Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Politics

David Brooks In 15 Words

A neocon revival?

Jesse Walker | 8.5.2013 7:30 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

From David Brooks' latest column:

nearly every problem with the Republican Party today could be cured by a neocon revival

There's more, but that's really all you need, isn't it?

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Powerball Jackpot Up to $400 Million for Wednesday

Books Editor Jesse Walker is the author of Rebels on the Air and The United States of Paranoia.

PoliticsPolicyNeoconservatismMedia
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (49)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Fluffy   12 years ago

    Nearly every problem in American punditry today could be partially ameliorated by a David Brooks suicide.

    1. JW   12 years ago

      If only. There's an army of yammering, slack-jawed fuckwits, all with their own Solution to Everything, waiting behind him.

      I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

    2. Lady Bertrum   12 years ago

      US suicide rates for 35-64 year olds increased 30% between 1999-2010. The rate for men in their 50's increased by 50% during the same period. Sooo, yeah, it could happen.

  2. sarcasmic   12 years ago

    Huckabee 2016!

    1. darius404   12 years ago

      Huckabee/Bachman 2016!

      1. some guy   12 years ago

        Kill me/Now 2016!

    2. SugarFree   12 years ago

      No, no. It needs to be someone with TEA Party support. Which is every Republican. Or no Republican. Or just no Republican that did something libertarians don't like.

      Sorry, I forgot what the narrative for the week was...

      1. sarcasmic   12 years ago

        Got, gays, and guns!

        Got, gays, and guns!

        Got, gays, and guns!

      2. JW   12 years ago

        Sorry, I forgot what the narrative for the week was...

        It's the same one every week: shut up and let us drive.

        1. SugarFree   12 years ago

          Big talk from someone that got stood up on his date last night with a dude. NTTATWWT

          1. JW   12 years ago

            It was a masculine public meeting!

            1. SugarFree   12 years ago

              Don't give up, big guy. There's someone hairy and sweaty waiting out there for you.

              1. JW   12 years ago

                :::relieved exhale:::

  3. Fluffy   12 years ago

    Many other conservatives want to go back to the 1890s. They think Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson and the other Progressives set us on that course....

    The kind of conservatism that Irving Kristol embodied was cheerful and at peace with modern America...

    Were there ever worse Americans than Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson?

    Seriously. Andrew Jackson had some redeeming moral qualities. The slaveholders among the Founders did, too.

    But other than John C. Calhoun, it's hard to think of anyone who ever summed up all the worst aspects of the American character than Teddy Roosevelt or Woodrow Wilson.

    Everything the post-colonialist left accuses white people of being? Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson actually were those things. When the narrator in Heart of Darkness reaches Colonel Kurtz and stares into the blackness of his soul, Teddy Roosevelt is smiling back at him from there. He was a vain and domineering oaf, more than a little crazy, completely without reflection or self-awareness, utterly convinced of his own superiority, who blundered about destroying the lives, fortunes and rights of others for no better reason than his own desire to engage in a performance. Everything about him was a vaudeville routine, and if you had to be trampled to let him do his shtick that was just your tough luck. TR was the American Caligula.

    1. Ted S.   12 years ago

      On the bright side, TR lost his mother and first wife on the same day.

    2. Brian D   12 years ago

      But all the history books speak so well of him...

      1. some guy   12 years ago

        Tells you something about who writes history books, doesn't it?

    3. some guy   12 years ago

      I think Wilson was worse. He had that self-awareness that TR lacked, and yet he still did the things he did. He gets my vote for worst American ever. He was the criminal mastermind to TR's thug.

    4. Timon 19   12 years ago

      That's one hell of a paragraph. I might lift that one day.

    5. JW   12 years ago

      TR was the American Caligula.

      I was forced to sit through some play at the Kennedy Center that centered around TR and the White House at Christmas, so that my spawn could be "exposed to the arts." It was a sloppy, fawning revisionist telling of TR, sanitized for the tots, so they can have a new generation of slobbering sycophants to power.

      It was all I could do to not leap on stage and strangle every one of the actors.

    6. A Secret Band of Robbers   12 years ago

      Personality-wise, TR was a great man and a great American. He represented the American ability that Rand admired so much: the power to face any challenge with determination and reshape the world. He could have done a lot of good for the world if he had never sought public office.

      Unfortunately, the progressive impulse he helped pioneer couldn't distinguish between harnessing science and nature, and harnessing the American people.

      1. JW   12 years ago

        He was a preening psychopath, never content on on the magnitude of his latest calamity in the name of American imperialist actions and advancing his brand.

        Fuck going back in time and killing Hitler. TR would be my #1 target.

        1. A Secret Band of Robbers   12 years ago

          I don't disagree that he was terrible for the country, and psychopath might be the right word. He was the supervillain equivalent of a Randian hero: great intelligence, great drive, great leadership, no respect for others' choices, and in place of a morality of freedom, a morality of slavery.

          If he hadn't existed, some other progressive would have done the same job. But because he was such a great man, and represented so many of the best qualities of the American spirit, he was MUCH more destructive.

          I don't know about killing him instead of Hitler, but TR probably did as much as any single human to destroy classical liberalism in the USA.

          1. Lord Peter Wimsey   12 years ago

            "He was the supervillain equivalent of a Randian hero: great intelligence, great drive, great leadership, no respect for others' choices, and in place of a morality of freedom, a morality of slavery."

            Randian heroes respect other's choices (or their right to make them), they just don't give blanket sanction to whatever people "feel like doing." I don't actively "respect" your choices in the sense of giving them the thumbs up. You make 'em; you live with 'em. But you can't escape judgement by me or others.

            This is NOT the Randian equivelant of TR's statist thuggery or narcissistic remaking of the world.

            1. A Secret Band of Robbers   12 years ago

              That was my point. He has all the strengths of a Randian hero, but the opposite morality.

        2. Juice   12 years ago

          Every time you go back and kill Hitler the result is global thermonuclear war no matter how you cut it. Hitler is there for a reason.

        3. creech   12 years ago

          Kill TR and he never runs against Taft, who then beats Wilson and if U.S. never enters WWI, then GB, France and Germany
          figure out how to end WWI without humiliating Treaty and Hitler probably goes back to doing schlocky sidewalk watercolors for tourists in Vienna.

    7. SIV   12 years ago

      TR was a pretty good outdoors writer. If only he stuck to hunting, fishing, camping and exploring.

    8. datcv   12 years ago

      The dream of the 1890's is alive in Portland!

  4. Raven Nation   12 years ago

    "He was a vain and domineering oaf, more than a little crazy, completely without reflection or self-awareness, utterly convinced of his own superiority, who blundered about destroying the lives, fortunes and rights of others for no better reason than his own desire to engage in a performance."

    Yeah, and his peers knew it. That's why they had him run for veep, to try and get rid of him. That's one thing you can blame the anarchists for.

    BTW: +1 for the "Heart of Darkness" ref.

  5. MP   12 years ago

    that's really all you need

    Yes. And at least it's honest. If you're going to continually trumpet Neocon positions, it's at least fair if you're upfront about it.

    1. Raven Nation   12 years ago

      How does promoting a neocon revival make sense even from a purely utilitarian "let's-get-elected" perspective. Wasn't the neocon position rejected in 2008 and, to a large extent, in 2012?

  6. SugarFree   12 years ago

    I managed to read the whole thing. The whole thing. Wow.

    If he didn't get fucked up on PCP and write this in a trance, he needs to go to a hospital. He's got a tumor in his frontal lobe the size of a walnut.

    1. Night Elf Mohawk   12 years ago

      It can't be good when the tumor is larger than the host organ.

      1. SugarFree   12 years ago

        Maybe it's his brain that's the tumor. If he got therapy for the eruption of intelligent-like symptoms, he could go back to quietly metastasizing in a pond somewhere.

    2. SIV   12 years ago

      Read the comments. Nobody does prog derp like NYTs commenters.

    3. JW   12 years ago

      I managed to read the whole thing.

      Herein lies the magic to the madness that we refer to as SugarFree.

  7. EDG reppin' LBC   12 years ago

    Alt-text: Nice glasses. Do they come in men's styles as well?

    1. datcv   12 years ago

      Alternative Alt-Text: "Sally Jessy Raphael, I loved your talk show in the 1990s!"

  8. Robert   12 years ago

    Favorite sentence:

    Neocons opposed government programs that undermined personal responsibility and community cohesion, but they supported those programs that reinforced them or which had no effect.

    1. robc   12 years ago

      supported those programs ... which had no effect.

      Bragging about wasting my money?

      Fuck you.

      Can we just start always referring to neocons as Trotskyites at all times until the rest of the GOP gets a clue?

  9. Rich   12 years ago

    The solution is ... to imagine what kind of values Americans should have, and what kind of limited but energetic government can reinforce those values.

    A *lot* have people have done just that, David. But, incredibly, still FUBAR.

    1. R C Dean   12 years ago

      Once you say that government should energetically reinforce the values that your imagine Americans should have, you have revealed yourself as a totalitarian psychopath.

  10. Ebriosa   12 years ago

    I remember one time when I was a teen arguing with a super team Democrat and saying Brooks was just like her. I was utterly convinced he was a Progressive. I'm still confused about the dude.

    1. robc   12 years ago

      Trotskyite. Probably not that far off from progressive.

  11. Eduard van Haalen   12 years ago

    Hair of the dog, eh? When we're recovering from neo-con-ism, what could be better than another dose of neocon?

  12. Eduard van Haalen   12 years ago

    "The crucial issue for the health of the nation, in this view, is not the size of government; it is the character of the people. Neocons opposed government programs that undermined personal responsibility and community cohesion, but they supported those programs that reinforced them or which had no effect....

    "How would they know if programs induced virtue? Empirically. "Neoconservatives, accordingly, place a lot of stock in applied social science research, especially the sort that evaluates old programs and tests new ones," Wilson added."

    I suppose it's space limitations which keep Brooks from enumerating programs which undermine virtue, and programs which reinforce virtue or are morally-neutral.

    Get rid of virtue-undermining programs, and you will have reduced the scope of government - not to zero, but to a smaller size than we have now.

    1. Eduard van Haalen   12 years ago

      "Wilson" here is the sociologist, not the President.

  13. The Late P Brooks   12 years ago

    He was a vain and domineering oaf, more than a little crazy, completely without reflection or self-awareness, utterly convinced of his own superiority, who blundered about destroying the lives, fortunes and rights of others for no better reason than his own desire to engage in a performance.

    Who are we talking about, again?

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Brickbat: Prodigal Son

Charles Oliver | 5.16.2025 4:00 AM

The Supreme Court May Rule for Trump on Nationwide Injunctions but Probably Not on Birthright Citizenship

Damon Root | 5.15.2025 5:28 PM

David Hogg, Victim of Wokeness

Robby Soave | 5.15.2025 4:23 PM

Trade War Means Higher Prices, Fewer Customers for This Vermont Distillery: 'It's Just Chaos'

Eric Boehm | 5.15.2025 12:50 PM

Hasan Piker's CBP Detention Marks Another Trump-Era Attack on Free Speech

Autumn Billings | 5.15.2025 11:24 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!