Babbling Brooks

[Preface: The title of this post was originally “David Brooks.” A good friend thought that was unimaginative, and suggested “Babbling Brooks,” which as you can see I’ve accepted. It’s good to have smart, imaginative friends.]

Something about David Brooks, or maybe about me, has changed. Either he used to be smart but now isn’t, or I’ve just changed my mind. (I’m ruling out the theoretical possibility that I’ve gotten smarter.) Take his New York Times column today, “The Quiet Death of Racial Progress.” It’s almost a parody of, well, a New York Times column.

Brooks begins by saying that he intended to write “a comforting column” arguing “that even though Donald Trump is doing his best to inflame racial division, we are still making gradual progress against racism and racial disparities.” Although Brooks is obviously inflamed, he didn’t mention any examples of Trump’s racist efforts. But let that go; it’s a column, after all, not a book.

He then offered a parade of actual evidence indicating racial progress: high school completion rates, record low unemployment, record high movement into the middle class, black women out-earning white women, etc. But the deeper he dub the more he came to doubt the progress that this evidence indicates. He found evidence of “stagnation or even decay.” The decline in poverty? Not so much recently. “A steady societal wind pushing against African-American men.” No progress toward “integration.” Etc.

The progress evidence he had presented strikes me as stronger than the “quiet death” evidence he offered to justify his pessimism, but leave that aside as well.

But then came this revelatory bombshell: “As a nation we seem to have lost all enthusiasm for racial integration. A culture of individualism has led people to focus more on individual outcomes and less on the components of each community.”

So, our problem is that Americans are too individualistic! We are concerned more with “individual outcomes” than “components of each community,” whatever that means. Why, just look at our “civil rights” laws, he could have written but didn’t. They are written to protect individuals from being discriminated against because of their race, not to guarantee “community” outcomes. In any event Brooks is in good company for ignoring that troubling (to him) feature of those laws, since courts have given that language short shrift as well, when they’ve given it any shrift at all.

As for additional evidence of decline, Brooks says the left is correct when it points to “the systems of oppression that pervade society: the legacy of residential segregation; the racist attitudes in the workplace that demonstrably make it much harder for African-American men to get jobs; the prejudices — in the schools, in the streets and in the judicial system — that make it much more likely that African-American males will be punished, incarcerated and marginalized.”

That’s bombastic rhetoric, not evidence. Could it be, for example, that African-American males are disproportionately punished and incarcerated because they commit more crimes?

To his credit, Brooks also recognizes that “conservatives” are right to point out that black men who are or have been in the military, who were brought up in two parent families, and who attend church are much less likely to be held down by the “systems of oppression” that affect others, but he then concludes that “the left” and “conservatives” are both right, not that the conservative “bourgeois norms” evidence calls into question the left’s pervasive “systems of oppression” explanation for everything.

But what do you expect from the New York Times, or these days from David Brooks?



Asians v. Harvard, Release 2.0

Several weeks ago I discussed Students For Fair Admissions v. Harvard College in an essay on Minding The Campus, “Harvard Says Asians Lack Courage, Kindness, Likability.”

Harvard, Not Trump, Could Kill Affirmative Action,” my follow-up essay, appeared there yesterday.

How “Diversity” Looks From Across The Pond

For a perhaps surprising, eye-opening account of how our “diversity” policies look to an American black writer writing in the London Spectator, take a look at “The Diversity Trap,” a warning that “Britain seems to be following America down a dangerous path.” Among its observations: “There’s no reason to believe that proponents of affirmative action […]

Sen. Diane Feinstein And The Decline Of The Democrats

There may be no better measure of the decline of the Democratic Party than the fact that Senator Diane Feinstein is now widely regarded as one of its wise, moderate elder statesmen. Even Politico seems to have noticed that something is amiss with the San Francisco Democrat. “If nominated to replace Anthony Kennedy on the […]

Patriotism? The EIGHTH Recycling of July 4th, With A Twist

Starting on July 4, 2002, and then six times over the years on subsequent July 4ths, I posted a copy of a short piece I’d published in The Nation as part of a collection of pieces on patriotism. (Yes, that Nation, with which, as explained in the posts, I had an association in a former […]

Hillary As Churchill? Hillary-ious!

In what must be the drollest item of the week, or longer (there haven’t been many droll items lately), Hillary recently told the Guardian that she wasn’t comparing herself to Churchill, after having just compared herself to Churchill. “I’m sure they said that about Churchill between the wars, didn’t they?” she flashes back sharply, a fraction too […]

Hypocrisy, Seen And Unseen

It would seem that nothing would be more deserving of a weary “So what else is new?” response than news of new partisan hypocrisy. You may think I am referring to the denunciation by the Democrats — speaking as one, or at least as a gaggle who   share the same scriptwriter — of the […]

Sauce For The Hen?

Harvard’s “Diversity” Chickens Come Home To Roost

“Are You Now Or Have You Ever … ?”

Charlottesville (Cont.)

The New McCarthyism

Can You Believe Politico Just Wrote … ?

Letter: Prosecuting Protestors A Bad Idea

Please Contribute…

More Shenanigans At UVa

Rather … Not