Friday, October 28, 2016

Where David Brooks Wants To Take the "Conservative" Message He Learned From William F. Buckely

Of course, there should be a question here: Did William F. Buckley espouse anything important to be passed on?

The New York Times columnist David Brooks writes:
I feel very lucky to have entered the conservative movement when I did, back in the 1980s and 1990s. I was working at National Review, The Washington Times, The Wall Street Journal’s editorial page. The role models in front of us were people like Bill Buckley, Irving Kristol...
This "conservative" with the state apologists Buckley and Kristol, as his role models, goes on to say:
Blinkered by the Republican Party’s rigid anti-government rhetoric, conservatives were slow to acknowledge and even slower to address the central social problems of our time.
For years, middle- and working-class Americans have been suffering from stagnant wages, meager opportunity, social isolation and household fragmentation. Shrouded in obsolete ideas from the Reagan years, conservatism had nothing to offer these people because it didn’t believe in using government as a tool for social good.
Is Brooks serious?

Does he really think that the view that we should be free from government planning is an obsolete idea?

Does he really think the Republican Party has carried the anti-big government banner? Does he really think that "conservativism" is a problem that must be corrected by introducing government as a tool for "social good."

 Does he really think that Reagan was anti-big government? Does he think Paul Ryan is anti-big government.

The truth is that since the start of the Republican Party it has grown the state, right from its very beginning with that monster Lincoln and Reagan didn't reverse things.

But Brooks has learned the true skill set of Buckley and Kristol: Dilute anti-government views, especially in the conservative movement, and become an apologist for the state.

These conservative infiltrators are now plotting a takeover of the entire conservative movement in the wake of Donald Trump. Brooks concludes:
 I confess I’m insanely optimistic about a conservative rebound. That’s because of an observation the writer Yuval Levin once made: That while most of the crazy progressives are young, most of the crazy conservatives are old. Conservatism is now being led astray by its seniors, but its young people are pretty great. It’s hard to find a young evangelical who likes Donald Trump. Most young conservatives are comfortable with ethnic diversity and are weary of the Fox News media-politico complex. Conservatism’s best ideas are coming from youngish reformicons who have crafted an ambitious governing agenda (completely ignored by Trump).
A Trump defeat could cleanse a lot of bad structures and open ground for new growth. It was good to be a young conservative back in my day. It’s great to be one right now.
The attack against the anti-government crowd, be it against libertarians or old right conservatives, is coming.

It is time for a serious intellectual battle. The state is evil, pro-state ideas must be ripped apart.



  1. Donald Trump is a moderate Republican. These windbags don't like his bombastic personality. They're the uptight stiffs that Rodney Dangerfield used to riff on in all his movies. They should love Trump's policies, except he doesn't appear to be total neocon and all in on cronyism.

    Trump advocates for eliminating individual mandate, expanding Medicaid coverage, increased EITC, new child care savings account with matching federal donations, increase school choice, infrastructure spending, increased military budget, cutting taxes, defer to states on cannabis, pro-gay marriage, original intent court justices, etc. etc.

  2. Earlier this year, David Brooks wrote a piece for the NYT "The Governing Cancer of Our Time:

    "We live in a big, diverse society. There are essentially two ways to maintain order and get things done in such a society - politics or some form of dictatorship."

    In other words, he sees only central planning by few or by many. There is no such thing as the free market for David Brooks. This man represents the intellectual crisis, the true cancer of our time. Where is the opposition? Which important public figures are speaking our for the free market? The conservative movement is not just worthless, they are the enemy.