives considered to be unreasonable was because they were too scared.
    2. Its a flaw, but not a disqualifying one. I reccommend going into the voting booth with low expectations because any politician is likely at least a bit slimy.

  49. Matt,
    We’re 19 T in debt that is acknowledged, and have way more other stuff.

    Historically there are three ways to deal…
    1. Hyperinflation. Bring along your wheelbarrow of cash to buy a loaf of bread stuff. See Weimar Germany. Tends to lead to #2.
    2. Large Scale War. Probably with China on their land despite the advice of The Princess Bride.
    3. Default via total gov’t collapse or an announcement.

    Of all these, #3 is the most mild.

    I don’t think #4, we get our act together is in the cards.
    And #5, we strike gold or asteroid mining or a nanotech revolution is unlikely in a useful timeframe either.

    I will point out that in the Bible there was this thing called the Year of Jubilee.

    And Romney and McCain were arguably attempts by the RINOS to squash conservatives, and cement their control of the GOP or lose to the Dems instead.

    This does support my McCainiac theory.

Comments are closed.