"David, why are the meeting notes mostly your internal narrative and a ham-handed attempt to tie everything to a half-remembered Victor David Hanson book? You didn't even take the roll"
Through the years friends have occasionally sent me articles by DB and I've tried. But remembering him on PBS years ago and slogging through his specious rightwing everyman drivel finally made me swear him off. I've never been able to express as clearly as Mr. Nolan why this guy rubs me the wrong way. Thank you, Hamilton Nolan!
My friends and I were just talking about the details details details of organizing our small town of 11,000 for regime change. The tedious tasks can be…tedious. So, your last paragraph summing up the foundation of change was spot on!!! Thanks for understanding who and how the work gets done! I think it’s my turn to send out the group text reminding everyone of tonight’s meeting and, of course, I’ll be happy to take notes. But next week, people, it’s somebody else’s turn. I promise to bake cookies.
It is my dream that every school child in America read a version of this essay. Let’s also hope that Brooks reads it. Also: the Atlantic is insufferable.
As a freelance writer, David Brooks is everything wrong with everything. Here's a guy who has no ideas but he gets published in The Atlantic because of his name. I'm reminded of a seminar I took on writing opinion pieces where I was told I needed 3 things - (1) a compelling argument that made a point and refuted all the most obvious rebuttals, (2) timeliness, where the editor understood that the piece needed to be published NOW, and (3) standing, or a position of expertise on the subject - and that if you didn't have standing, your odds of success are minimal. Brooks proves it
There's an episode of the Citations Needed podcast specifically about The Atlantic that explains a lot of why that magazine is what it is. They've got pretty fascinating episodes on several different storied publications.
Oddly enough the Atlantic does make space for interesting comments including people making fun of David Brooks for teaching a course on `Humility' at Yale, in which students are required to read the writings of ... David Brooks.
Your supermodel analogy is tricking hilarious, thank you. The drive to love up on the Right, common to Brooks, Dem leadership, and most white male pundits, is living proof that psychology eats strategy for breakfast. These guys suffer from the compulsion to win over the angry white dad in their head. They are fixated on reconciliation with him, and at best want to persuade him to be nicer to workers, women, people of color, and queers. Empowering us to help run the world isn't anywhere in their plans.
You can follow the anti-labor super capitalist politely (though no longer politely) racist line straight back to Brooks' mentor Buckley. First step to taking him seriously would be for him to own up to that.
His whole position/worldview is based on thinking that Trump is some kind of aberration from previous conservatism and not the logical conclusion of it so that will never happen
This is great. I wrote Brooks off as hopeless a long time ago. I find him unbearable. But you have found a (minor) place for him. Thanks for your graciousness and inclusiveness.
Better late than never, I suppose, for David Brooks who, for all his erudition, still doesn’t get it (as you point out). What really frustrates me is the sanctimony. The stealthy plugs for religion he inserts in every column.
No truer words: you want to participate in the movement, David? Take notes, keep the minutes, brew coffee, consider all the work of anonymous workers and church people in building something like the civil rights movement. Thanks for this piece, Hamilton. It was on target and also hilarious if you know Brooks’s fatuous writing at all.
this was a delightful read. Mean enough to be satisfying, but sufficiently generous and constructive that I don't feel too guilty about the mean stuff...
"David, why are the meeting notes mostly your internal narrative and a ham-handed attempt to tie everything to a half-remembered Victor David Hanson book? You didn't even take the roll"
America's present is the sum of all the David Brookses of the past.
Genius, Arjun.
Through the years friends have occasionally sent me articles by DB and I've tried. But remembering him on PBS years ago and slogging through his specious rightwing everyman drivel finally made me swear him off. I've never been able to express as clearly as Mr. Nolan why this guy rubs me the wrong way. Thank you, Hamilton Nolan!
My friends and I were just talking about the details details details of organizing our small town of 11,000 for regime change. The tedious tasks can be…tedious. So, your last paragraph summing up the foundation of change was spot on!!! Thanks for understanding who and how the work gets done! I think it’s my turn to send out the group text reminding everyone of tonight’s meeting and, of course, I’ll be happy to take notes. But next week, people, it’s somebody else’s turn. I promise to bake cookies.
It is my dream that every school child in America read a version of this essay. Let’s also hope that Brooks reads it. Also: the Atlantic is insufferable.
It hasn't always been but the iteration its's been for the last 10 to 20 years certainly is
Yes I remember. I am old enough to remember!
As a freelance writer, David Brooks is everything wrong with everything. Here's a guy who has no ideas but he gets published in The Atlantic because of his name. I'm reminded of a seminar I took on writing opinion pieces where I was told I needed 3 things - (1) a compelling argument that made a point and refuted all the most obvious rebuttals, (2) timeliness, where the editor understood that the piece needed to be published NOW, and (3) standing, or a position of expertise on the subject - and that if you didn't have standing, your odds of success are minimal. Brooks proves it
There's an episode of the Citations Needed podcast specifically about The Atlantic that explains a lot of why that magazine is what it is. They've got pretty fascinating episodes on several different storied publications.
Oddly enough the Atlantic does make space for interesting comments including people making fun of David Brooks for teaching a course on `Humility' at Yale, in which students are required to read the writings of ... David Brooks.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/2013/01/heres-syllabus-david-brookss-humility-course-yale/319461/
I'm glad they aren't entirely shameless.
Agreed on all fronts. Stop talking about "what to do" and just fucking do it.
Your supermodel analogy is tricking hilarious, thank you. The drive to love up on the Right, common to Brooks, Dem leadership, and most white male pundits, is living proof that psychology eats strategy for breakfast. These guys suffer from the compulsion to win over the angry white dad in their head. They are fixated on reconciliation with him, and at best want to persuade him to be nicer to workers, women, people of color, and queers. Empowering us to help run the world isn't anywhere in their plans.
Excellent Maia, thanks! “psychology eats strategy for breakfast.”
“the angry white dad” = “The Stern Father” of xtian fundamentalism. Obey or go to Hell
You can follow the anti-labor super capitalist politely (though no longer politely) racist line straight back to Brooks' mentor Buckley. First step to taking him seriously would be for him to own up to that.
His whole position/worldview is based on thinking that Trump is some kind of aberration from previous conservatism and not the logical conclusion of it so that will never happen
Yes; he never admits to being part of the GOP process that got us here.
Can there be a more fatuous person?
Ezra Klein?
Love that I came to say this and it was already covered. I'll add Matt Yglesias.
Douthat, Ross is awful too.
This is great. I wrote Brooks off as hopeless a long time ago. I find him unbearable. But you have found a (minor) place for him. Thanks for your graciousness and inclusiveness.
Absolutely spot on. No quarter to fascists; open arms to ex-fascists.
Better late than never, I suppose, for David Brooks who, for all his erudition, still doesn’t get it (as you point out). What really frustrates me is the sanctimony. The stealthy plugs for religion he inserts in every column.
No truer words: you want to participate in the movement, David? Take notes, keep the minutes, brew coffee, consider all the work of anonymous workers and church people in building something like the civil rights movement. Thanks for this piece, Hamilton. It was on target and also hilarious if you know Brooks’s fatuous writing at all.
this was a delightful read. Mean enough to be satisfying, but sufficiently generous and constructive that I don't feel too guilty about the mean stuff...
Best title I've read in a while