Over at The New York Times and asks the trillion dollar question:
What if we - that is America's modern liberal elites - are the bad guys? It's an eye opener, though I don't know what to make of it. We live in an age that doesn't really - care. That he says what almost anyone sane enough to avoid the modern Left has known for years doesn't really matter if he doesn't follow through.
Don't get me wrong. Any step in the right direction is a step in the right direction. His admission that most of the penthouse liberals' efforts are aimed at keeping them and their families in their penthouses, and at the expense of an ever growing segment of American citizens, at least calls the naked emperor out for what he is.
"Armed with all kinds of economic, cultural and political power, we support policies that help ourselves … We built an entire social order that sorts and excludes people on the basis of the quality that we possess most: academic achievement. Highly educated parents go to elite schools, marry each other, work at high-paying professional jobs and pour enormous resources into our children, who get into the same elite schools, marry each other and pass their exclusive class privileges down from generation to generation."
He even mentions the suffocating levels of condescending arrogance they possess - though at times doing so in a way that almost seems as condescending:
"It’s easy to understand why people in less-educated classes would conclude that they are under economic, political, cultural and moral assault — and why they’ve rallied around Trump as their best warrior against the educated class”
He doesn't seem to go into the details of liberal ideals, values, agendas and activism. He doesn't appear to suggest the core of their ethics and beliefs could be wrong, much less the problem. He simply acknowledges that they all seem geared to making sure those elite liberals end up benefiting from them no matter what happens to the 'not-them' classes. Something, again, your average child can see by this point.
Nonetheless we'll see. I don't think this will cause a Josiah level of repentance. At least it might help those who aren't leftwing thralls realize they weren't crazy for thinking what Brooks finally admits is true.
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/lincolnbrown/2023/08/03/nyt-columnist-asks-what-if-were-the-bad-guys-here-the-answer-yes-you-are-n1716007
ReplyDeleteI saw the above post on this and pretty much agreed with it.
DeleteYep. I notice he caught a few things I glossed over. Noteworthy was his observation of the elites weaponizing language in the best Orwellian sense. Code words for inclusion in the fraternity like cisgender and intersectionality, while constantly threatening to retroactively change the meaning of a word to attack the little people and thus keep them guessing. It was a revealing editorial. We'll see what it does, but I'm not hoping much.
Delete(Tom New Poster)
ReplyDeleteBrooks (as the British would put it) has got hold of one end of the stick. But he still remains clueless about the rest: that the political culture and economy he and his ilk sustain is not just economically and culturally bad for the working classes, it's bad for the elite also and for the whole country. I've read him before and think him intelligent enough to complete the puzzle, but will he find the moral courage?
That's what I caught. We are in an age where we will not admit any liberal initiative or solution or idea could possibly be wrong. Ever. I mean, consider AIDS. To this day, in the West at least, we officially have no clue why AIDS suddenly appeared in the 1970s when it had not impacted humanity before the sex and drugs revelation. That sort of willful obtuseness is practically engrained in us today. No matter how self aware Brooks might be about the elite's behaviors, I doubt it extends to the elites ideals and beliefs and agendas.
DeleteBrooks is a true believer who occasionally has nagging doubts. But don't worry -- the only thing he will ever repent of is having had doubts about the goodness of liberalism. You can't fix stupid.
ReplyDeleteI've seen some other takes on his column that are less sympathetic than the first ones I saw. The first, like me, took him at his word, though with the obvious caveats. Others are now suggesting he said a big bunch of nothing. Though I think a couple things he admits to are important. For instance, his admission that the leftwing elites really have weaponized language, using a purely invented erudite cant as code for being in the proper club (think cisgender or intersectionality), while constantly changing words and meanings to keep the riffraff unbalanced and never sure if the next word they use might indicate inner Nazi. Perhaps if nothing else comes from his column, his admitting that should be a major banner for non-leftists to rally around.
Delete