posted on September 5, 2005 10:11:06 AM
This conservative columnist has some very interesting things to say in his latest column:
Op-Ed Columnist
The Bursting Point
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: September 4, 2005
As Ross Douthat observed on his blog, The American Scene, Katrina was the anti-9/11.
On Sept. 11, Rudy Giuliani took control. The government response was quick and decisive. The rich and poor suffered alike. Americans had been hit, but felt united and strong. Public confidence in institutions surged.
Last week in New Orleans, by contrast, nobody took control. Authority was diffuse and action was ineffective. The rich escaped while the poor were abandoned. Leaders spun while looters rampaged. Partisans squabbled while the nation was ashamed.
The first rule of the social fabric - that in times of crisis you protect the vulnerable - was trampled. Leaving the poor in New Orleans was the moral equivalent of leaving the injured on the battlefield. No wonder confidence in civic institutions is plummeting.
And the key fact to understanding why this is such a huge cultural moment is this: Last week's national humiliation comes at the end of a string of confidence-shaking institutional failures that have cumulatively changed the nation's psyche.
Over the past few years, we have seen intelligence failures in the inability to prevent Sept. 11 and find W.M.D.'s in Iraq. We have seen incompetent postwar planning. We have seen the collapse of Enron and corruption scandals on Wall Street. We have seen scandals at our leading magazines and newspapers, steroids in baseball, the horror of Abu Ghraib.
Public confidence has been shaken too by the steady rain of suicide bombings, the grisly horror of Beslan and the world's inability to do anything about rising oil prices.
Each institutional failure and sign of helplessness is another blow to national morale. The sour mood builds on itself, the outraged and defensive reaction to one event serving as the emotional groundwork for the next.
The scrapbook of history accords but a few pages to each decade, and it is already clear that the pages devoted to this one will be grisly. There will be pictures of bodies falling from the twin towers, beheaded kidnapping victims in Iraq and corpses still floating in the waterways of New Orleans five days after the disaster that caused them.
It's already clear this will be known as the grueling decade, the Hobbesian decade. Americans have had to acknowledge dark realities that it is not in our nature to readily acknowledge: the thin veneer of civilization, the elemental violence in human nature, the lurking ferocity of the environment, the limitations on what we can plan and know, the cumbersome reactions of bureaucracies, the uncertain progress good makes over evil.
As a result, it is beginning to feel a bit like the 1970's, another decade in which people lost faith in their institutions and lost a sense of confidence about the future.
"Rats on the West Side, bedbugs uptown/What a mess! This town's in tatters/I've been shattered," Mick Jagger sang in 1978.
Midge Decter woke up the morning after the night of looting during the New York blackout of 1977 feeling as if she had "been given a sudden glimpse into the foundations of one's house and seen, with horror, that it was utterly infested and rotting away."
Americans in 2005 are not quite in that bad a shape, since the fundamental realities of everyday life are good. The economy and the moral culture are strong. But there is a loss of confidence in institutions. In case after case there has been a failure of administration, of sheer competence. Hence, polls show a widespread feeling the country is headed in the wrong direction.
Katrina means that the political culture, already sour and bloody-minded in many quarters, will shift. There will be a reaction. There will be more impatience for something new. There is going to be some sort of big bang as people respond to the cumulative blows of bad events and try to fundamentally change the way things are.
Reaganite conservatism was the response to the pessimism and feebleness of the 1970's. Maybe this time there will be a progressive resurgence. Maybe we are entering an age of hardheaded law and order. (Rudy Giuliani, an unlikely G.O.P. nominee a few months ago, could now win in a walk.) Maybe there will be call for McCainist patriotism and nonpartisan independence. All we can be sure of is that the political culture is about to undergo some big change.
We're not really at a tipping point as much as a bursting point. People are mad as hell, unwilling to take it anymore.
posted on September 5, 2005 04:43:25 PM
I seriously doubt this journalist is a conservative, especially coming from the NYT. It appears he believes and possibly even support a change, brought about out of supposed frustration, and our country will now turn to the progressive way of doing things.
I don't think so. LOL
Won't happen in MY lifetime.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, [b]from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Sep 5, 2005 04:54 PM ]
posted on September 5, 2005 05:00:57 PM
David Brooks may not be your kind of conservative Linda, but he is one, none the less....works for the Weekly Standard, among others. From his bio:
David Brooks is a senior editor at The Weekly Standard, a contributing editor at Newsweek and the Atlantic Monthly, and the "Machine Age" columnist for the New York Times Magazine. He is also a regular commentator on National Public Radio, CNN's Late Edition and The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer. He is the author of "Bobos In Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There" published by Simon & Schuster.
Mr. Brooks joined The Weekly Standard at its inception in September 1995, having worked at the Wall Street Journal for the previous nine years. His last post at the Journal was as op-ed editor. Prior to that, he was posted in Brussels, covering Russia, the Middle East, South Africa, and European affairs. His first post at the Journal was as editor of the book review section, and he filled in for five months as the Journal's movie critic.
Mr. Brooks graduated from the University of Chicago in 1983, and worked as a police reporter for the City News Bureau, a wire service owned jointly by the Chicago Tribune and Sun Times.
His articles have appeared in the New Yorker, the New York Times Magazine, Forbes, the Washington Post, the TLS, Commentary, the Public Interest, and many other magazines. He is editor of the anthology "Backward and Upward: The New Conservative Writing" (Vintage Books).
Thanks for the post Roadsmith, one can only hope he's right.
____________________________________________
Fue por lana y saliσ trasquilado...
posted on September 5, 2005 05:05:41 PM
Wow Linda - Is your Google broken? Somehow I think that if Brooks was the editor of Mother JOnes magazine you found that immediately. I wonder why it is that you were not able to find tht he is editor of The Weekly Standard.
Is The Standard not conservative enough for you or have you recently appointed yourself the measuring stick by which all conservatives are measured?
~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
posted on September 5, 2005 05:33:01 PM
LOL.....Nothing he said in his article....SHOWS/PROVES he's a conservative. Nothing.
And I'll never believe that anyone who thinks when things get tough everyone's going to demand change, progressive change no less LOL....is a conservative.
Maybe this time there will be a progressive resurgence.
You'll NEVER convince me that a conservative would actually concede that maybe this time there will be a progressive resurgence. LOL You're all just gullible, imo. If the 'progressive/social agenda were popular....hillary wouldn't be moving more to the center, politically....she'd be just more and more left. It's not the reality of what's going on in the dem party....which IS very much divide between the 'angry left deanites' and the more [wanting to appear] moderates, like hillary's pretending to be.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on September 5, 2005 05:36:02 PM
David Brooks may not be your kind of conservative Linda, but he is one, none the less....works for the Weekly Standard, among others. From his bio:
David Brooks is a senior editor at The Weekly Standard, a contributing editor at Newsweek and the Atlantic Monthly, and the "Machine Age" columnist for the New York Times Magazine. He is also a regular commentator on National Public Radio, CNN's Late Edition and The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer. He is the author of "Bobos In Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There" published by Simon & Schuster.
Mr. Brooks joined The Weekly Standard at its inception in September 1995, having worked at the Wall Street Journal for the previous nine years. His last post at the Journal was as op-ed editor. Prior to that, he was posted in Brussels, covering Russia, the Middle East, South Africa, and European affairs. His first post at the Journal was as editor of the book review section, and he filled in for five months as the Journal's movie critic.
Mr. Brooks graduated from the University of Chicago in 1983, and worked as a police reporter for the City News Bureau, a wire service owned jointly by the Chicago Tribune and Sun Times.
His articles have appeared in the New Yorker, the New York Times Magazine, Forbes, the Washington Post, the TLS, Commentary, the Public Interest, and many other magazines. He is editor of the anthology "Backward and Upward: The New Conservative Writing" (Vintage Books). """
So what does HE know? I'm sure LindaKKK 's credentials are much better.
posted on September 5, 2005 05:39:40 PM
From the Wikipedia:
David Brooks (born August 11, 1961) is a columnist for The New York Times who has become one of the prominent voices of conservative politics in the United States, though his views are considerably different from those of some other conservatives.
David Brooks was born in Toronto and grew up in New York City in Stuyvesant Town. He graduated from the University of Chicago in 1983 with a degree in history. Brooks later served as a reporter for The Wall Street Journal, and has since been a senior editor at The Weekly Standard, a contributing editor at Newsweek and The Atlantic Monthly, and a commentator on NPR and The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer.
He has written a book of cultural commentary titled Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There. Brooks also writes articles and makes television appearances as a commentator on various trends in pop culture, such as internet dating. His newest book is entitled On Paradise Drive : How We Live Now (And Always Have) in the Future Tense.
Before the Second Gulf War, Brooks had argued forcefully on moral grounds for American military intervention in Iraq, echoing the belief of conservative commentators and political figures that American and British forces would be welcomed as liberators. However, some of his opinion pieces in the spring of 2004 suggested that he had tempered somewhat his earlier optimism about the war.
Contents
____________________
"Bad temper is its own scourge. Few things are more bitter than to feel bitter. A man's venom poisons himself more than his victim." --Charles Buxton
posted on September 5, 2005 05:48:05 PM
Linda... I wonder... Are you even aware of what a caricature you have become?
Do you honestly believe that the people of this country are not becoming rapidly disenchanted with what is going on (i.e. - billions of dollars spent in the past 4 years since 9/11 to increase response and communication among first responders and yet it takes three days to respond and they still can't communicate) right now? Are you so ensconced in the glow of the 2004 republican victory that you are blind to the 2005 American reality?
The american people are not happy right now Linda. Why is it that you think they will stand much longer for more of the same?
~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
David Brooks (born August 11, 1961) is a columnist for The New York Times who has become one of the prominent voices of conservative politics in the United States, though his views are considerably different from those of some other conservatives.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Sep 5, 2005 06:02 PM ]
posted on September 5, 2005 06:05:14 PM
I would be surprised--and more than a little disturbed--if every single conservative held exactly the same views on every topic as all the rest. Shades of mind control!
Just because he is able to think for himself and draw his own conclusions doesn't make him a non-conservative.
Edited to insert a needed "e" and remove an extraneous "s"
____________________
"Bad temper is its own scourge. Few things are more bitter than to feel bitter. A man's venom poisons himself more than his victim." --Charles Buxton
[ edited by bunnicula on Sep 5, 2005 06:06 PM ]
posted on September 5, 2005 06:07:30 PM
bunni - I read this man's bio before posting my first post. He once 'claimed' to be a liberal too.
Reading a couple of his other articles clearly lets one see he leans MORE left than right. Like the post I made....he's not a 'normal' conservative. And normal conservatives don't always agree either.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on September 5, 2005 07:50:56 PM
LindaK, why do you tolerate the reference to KKK added to your name? That is hate speech and should not be tolerated.
posted on September 5, 2005 07:56:18 PM
ronnie for the same reason I tolerate being called names like craw, crowfart, Linda Blair...because I don't give a damn, I'm not delicately sensitive, I'm not a child, I HAVE a backbone, and I don't care.
Try it , you might like it
[ edited by mingotree on Sep 5, 2005 08:10 PM ]
posted on September 5, 2005 07:56:23 PM
Ron - I've just learned to ignore her racist, hatefilled, ignorant statements. I truly believe she's mentally ill. She goes way past what even angry liberals do/say. It's not really political disagreement, imo, it's her personality and lack of being able to discuss anything in a civil manner. She only shames herself...not me when she acts in that manner.
posted on September 5, 2005 09:33:19 PM
Linda_K
posted on September 5, 2005 07:56:23 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ron - I've just learned to ignore her racist, hatefilled, ignorant statements. I truly believe she's mentally ill. She goes way past what even angry liberals do/say. It's not really political disagreement, imo, it's her personality and lack of being able to discuss anything in a civil manner. She only shames herself...not me when she acts in that manner.""
LindaKKK please point out any racist statement I've made or shut your flapping LONELY mouth
Ha! The only statements of mine that you ignore are the ones where I ask you pointed questions that you can't answer
posted on September 5, 2005 09:50:06 PM
Now classic , how do you know I'm not some limp-wristed overly sensitive, cry baby wienie who will threaten to turn you in to Momma because you called me crowfart
LOL
