Conservative David Brooks espouses communist philosophical principles

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."

Post your comment

Comments are moderated. See guidelines here.

Comments

  • "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."

    Historically the hallmark of anti-communism has been to put down the French Enlightenment in favor of the British Enlightenment-- to play down reason (as Brooks does here) and to elevate the passions and emotions to co-equal status.

    Posted by Thomas Riggins, 03/19/2011 11:41am (7 years ago)

  • The present writer does not elect to be associated,necessarily with Carl Bloice,however,what he writes in PA concerning David Brooks,may be instructive,see his current PA article,Rewriting the Social Contract and Making Everybody Hurt.
    Brooks is a strong austerity for the working class advocate,a stark austerity,which will plummet the whole world economy into depression,and this friends,is an imperialist position.
    Is this "...espousing communist philosophical principles..."?
    We do not think so.
    Lets tell the whole truth about conservative Brooks,who has not lost his reactionary stripes.

    Posted by E.E.W. Clay, 03/17/2011 10:51am (7 years ago)

  • Perhaps illustrative of the overlap between communitarianism and socialism?

    Posted by C.J., 03/16/2011 9:46am (7 years ago)

  • What was the specific affinity between Marx and Burke pointed out ?

    Posted by John, 03/15/2011 4:54pm (7 years ago)

  • This should not be overly surprising. After all, the traditionalist conservative, Russell Kirk, pointed out decades ago, that there was an affinity between Edmond Burke and Karl Marx. One of his lady students, I forget who, actually wrote a book about Marx and Burke.

    Posted by Otis Daniels, 03/15/2011 10:47am (7 years ago)

RSS feed for comments on this page | RSS feed for all comments