In a recent article, conservative journalist David Brooks espouses, surprisingly, some fundamental communist philosophical principles. In "The New Humanism" he says:

"Finally, we are not individuals who form relationships. We are social animals, deeply interpenetrated with one another, who emerge out of relationships."

This is a profound truth and criticism of the central bourgeois ideological principle of Individualism. It is found in philosophies and ideologies from libertarianism to existentialism, from social darwinism to Christianity, from positivism to Reaganite individual responsibility.

Consistent application of the principle Brooks enunciates would undermine the Reaganite demagogic trope of  exclusive individual responsibility for one's poverty and other failings.

Here's another amazingly progressive philosophical statement from this conservative ideologist:

"This body of research suggests the French enlightenment view of human nature, which emphasized individualism and reason, was wrong. The British en...lightenment, which emphasized social sentiments, was more accurate about who we are. It suggests we are not divided creatures. We don’t only progress as reason dominates the passions. We also thrive as we educate our emotions."

And this next statement below is basically a criticism of the right-wing  educational "de"form theory:

"When we raise our kids, we focus on the traits measured by grades and SAT scores. But when it comes to the most important things like character and how to build relationships, we often have nothing to say. Many of our public policies are proposed by experts who are comfortable only with correlations that can be measured, appropriated and quantified, and ignore everything else."