David Brooks wrote an interesting column arguing that if the GOP is going to modernize, as it needs to, it should focus less on the individual. “The problem is, this individualist description of human nature seems to be wrong,” Brooks said. “Over the past 30 years, there has been a tide of research in many fields, all underlining one old truth — that we are intensely social creatures, deeply interconnected with one another, and the idea of the lone individual rationally and willfully steering his own life course is often an illusion.” Brooks said the GOP should emphasize “society as well as individuals, security as well as freedom, a social revival and not just an economic one, and the community as opposed to the state.”
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- outlander on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- HLP on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- outlander on Open thread 11/23
- outlander on Open thread 11/23
63 Comments
Spoken like a true Canadian.
“security as well as freedom”
Something tells me that the “security” he’s speaking of is not, like, security from someone trying to blow “us” up.
B.J.
Lets here it Pal, this ones tailor made for you.
Oh, you mean something like ‘it takes a village”?
Yeah we dems already knew that.
What Brooks is talking about here is the current best understood approximation of reality concerning human nature. Research does indicate that humans are interdependent as well as independent. And behavioral economics is one of the fields that is buttressing this claim (for example, empathy and concern for others is as fundamental to most humans, and indeed most higher primates, as selfishness).
This is what makes the conservative and the anarcho-capitalist views of human nature and politics so flawed.
However, is this viewpoint truly a political disadvantage? I wish it was, but it isn’t. The myth of the rugged individualist who doesn’t need gummit interference is still widely popular (and not just with self described conservatives and libertarians). It is a policy disadvantage because some of the more reflexive aspects of conservatism and libertarianism, such as the idea that a large economy and human rights can be and are best managed and protected with mininimal government done on the cheap are certainly flawed. But I don’t think the average voter, including the foul weather voter, connects the dots between the effects of bad policy and the philosophies that underlie them. The current unpopularity of the current administration can be directly linked to to policies that are based on conservative popular myths. However, the myths are as popular as ever.
“Spoken like a true Canadian.”
Spoken like a true communist of the Russian Revolution.
I’m not your pal Heckler. But this thread is correct.
Modern society is not fit with most of the tenets of conservativism. THAT ideology is more fitting to the time when everyone had a small farm of their own. Those farms given to them by the government. We see every day how the culture of getting your own and keeping it is inherently destructive in modern society.
“Spoken like a true communist of the Russian Revolution.”
Spoken like someone who has long ago given up putting any real thought into the basis of his beliefs.
Agnasty- Spoken like someone who has long ago given up putting any real thought into the basis of his beliefs.
———————————–
right click * paste….
biased1,
Not so fast. I agree with Agnatha for once when she says “Spoken like someone who has long ago given up putting any real thought into the basis of his beliefs.”
That is exactly what this thread by Phillip Brownlee sounds like, and usually what Agnatha’s post sound like as well.
But thanks!
Another political jab by comrade Brownlee of the Wichita Pravda. Remind us that voting is outdated and that politicos should be selected by affirmative action, rather than majority rule. The individual is no longer important, better to be a lemming of the masses. This comment brought to you by the forces to elect Obama Lin Biden.
“In many communities, social norms do not encourage academic achievement, decent values or family stability. These problems straining the social fabric aren’t directly addressed by maximizing individual freedom.”
———–
This is where effects of the breakdown of the traditional American family is most evident. Fatherless children, easy divorce, single parent households etc…make life difficult for an increasing percentage of the population. Kids especially. The government should do everything in its power to encourage marriage and parental responsibility and authority. But they can’t and shouldn’t try to do everything.
It is hard to overstate the harm done to our society by the liberal Hollywood and pop culture. And unless we each personally reject the selfishness, materialism (bling bling), and immorality it promotes, and focus on the things that really matter, our society will continue to degrade.
“It is hard to overstate the harm done to our society by the liberal Hollywood and pop culture. And unless we each personally reject the selfishness, materialism (bling bling), and immorality it promotes, and focus on the things that really matter, our society will continue to degrade.”
And Hollywood is overwhelmingly populated and controlled by Democrats!
“And unless we each personally reject the selfishness, materialism ”
Oh this is probably too much to ask of cons.
Selfishness and materialism are the foundation of the Republican party.
I think I heard that once back in 1917.
“Greed is good” – Gordon Gecko
Where is innovation going to come into play without a society that rewards it?
“empathy and concern for others is as fundamental to most humans”
Pardon my cynicism again, Agnatha, but… come on. Really. Come on.
I’d love to live in your world. If only it existed in reality.
And outie? Marriage should be encouraged, just not for homosexuals? Oooookaaaayyyy.
And in all your ranting about the demise of the family, did you notice that gay folks were NOT getting married during the time straight families were supposedly hitting the skids?
What am I thinking of? Logic has no place in that debate. Only sheer emotion and theocracy. My bad.
I think pulling the wings off live flies is more accurately descriptive of human nature than empathy and concern for others. At least on this blog.
Lord of the Flies, anyone?
A while back GMC had a long debate with VT about how everything each of us do is driven by self interest.
I thought GMC was going to lose that debate in a hurry. But he didn’t. I’m thinking he was about 90% right. Would be interesting to bone dig that one up.
Well BrownLib, the Constitution was fashioned to protect the rights of the individual and later on the individual states. The latter, should be enough for any socialistic minded progressive. I mean, just look at Hollyfornia.
The great horde is a mind set of the Kommie socialistic minded progressives. Duh Libs want us to live in a borg-like society as part of the hive, with no individual identity.
Model ourselves after the British? No thank you. The United Kingdom has 60 plus million people crammed into a space about the size of Oregon. They have different rules because they can smell each others arm pits first hand, up close and very personal.
The “Country First Theme” of the McCain campaign sets the right climate in which we as a nation should progress. Governing over a people who establish their country first is part of the individual rights combined to make a nation work.
It’s not “we the sheeple,” it’s “we the people.”
Phillip
When has the Eagle EVER printed a story about the problems within the Democrat Party?
When has the Eagle EVER printed a story about the problems within contemporary liberalism?
It seems when ever a “conservative” or a “Republican” comes forward, to complain, he or she gets great coverage —- as long as the complaint against other Repubicans!
(And as long as the complaining Republican does NOT run for President!)
Brooks is a bit of a sell-out.
Brooks used to get trashed by the left.
Slowly, he seems to be joining the left.
BJ
You are every bit as selfish as anyone else, if not more so.
However, you are not as industrious as everyone else.
You are a bit more lazy than everyone else.
You allow your false pride to limit your opportunity.
You don’t want to “work for the man” and you should accept the consequences.
Add Selfishness, Sloth and Envy together and you get BJ!
When you attack conservatives for their hard work, and for trying to keep more of what they earn, that is a personal attack.
Somehow, you elevate the pursuit of OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY, through socialism, as morally superior to working hard, for your OWN money.
Rather than sounding like a communist, Brooks is sounding like a neuroscientist:
http://www.amazon.com/Loneliness-Human-Nature-Social-Connection/dp/0393061701/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1221663098&sr=1-1
I heard the author of the above book say that rather than using a single computer as an analogy for the human brain, it would be more accurate to use the internet – a connection network of computers.
I posted about Brooks’s editorial yesterday. He is an enlightened conservative and I am very glad most republicans, as reflected in some of the posts above, will never listen to him. Repubs don’t need no stinking facts, e.g. “I said thanks, but no thanks to that bridge to nowhere.”
Hopefully it will become more clear in the next 50 days that voting Repbulican is voting for myths and fiction. Vote for a better approximation of the truth and for the future.
I’ll repeat my question on innovation with another thought.
We are at a major crossroads with regards to energy in this country.
If innovation is not encouraged where do we expect this to come from?
We read daily about complaints in how our Government operates. How is giving that Government more power going to solve any problems?
Mr. Kia,
I am not an expert on energy, but my understanding is that at this point, alternate energy is not yet sufficiently profitable to support the investment that will be required to get it going. The government, which supposedly has the interests of all citizens at heart (that has changed the last 8 to 16 years) could foster the development of alternate energy sources at this time rather than waiting for the free market to do that. I believe this would be a legitimate function of government – reasonable people could disagree.
Blue Jay,
I have worked hard to get what I have and live without wants and worries and be able to help family when needed. What gives you the right to tell me I can’t keep what I have?
Just because you won’t get off your ass and earn a living where you can provide for you and yours doesn’t make me or others responsible to provide for you
GOP needs to focus less on the individual
False statement, but in a way, good sentiment.
Members of the GOP need to focus on the needs of those around them, and help them when possible. But, the focus of the government, from the beginning, was not THE COLLECTIVE, but rather the individual. THe government (in particular the federal government) was quite limited in power. It should have stayed that way.
By the way, liberals need to quit focusing on the state, and worry about the individual next to them.
Government should at the very best be the support of last resort.
Government should at the very best be the support of last resort-Little John
And as some one else said”The government that governs least governs best”
KFG,
Hope none of your friends in Texas are the worse for wear after Ike. Glad to see you are ok as well. Always enjoy reading your posts even when I don’t agree with you,they do give one pause to consider them
This is a totally inane position Brooks is taking, IMHO.
Of course, both sides frame their arguments in terms of individual rights AND protecting society.
The CONs want to protect society against Janet Jackson’s nearly naked breast, for instance. They want to protect it from peaceful protest against their political positions (see the cheering of protestors beaten and maced for exercising their first amendment rights). They want to protect society against “creeping secularism” by posting the 10 Commandments in public courthouses and schools. They want to protect or “morals” by demanding that Cosmopolitian magazine be covered in the grocery store.
The CONs have plenty of causes in which they want to protect society–the “collective,” as LJ says.
Unfortunately for them, most of those causes are not supported by the majority.
I’d ask what world you are living in Capn.
Most of the things you mention that liberals are outraged about the majority either supports or doesn’t give a rats ass about.
“Over the past 30 years, there has been a tide of research in many fields, all underlining one old truth — that we are intensely social creatures, deeply interconnected with one another, and the idea of the lone individual rationally and willfully steering his own life course is often an illusion.”
Actually, Capn, when Brooks says the above, he is on target with a variety of scientific literatures. I doubt that any party will give up its individualistic approach because of this information, but it is true that the “individual as determinate to everything” is not supported by data.
The American economy has always been a combination of free-market pressures and regulation; capitalism and socialism. We have moved much more toward the unregulated free market in the last eight years than in any time since the late 19th century. Then as now, things are not working out real well for even the robber barons, and decidedly less so for non-wealthy citizens.
Brooks is more on target than he probably even realizes.
“The American economy has always been a combination of free-market pressures and regulation; capitalism and socialism. We have moved much more toward the unregulated free market in the last eight years than in any time since the late 19th century.”- SD
———
When 911 occurred and we discovered what had happened, I recall thinking that we were in for a change. That the demand for security will result in more rules and less freedom.
The financial shakeout occurring now is it’s counterpart. People are scared and will demand more security. So, financials are in for a period of increased scrutiny and regulation. As they should be.
Blue Jay and others of his kind,
I worked hard to get what is mine,why don’t you work and get yours,instead of feeling like you are entitled to the fruits of other people’s labor
I second that Freebird.
Thanks,one thing my late father tought me was never apologize for working hard and being successful,it’s out there for the taking you have just got to want it. Sadly some were never taught that lesson.
The financial shakeout occurring now is it’s counterpart. People are scared and will demand more security. So, financials are in for a period of increased scrutiny and regulation. As they should be.
—————
And this is very good for Obama since rules and regulations and restrictions are what the ‘crats do best.
I am really amazed that McCain is staying so close in the polls. If this doesn’t put Obama way over the top, he is in trouble.
Well, it just happened, outlander.
Give it time to sink in . . .
Not only that, Palin’s numbers are dropping as fast as they went up.
Freebird–
Why are you baiting Blue Jay with a position he does not hold?
He’s not asking you or anybody else to give him what you’ve earned.
His comment that “getting and keeping” as the first priority for living is destructive–and that is true.
The electric company has a right to produce electricity and make a profit, but they don’t have the right to pollute the air with mercury and poison your child.
You have a right to hire whoever you want, but you don’t have the right to hire an eight year old child.
The government has the right to seize property for the common good–as for a new park that will benefit everyone. It doesn’t have the right to seize property to make a few people rich (see George W. Bush and how he made his fortune with the Texas Rangers).
That’s the kind of thing Blue Jay was talking about.
How about looking at it from the frame of reference in which he means it instead of looking at it in the worst possible interpretation?
“Give it time to sink in . . . ”
I had thought that the debates would be the turning point with Obama realizing a significant advantage. But I have been hearing Obama talk when not scripted and he is not nearly as impressive as when he has prepared material.
I had expected to see another Kennedy v. Nixon debate, but we will see, I guess.
I think Capn is right about Palin’s honeymoon with the press being over. She has plenty of minuses that are being gleefully discovered. For a while I thought her selection might have been a stroke of brillance for McCain – it looks now to be a more routine cardiovascular accident.
BTW, Freebird–
Why is it okay for the Federal Government (i.e., our tax money) to bail out huge multi-national companies like AIG, Merrill Lynch, Bear Stearns, Countryside, Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac, Washington Mutual Bank etc. etc. who demanded deregulation so they could make the bad decisions that mired them in bad debt?
But it’s not okay for the Feds to help poor Americans get health care, for instance?
I get and keep for me and mine,the rest of you are on your own
I don’t think either are right. Why should I pay for my health insurance and someone else’s?
Let Blue Jay speak for himself
If I’m selfish so be it.
“The government has the right to seize property for the common good–as for a new park that will benefit everyone. It doesn’t have the right to seize property to make a few people rich (see George W. Bush and how he made his fortune with the Texas Rangers).”
umm. THat would have been the liberal members of the supreme Court for that scenario
Not only that, Palin’s numbers are dropping as fast as they went up.
————-
The shameful way that Palin was/is being treated illustrates why the best people won’t go into politics. Who needs that kind of crap?
Common decency is a foreign concept to a lot of folks. Too bad.
“I get and keep for me and mine,the rest of you are on your own”
A society composed of a majority of folks who believed this way would be a doomed one.
Since there is no small number of such folk, their attitude does encourage a similar response.
Nation under attack? Not my problem. Terrorists? They aint after me.
How ARE those greed con ideas working out lately? Financial industries in collapse.
Maybe if more people took care of their reposibilities we woiuldn’t have people expecting handouts at the expense of those that do work and provide for themselves
Yes Government provided health care is a hand out.
Many people believe that in a decent society, health care is a basic right. This is true of every western nation except the United States.
Too bad,I pay for mine you pay for yours
Freebird we all know the Republican party is the party of “let them die and decrease the surplus population.”
What is cynical and dishonest is that folks like you doen’t just out and say it.
Where have I ever said I’m republican? You Want someone to provide for you because it’s easier than going out and working for it.
Ok,I’ll say it I don’t care if anyone has health insurance except for me and mine.
See Blue Jay My father taught me you were responsible for providing for yourself and your family and depending on someone else was lazy. I have taught this to my kids and they are teaching it to theirs
For worrying about what I’m doing you sure seem to have ample ass in the chair time there Freebird.
You have posts here all through the day.
“Where have I ever said I’m republican?”
Only all day long.
My father taught me that we have an obligation to help other people. That is what I am teaching to my son.
“Nation under attack? Not my problem. Terrorists? They aint after me.
‘
Yeah we know. It ain;t your country. so you said
Specifically point out where I said it. I work different hours(not that it’s any of your concern) but put in on an average of 50 hrs a week
My father taught me that we have an obligation to help other people. That is what I am teaching to my son.
No you are teaching him that others should provide.
I have no obligation to anyone but my family. If you don’t like it you are the one who has to deal with it,not me.
Once again show me where I uttered the words Republican,if you can’t don’t accuse.
“I work different hours(not that it’s any of your concern)”
You seem fairly free to make assumptions as to me. I’m just giving you back your own.
“Once again show me where I uttered the words Republican,if you can’t don’t accuse”
You project it well enough.
“I have no obligation to anyone but my family. If you don’t like it you are the one who has to deal with it,not me.”
And you are free to vote with that and the concurrent thinking that the world ends at the end of your nose. I am free to vote as I believe.
We’ll just see who wins out.
Hint? “Greed is good.” is taking a BIG hit just these last few days.
Projecting isn’t saying. Actually I’m independent and don’t think either candidate is worth a damn
With that Blue Jay have a good night. No I’m not being sarcastic, since I don’t know you I don’t have anything against you personally we just come from 2 different schools of thought
WTF are you talkin about Brownlib?
You sound like you’ve drinkin some old Soviet era koolaide propaganda.
You gotta red flag on your flagpole at home?