What made Barack Obama famous?
His ''One America'' speech at the 2004 Dem Convention. THAT got his name on every tongue, even if it got the political Right busy finding out just how radical a Leftist he really was.
The fact that he never even made a sniff of a reference to that theme as president never mattered to the party-controlled media, but what remains of the Dem Party needs to remember that first idea.
Going hard Left places you to the Left of 70% of the country just as the GOP President is gaining popularity.
7
Change will not occur without a complete collapse.
7
The U.S. is worse than feudal in its exploitations of the lower-class and has fallen far behind other wealthy democracies in social protection programs.
The American people are being bled by the one per cent and the path for the Dems can only be labour friendly and poor friendly with war on the tax evading overclass.
11
To say one party or another has to choose an agenda in order for a story....they each have their story ingrained and both stories are about monies, and how to get more. The agenda matters not. What really matters for this title to be an accurate one is to ask What is the political story of our country today? Is it for getting wealthier or is it for the program to benefit each participant in the program, not choose one over the other, and especially financially. We all live in the system, yet we have learned that money is the best story we can come up with.
Today People want this narrative changed and it is what they want for a new story. Changing the way we do business in America, for the benefit of all.
It was screamed in the 2016 election...how can you say or ask what's our story...if we told you would you even listen?
1
"In November, several outright Nazis and white supremacists will appear on Republican ballot lines. Arthur Jones, a founder of a neo-Nazi group called the America First Committee, managed to become the Republican nominee for Congress in the heavily Democratic Third District in Illinois. The Republican candidate in California’s 11th District, John Fitzgerald, is running on a platform of Holocaust denial. Russell Walker, a Republican statehouse candidate in North Carolina, has said that Jews descend from Satan and that God is a “white supremacist.” Michelle Goldberg NYT
I have yet to hear a single elected Republican politician or pundit for that matter, including Mr. Brooks, raise a single word against these people. Look to your own house, Republicans, before (with the kindest of intentions, of course) you go accusing Democrats of being too extreme. Your party has been taken over by full-blown fascists who will run this country into a fascist dictatorship while you dither away wringing your righteous hands.
19
Sadly, it feels like if you have an R next to your name, you get a pass on everything. I get it. This nation has always been center right. Budweiser and farm people who know better than the rest of us city does. But this is becoming a destruction of our nation.
7
The Democratic "story" is and has been quite clear. It can be summarized as justice and fairness toward the poor, working and middle classes (the 90-99%): Healthcare as a right, income equality, concern for the environment, harmonious international relations, respect for civil and minority rights, improved education, to name a few.
Republican attempts to brand the Democrats as somehow not having a story or focus is simply an attempt to deflect from their own track record of exclusive service to the 1%.
15
"Second, the core long-term fear is American decline; are we losing our mojo? "
No, we're not losing our mojo, we're having it trashed and stolen by a blatant con man.
How do we make contact with the vast majority of Americans--those who will suffer most under the present would-be dictator?
Hey, your taxes will be higher. Hey, the products you work so hard to make won't sell any more. Hey, you won't be able to afford health care, or to retire, or to live even reasonably well.
Those of us who've done well in the USA, many of us older and fairly well off, look with dismay as the newest generation of young people faces huge debt and dearth of jobs.
When I grew up, things were much more fair than they are now. Please, my fellow Americans, do you really see Donald Trump, with all his shenanigans, gold-plated toilet seats, and fancy golf courses as your neighbor?
40% of golfers in the USA make more than $100,000. 25% make $125,000 and upwards--sky's the limit. The image of Trump tramping around his golf courses (at huge taxpayer expense) isn't you or me.
8
Mr. Brooks:
If I had to advise on a Democratic narrative I’d start with three premises: First, by 2020 everybody will be exhausted by the climate of negativism and hostility.
_____________________
Good. Fewer Republicans will vote then.
5
I'd modify your suggestion somewhat. It's big-ticket items only and not culture war or identity politics. By big ticket, I mean health care we can afford and which covers as many as possible.
Affordable education of quality for all. Infrastructure programs not only for cities but for towns and suburbs. Clean air, clean water, open spaces. Then emphasize our decency. Democrats can do their own version of "morning in America", promoting respect, empathy, charity, and optimism returned to our national life. Elevate what is best about us.
Avoid wonky discussions beloved by the hard left. Telling the average voter you intend to eliminate ICE means to them open borders. Sure you can follow up with a five-minute discursive explanation of the history of ICE and its problems and some vague discussion of a replacement but you've lost that voter. Their eyes have long since glazed over and the tsunami of dark money ads sure to inundate us will have Dems as the open border party. Don't go there Dems.
3
Oh dear!
David Brooks splitting hairs about whether the Democrats have their message spot on.
Earth to David Brooks: Donald Trump is a threat to democracy even as David Brooks would like to know it.
Forget it, David, the NYT would still keep you as a columnist if you started coming out with truth rather than lame-brained exculpatory obfuscation.
Bret Stephens is still alive after his apostasy. You too could be getting the same amount of comment traffic as Bret Stephens.
Forget Paul Krugman, who has always been on the right -- i.e., correct -- side of truth, justice, and the American Way.
You can't always get what you want, David, but if you try sometimes, you might just find, you get what you need.
Anything is better than in anyway, by omission or commission, being a Trump apologist.
And that is what you are in this column, David, picking nits so Sean Hannity's research staff, such as it is, can turn your craven nitpicking into talking points.
5
Would be great if a Democratic candidate would appear to help the Democrats out of this funk but at this point I have a Sophia"s choice dilemma; vote for the Democrats who promise to destroy the nation with open borders and the mindset of a talk show host giving everyone a car or go with the incompetent Republicans and destroy the environment; at 72 years, I have about the enthusiasm to vote as the average Millennial.
3
Its abundantly clear that a far left agenda would result in persistence of the current regime in Washington. But bringing people together on as bland an agenda as Brooks proposes seems highly improbable. Making the election about Trump and related disasterous actions by the majorities in Congress seems more likely if combined with an expressed willingness to find moderate solutions to our many many problems.
3
The only drum beat we should be hearing is vote Democrat and get as many Republicans as we can out of office. Full stop. Whatever song we need to sing in every single race, we should be singing. Period.
This atrocious administration needs to be contained and the spineless Republicans are not up to it.
4
"The story Donald Trump tells is that we good-hearted, decent people of Middle America have been betrayed by stupid elites who screw us and been threatened by foreigners who are out to get us. That story resonated with many people."
It also resonated with the "plain people" in Germany for Hitler.
7
Democratic socialists are going to have to kill huge numbers of Americans to achieve their stated (web site) goals of eliminating private ownership.
The Soviets had to. Same with China. Vietnam. Cuba. Pol Pot had to. So did everyone else who wanted fully state run economies. Look at the socialist utopia of Venezuela. World's largest oil reserves and starvation. Committed socialists can do that for us.
Is David Brooks willing to give up 90% of his wealth as down payment on privilege? What about the next round when they take 90% of what is left? Is there a point where he would fight? What about the rest of the country?
2
Democrats must stop being neoliberal lite. Neoliberalism what we now call conservatism failed over 90% of the population in the 18th and 19th century and early 20th century and it is about to destroy America which was the first country to abandon it.
Growing the economy was not enough to keep America America the government of the people is about to be given the last rites.
Fifty years of the best GDP growth has given America a desire for felo de se. Conservatism is a failure, and it about to become a disaster.
The 18th century Nova Scotian statesman and writer Thomas Chandler Haliburton said it best. "When a man is wrong and won't admit it, he always gets angry."
Donald and the GOP are very angry.
7
When did a "story" become the be-all and end-all? Democrats will win by pushing out information and facts.
2
A real infrastructure program and the continuous upkeep of what we build would be great. That would employ a lot of skilled blue collar workers and motivate young people to major in STEM if they knew there would always be a need for engineers. Our bridges are in major need of repair (remember the one that fell in Minnesota?). Our big city airports like NYC and DC are dated. If you want to dream big, light rail like Portland has. People mention Social Security but the Works Progress Administration built a lot of things that people use every day.
4
Revival. That's the word Democrats need to use. It has Christian overtones and Democrats need to take back Christianity from the mean-spirited "God is a Republican" evangelicals who have embraced Trump. With a fake Christian with abominable morals and no compassion now in the Oval Office would be an excellent time to quote some New Testament. Revival also connotes CPR, reviving the heartbeat of a stricken body politic that has lost hope and lost faith. We have a lot of life-saving to do. There's also the reference to revivals of old Broadway musicals and plays that told uplifting stories and remind us of shared good time before we got so bitterly divided. Yes, we need revival, on so many levels.
4
The Democratic Story is
David Brooks has been wrong about everything for Decades, so what ever he says ... we will ignore.
Brooks is responsible for Trump ... He Built That.
5
"a focus on race or class is the wrong choice to begin with."
Easy to say for a white man...
4
Actually it is the right that focuses on identity. The left says that all are equal. The right identifies the deviants to their
ideal and then try to drive them to failure.
2
No need to worry...I will vote for anybody that opposes Trump
3
@George Eastwoo
But opposing Trump may not drive enough voters to vote for a Democratic House, this year.
I think the Democrats need a pulse, a beat, a rhythm, Trump has his daily rhythm, with is Tweets, etc. Where is the Democratic beat?
Perhaps they can come up with catchy songs to excite voters. Maybe they could hold idea contests to find the best beats to beat Trump... Good luck Democrrats
Harry,
Concur.....Our very democracy is under attack. The Democratic message needs to return to the fundamentals: defense of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, due process under the law, etc. Democrats should concentrate on and INSPIRE Americans with a 2018/2020 version of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address. Healthcare for all doesn't mean that much if the methodology of the dictators (propaganda and deliberate deceit) becomes the new norm for the US government.
2
David, I guess you're right on the need for a story, but it's the negative story that takes the day; no matter how bad our candidate is (even someone like Trump), theirss worse. Worked against Dukakis, McGovern, Gore, Kerry, seectyaculatly well against Hillary, and against Goldwater. If you want to win, go dirty.
1
The defensive responses by liberals in the majority of these comments is disturbing.
The messaging of the Democratic Party is key to winning the next crucial elections.
That message must be geared to to the underlying fears of the American public. ' Vote Democrat to save the Republic' or any variation there of will not work. Most voters are afraid of losing what they need: job security, decent wages, healthcare, affordable housing, affordable education.
They are not focused on foreign policy or identify politics - except for using them as scapegoats for their underlying broad existential fears.
Thus a message that would be most effective would be on the order of :
Vote Democrat! We Are For Affordable Healthcare, Education, Housing, and Decent Wages! Or some more abbreviated slogan of the same.
Brooks lays out the messaging that are losing storylines.
Democrats MUST find a message that will work this November if they want to WIN elections.
4
I do think David has this wrong. At the end of the day the decision will come down to who has the biggest tent, assuming you can turn them out. The republican tent has 2-3 factions that repel rather than attract. I'm thinking of evangelicals that want judges that will turn back the clock on individual rights, hate mongers who think the country is going to hell because of immigrants and big money interests that want to keep the deck stacked in their favor. I believe that is an explosive mixture that is not likely to last. The key is finding a candidate that can galvanize the opposition, several can win, the right one will change things for a generation.
1
The job market is not the same as in days past; unions are few. The top CEO's of large companies are racking in more than 300X plus more than their typical worker. Those with health benefits are having to choose high deductibles because of the high cost of care. College tuitions are exorbitant and out of the reach of most Americans.
It is hard to have hope for the future when housing prices are sky high, and in many cities rents are way over the top with the average paycheck not enough.
Our priorities are lopsided. Trump's tax cuts, his billions of dollars offer to farmers because of his bad tariffs decision, along with the fallout when the effects of the tax cuts become really apparent in 1 or 2 years, it is evident that the average person in this country is not on the list of the GOP agenda. Oligarchy will rein.
Of course, we need businesses to thrive, but let's be real. A business is only as good as its employees. That has always been the case.
A society with health care for all from cradle to the grave, the opportunities to improve oneself with resultant employment, affordable housing, higher education within reach, living in a safe community where the police departments are a part of it, is a society where we all would want to live. It is a society where crime, suicide, domestic abuse, will be less. It all goes together.
3
Mr. Brooks like most Americans get one fact amazingly wrong, socialism isn't about state vs. companies or worse entitlement. Socialism is about regulation by community. There are many forms of communities, it needs not to be the federal government.
The fact Mr. Brooks writes this article, is a clear sign that this movement is gaining traction and begins to be worrying. I share the same worry, but I worry a lot more about the current state of affairs with this administration and GOP.
1
if there is one thing poor whites hate more than being poor is being lumped in with hated folks of color. its been proven time and again that poor and lower middle class whites have much more in common with their economically disadvantaged neighbors of color. but time and again these whites vote for white candidates from the monied classes just like trump. this is not going to change until this class of white voter dies out. one very discouraging thing for me is to see all the young whites at trump rallies soaking up the racist agenda of their parents.
3
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has risen to prominence, among other reasons, for being anti-Israel. She has joined Sanders, the most anti-Israel Senator except for Rand Paul, at this time.
In July of 2017, Sanders and Paul were the two votes in a 98-to-2 vote on sanctions against Iran. Legislators who are anti-Israel are pro-Iran. If Ocasio-Cortez is elected to the House she will be a new pro-Iran and anti-Israel vote in the House.
1
David - message, schmessage. We WON the popular presidential vote in 2016! When Democrats look in the mirror, we know who we are and what we stand for.
Winning the presidency - as Obama did twice - gives us exactly... nothing. We've got to have all the marbles, the way you guys do.
I think that happens when the GOP reaches it's nadir of negative nastiness. We ain't there yet. See the NYT story today about Jeff Sessions and "Lock Her Up".
I don't want to see us gain the house for two years. What's the point in throwing down some spike strips? The GOP 18-wheeler will just blow past 'em.
Our current national GOP dance craze is the Limbo - how loooowwww can you go - and I think we'll know eventually. And when we get there - battered, bruised, dazed and confused - that's when the Left has a shot at running the table.
Mr. Brooks, for all of his wisdom, has a debilitating blind spot when it comes to America's Original Sin (slavery) and the racism (a national problem) that relentlessly flows from it. You cannot divorce the GOP and any of its successes from the racist foundation of its modern campaigns. Dog whistles that began with Spiro Agnew have been underwritten in every Republican campaign since (with perhaps the exception of John McCain). From "law and order" to Philadelphia, MS; from Willie Horton to the lies told about John McCain's fathering a black child, all of this finally culminating in the lie about Barack Obama being a Kenyan Muslim instead a US citizen, courtesy of our current president.
Granted, identity politics has risks, but our nation lives with daily tweets and announcements from the White House that mimic the words and pronouncements of the most segregationist Southern politicians of my childhood and youth: Orville Faubus, George Wallace, and Jesse Helms, and Birmingham Police Commissioner, Bull Conner. Just like this president, these ugly, hate-filled men winked at and encouraged violence, and belittled opponents. The South in which I grew to maturity was -- for African-Americans -- a police state, worthy of any communist or fascist dictatorship.
This editorial is thoughtful, but it remains curiously above the fray, especially when Trumps' primary contribution to our culture is the divisive, continuous project of Making America White Again.
5
Trump didn't win. He squeaked into office on the wings of a biased electoral process and a major assist from federal law enforcement and Russian espionage.
The problem that Democrats face is not our story. Our story resonates. Our problem is how to wrestle power out of the hands of the amoral and unfit.
3
The Dems should be on Trump's message. Talking race or how to help the poor are both loser talking points! They should be all over increasing the minimum wage, unions and universal health care. Not the mamby pamby mealy mouthed nonsense they put out now. They need to be forceful and grow a back bone. Their corporate masters insist they keep quiet.
1
Poor sad little Brooks gives us a seasonal Midsummer Night's Dream of Republican propaganda. Lies within lies.
The outer lie is that of being a newspaper columnist offering journalistic opinion. There is no "opinion" here, just the shuffling of alternate structures of propaganda. Shall we call them this? Or shall we call them that? He's not talking Democratic plans, because no such thing exists. This is all about which stories the Republicans should tell about them.
These latter are the inner Pyramus and Thisbe. Brooks proposes alternate campaigns of asserting which Republican shortcoming is actually typical of the people he opposes. Which picture shall the GOP up to the nook of public vision?Will the public be more suckers for a social class bias story? Or will claiming that the left are the racists be the winning way to go?
Well put together, Brooks. Bottom would be proud.
It’s not about a story. It’s not about what kind of healthcare, if is you can get healthcare at all. This is not complicated, this is binary. You vote Democrat or Republican. It doesn’t matter the name next to the (D) or (R).
Why do you vote for one party or the other – regardless of the name? What’s most important to you? Your kids safety in school; or at outdoor concerts? Which party refuses to even consider any gun control and which party does? You want your kids safer, you vote Democrat.
Is health care most important to you? Which party tried getting rid of your Obamacare? Which party increased your medical premiums last year; and will again this year; and now wants to let the insurance companies drop you or refuse you because you have a preexisting condition? Which party doesn’t?
Your wages most important? Which party refused to increase minimum wage, and which one want to increase it? Which party is against women’s rights and which one isn’t? Which party wants to cut your Social Security and Medicare and which one doesn’t?
This is not complicated, this is binary. What’s most important to you? Vote (R) or (D) accordingly.
5
Dear David Brooks; Why do you conflate "Socialism" and "Socialistic"? Most pople know so little about either that there is a knee-jerk No to any mention of either. We alrady have many aspects of our national life and economic policy that are "socialistic" -- full public fundinfg health care for veterans, national/interstate highways, Old Age and Survivors' Insurance, etc.Why not state forthrightly that we can't have some aspects of national life unless we pay for some necessities with public funds (taxes)? That Promotes the General Welfare and helps to form A More Perfect Union.
4
In America 2018.....aint nobody "oppressed" in the USA. The only oppression is what exists in the individual's own mind....and the circa 1968 style propaganda cranked out by the DNC, Inc.
2
Mr Brooks is an intelligent man and at times that is reflected in his writing. The Democratic Party should act on his advice and actively refute these messages since they, taken together, do provide an effective way to confuse voters and to generate dissonance within the party. To refute just one "everybody knows:" Americans do not trust businesses over government. Business did not have the ability to stop or fix the Great Depression, Banks acting without governmemt enforced rules fail losing depositors money, coporations find it much cheaper to dump the byproducls of industry into our air and water than to follow EPA rules - those rules apply to everyone not just the wealthy or fortunate upstreamers. As the more eloquent writers here have articulated, the opposition does not need a single story or narrative, we are diverse in background but are unitef in an understanding that society must "[work] together in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice and ensure domestic tranquility..." Repulicans story was and is prevent American progress. The ongoing attempt to "dissaper" positive actions by Obama and the Democrats feels like the overfed and wealthy bully not satisfied with his meal extorts lunch money from everyone watching as they starve. We do want to stop that bully since he's on the side of bullies everywhere and our friends are starting to fear, ignore, or work against us. Meanwhile our common defences are probed by Putin who will attack weaknesses.
1
Mr. Brooks, you're becoming more irrelevant with every column. Typically Democrats are the ones who do the most for the country: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, ACA, the WPA, denouncing segregation, trying to allow people to vote, immigration, gun control, etc., etc. Republicans are against all of these. Stop telling Democrats what they should do; you know nothing of our work.
1
Here is what Steve Bannon said in an interview with the conservative "American Prospect" last year:
“The longer (Democrats) talk about identity politics, I got ’em. I want them to talk about racism every day. If the left is focused on race and identity, and we go with economic nationalism, we can crush the Democrats.”
http://prospect.org/article/steve-bannon-unrepentant
He's absolutely correct. It is so deeply frustrating that Democrats believe that the path to political power is obsessing over the plight of women, minorities, LGBTQ people and other groups who, even in the era of Trump, have objectively never, ever had it so good. Even with all of our problems, there has never been a society as open, free, fair and welcoming to these groups than the one we live in today.
Stop indicting the nation as irredeemably bigoted. Stop celebrating the demographic death of white people. Go back to the Democrats' raison d'etre of working to support, defend and promote the very widest swath of the electorate, the middle class.
Yes, that will include welcoming into the coalition socially conservative white males who drive pick-up trucks. But it will mean that Democrats start winning elections and wielding real legislative power again, rather than continue to lose nobly.
5
The GOP has won the argument on race. There really aren't enough Republicans who can be swayed by human decency on the subject of race to make any difference in the election. However, Democrats should still hammer Republican bigotry because it will inspire Democratic troops.
Herman B Wells, a very wise man who became President of Indiana University when the Klan occupied every statewide office and controlled the legislature, several times told me before his death in 2000 how you had to deal with someone like Trump. Don't expect to beat them by recounting the truth - they are superb at lying. Scorn them. Make them and more importantly their followers (Trump and his ilk have no shame) look ridiculous, and weak.
3
In my youth I was an idealistic Christian Marxist, then I was mugged by reality,and became a Christian-Democrat socialist (with a lot of caveats). In my "fire-breathing" Marxist days, I was a true socialist, and called for the nationalization of the means of production. Unless I'm missing something, or the definition of "Socialist" has changed, these folks are hardly socialists. They are more like European Social-Democrats. I think using the word "socialist" might be off-putting for the poorly educated, and give the Republicans too easy of a target.
5
Argh! Please, David, Please don't try "to advise on the Democratic narrative!" You've done this for many years for the Republicans, thereby intellectualizing and rationalizing the politics that brought about the likes of the Palins and Trumps of this world. (Remember your indignation of the Romney 47-percent comment, and then your subsequent support for him???) You now work hard to separate yourself from all Trump stands for. However, like McCain, Bush/Rove, Romney, and others... your indignation can't hide the fact that you were an important player in bringing about the era of Trump. That is your Republican and moral legacy... so please, for the love of our country, please steer clear from advising the Dems!
The choice is between labor and capital.
I disagree with you, there is no choice, labor and capital are yin and yang, and a healthy society has a healthy balance between the power of labor and the power of capital.
Capital alone means nothing without labor as its workers and customers. Labor alone means nothing without capital to hire it and channel its efforts ( history proved the attempts of worker's cooperatives or state power to play this role to be unsuccessful).
1
@Vlad
Fair enough, but for more than a century the Republicans have been all in on the side of capital and the lack of the healthy balance you speak of is creating the unhealthy society we see.
The political party in crisis is the Democratic one. I would imagine that an opinion columnist that identifies as Conservative and votes Republican would have more to say about his own party which, in spite of controlling all three branches of our government, is melting down. Please start your next column like this one with the following changes:
"There's a lot of discussion these days about how far right the Republican Party should go these days".
Physician, heal thyself, and remember that denial is not just a river in North Africa.
3
David, who are you kidding? Trump's story is all about race and class from day one of his campaign. Day one.
He is all scapegoating and name calling. You and the Times have been going along on this ride for a while now...handing him a bullhorn, silencing his competitor with innuendo unbecoming of journalism, and sounding the relentless beat TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP in service to the paper's subscription rate.
All you are doing here is turning arguments against TRUMP on decent people who happen to be living breathing examples of what it is to live in a diverse country.
Your arguments are arrows entirely missing their mark...pale, weak, childish darts. This displacement informs us only about your inability to tend to the mess that is the conservative narrative.
Democratic deference to conventional wisdom about what the "real Americans" want, and as centrist a Democratic nominee as one could possibly dig up for the 2016 election, are why Donald Trump is currently president and Hillary Clinton is sitting at home ruminating on "What Happened?"
How's this for a story?: Corporate interests and culture war extremists have hijacked the American political system, especially via the Republican Party, and ensured that the "real" Americans get less value for what they pay into government via taxes than the citizens of any country on Earth, while what most citizens of rich countries expect - comprehensive health care throughout their lives (with better outcomes), free education all the way through college, and a recognizable social safety net for everyone, rather than one attuned to special classes of citizens in certain favored industries - is what Democrats have to offer.
3
Democrats will read the NYT Picks and blow off the Reader Picks. Republicans will never read the New York Times. Trump will watch FOX News.
3
Mr Brooks, and other Republicans:
S...t...o...p...
G...i...v...i...n...g...
D...e...m...o...c...r...a...t...s...
Very bad advice.
1
David Brooks needs to stop concern-trolling the democrats and look to cleaning up his own house (republicans). If he really comes out with something truthful about what's wrong with republicans, then maybe, I'll consider his opinion worth more than bird cage lining.
1
Just what the Democrats need, advice from David Brooks.
Don’t be grouchy, he says. It doesn’t work. Be youthful and optimistic. Sing songs. “If I Had a Hammer.” ?
Grrrrrrr...
So, let’s speak a language that Mr. Brooks might understand.
He’s always advising folk to go back to church. So. Let’s uae his language.
Mr. Brooks, your party has become evil. Cruel. Evil. See Matthew.
“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.”
That about sums it up.
That’s why we’re grouchy.
1
The way to win for Democrats? Less SJW, more FDR.
1
What???" Maybe the right narrative could be rebuilding social mobility for the young: America is failing its future. We need to rally around each other to build the families, communities, schools, training systems and other structures to make sure the next generation surpasses this one." That's exactly what Ocasio-Cortez is calling for. She's a "structuralist," even if her emphasis is what you call "racial justice socialism." She's saying you can't disaggregate race from economics. It sounds like you are saying the same thing. Today you're talking non-sense.
1
The difficulty in crafting a viable story for Democrats is in part the difficulty in crafting a viable story for the country at large in a world that no longer resembles the one we used to have. The country has lost its dominance in the world not so much from fecklessness on its own part, but because the rest of the world noticed the successes of our expertise and set about copying them. The US comprises only about 5% of the world's population: we should have seen it coming that the other 95% are not stupid.
At the moment we are grappling with the fact that among globalization's winners and losers is a cohort of losers in the US largely found in the rural interior who in 2016 copied the identity politics of others and elected their champion to the White House as leader of a party that has also curried their favor, largely for selfish reasons. The calculated disruption of this event has our attention but will likely fail to deliver benefits due to a lack of focused effort to identify accurate remedies such as aggressive infrastructure development needed to grow the economy.
Perhaps the Democrats should stay true to their past stories of equal opportunity, resistance to race and class prejudice and investments in education and the social fabric. The underlying principle is that we need not fight failure so much as we need to let failure fail on its own. The man in the White House is in this sense acting perfectly according to script.
Democrats have many stories as it was once a party of racists in the South, of corrupt party bosses in many cities, and a historically more conservative party than most today might believe. But it is also the party of the New Deal, the Fair Deal, The New Frontier and the Great Society. Later, it was overrun by Clinton and Company espousing Republican Lite economics and centrist social policies.
The Democrats cannot tell a unified story as long as the current cabal in Washington rule the roost. They have no intention of sharing or conceding power and they have spent most of the past 3 + decades ignoring and abusing the Progressive wing- not to be confused with liberals.
The story that Bernie Sanders and many like him want to tell is that we are a party of all the people. A party based upon equity, opportunity and community. Government can and should be a force to level the playing field of individuals by protecting them from predation by large corporations and trade groups that see them as sheep to be sheared. Government should provide the tools by which every person can have a reasonable shot at taking their own gifts, talents, initiative, genius, experience, ambition and insight to make a great and productive life for themselves and their family.
The path to a better America is not through marginalizing anyone, kicking the ladder of opportunity away from anyone, or by writing off any person, place or group. It will be found in community.
e Pluribus unum
1
The Democratic Party, from its beginings, has always stood as the enforcer of the Status Quo, the practical continuum of what has been and what will be. It began as the "big tent" coalition of the Jeffersonian landed-gentry and the Aaron Burr financial-political urban Patrons of Tammany Hall-NYC chapter. The Democratic Party has resisted change all the way up to the point that change becomes part of a new accepted status quo. The Democrats fought hard to protect the labor institution of slavery......only to become the standard bearers of Civil Rights......the Democrats fought hard to maintain the patronage system in government jobs....Only to become the protector of unionized government jobs.....The Democrats fought hard to prevent FDR from expanding the Federal Bureaucracy until now the DNC is the biggest proponent of such institutions. The party membership likes to wrap itself in the robes of "progressivism".....but the truth is exactly the opposite...........as even today we must observe the uncomfortable truth that the DNC is a corporation mired in the politics of 1968.
The story that the Democratic Party tells our fellow Americans must be a bold one.
Justin Trudeau of Canada framed the dilemma:
"Our modern Canadian identity is no longer based on ethnic, religious, historical, or geographic grounds. Canadians are of every possible colour, culture, and creed, and continue to celebrate and revel in our diversity. We have created instead a national identity that is based on shared values such as openness, respect, compassion, justice, equality, and opportunity."
I think this is EXACTLY how the Democrats must frame the debate.
It's the truth.
Americans are tired of being mansplained what is in front of their eyes. The choice is really a stark one:
1. Do you believe that America is for white native-born people? If so, check R on your ballot.
2. Do you believe that America is for anyone who shares our values of openness, respect, compassion, justice, equality, and opportunity? Check D on your ballot.
Don't tell me it will turn off some voters--those voters are already not with us. They saw this frame long before the rest of us.
Some are in incorrigible. Others, can be turned. Some, because of fear and resentment, retreated to the lowest common denominator of xenophobia. Some are now sorry. They lack the language to understand the alternative.
So, Dems, explain and articulate to the modern person exactly what it is they are endorsing: a community of shared beliefs vs identity.
...and let the chips fall where they may.
1
Here is what I think that the democratic story should be: In a time of rapid change, uncertainty, and challenge, we need to offer people some degree of security. They should not have to worry that, if they lose their job, they will lose health insurance! They should not have to be concerned that a job will not pay a decent wage. They should be protected from consumer exploitation. They should have the opportunity to be trained and go to college without having to pay for it for the rest of their lives. "Dreamers" should not have to worry that they will be deported. Our goal is to "soften the blow" of a difficult and changing work environment. So we support a national program of quality health care for all, college options at minimal cost, a minimum wage of 12-15 an hour, a consumer protection bureau that works for all. Elect us and we will fight for these policies and programs.
2
The premise of our system is that one takes an objective look at the facts and comes to the best conclusion one can.
When our system was still sane this model lead to men and women from both parties coming to the same conclusion. Those who didn't stood out as less than honorable because there was little or no reason or empiric evidence to back them up. It was always clear they had a different agenda, a partisan or at least selfish one.
Then the republicans went communist and everyone started saying the same things, those who did not were punished mercilessly. Then "talking points" became a thing that explained away why responses to questions never addressed the question instead advancing their agenda without offering up any of the explanations or objectively evaluated evidence that lead to whatever position they held. Turns out they never had any positions only talking points to advance an agenda mostly enacted in secret and described as something other than it actually was.
The Democratic Story is the failure to recognize and confront this fact.
For once Brooks has got it right. There is existential fear abroad in the land. Fear that we're falling behind, losing our place at the top, and that once we've fallen, will never get back to where we were. Candidates that tell the right story about how to get around and beyond this fear, will carry the day.
I dislike the Democratic party slogan, "A better deal". It sounds like a fast food advertisement . How about this: "Rebuild America" . We've got 4 trillion dollars infrastructure that needs fixing. There's plenty of jobs to go around fixing it. From failing schools to National Parks, potholes, bridges, waterworks---Let's rebuild. Let's invest in our kids.
There's reams of social science research to show that focusing on our differences, IE racial and class divides, actually work to deepen those divides. What actually shrinks them is focusing on what unites us. Brooks is right when he points out that people are united by the idea of leaving a better future for all of our children. Demands to abolish ICE, open the borders, and promises for unfunded mandates, etc., won't get Democrats the White House in 2020, and won't rebuild this country. They'll just tear it farther apart.
5
@Kate
We have been bombarded with the message of a society and economic system in decline. The GOP has gained success after success on the message that someone's gain automatically equates to my loss.
We need to project our enthusiasm into concise projections of how a positive-sum game will benefit all and how the GOP's short-term zero-sum game only benefits a few.
1
As usual, a well thought out and written piece.
But I can't tell if Mr. Brooks is making a suggestion/recommendation or merely an observation. If the former, it's likely far too complex of a story for most voters.
3
Let's talk about the American story. I have long thought there was such a thing, and that it featured a people who were, perhaps uncommonly, committed to, in this order, 1) fairness and 2) the underdog, while at the same time being steeped in rugged individualism, the near-sanctity of private property, and the idea that their country was more prosperous than any other country because it was also more freedom-loving. Dear fellow-reader, I wonder which parts of that story resonate with you. It seems to be the case that any commitment, or even pretense of commitment, to the underdog has been thoroughly jettisoned, and that the same is true for any commitment, or even pretense of commitment, to fairness. It has been suggested that many who support our ever-dissembling Bully In Chief to do because they see him as the underdog being beat up by a bullying liberal media establishment. Therefore, maybe (just maybe) there's some basis for hoping that the story outlined above isn't totally a thing of the past. But it certainly looking bad for that story, as day after day the billionaires, whose only qualifications for office are 1) their right-wing ideological fixations and 2) their billions, take more and more material wealth for themselves, leaving less and less for the rest of us, with the active support of 1) this administration and 2) its never-say-die supporters.
1
What Brooks misses in the story equation is the importance of the messenger. FDR, Kennedy, Clinton, and Obama were great messengers, who tapped into the ethos of their eras because of who they were perceived to be. Bernie Sanders has a great message, and has conviction, and can be erudite, but he is not the ideal messenger. Someone like Harris or Ocasio-Cortez with Bernie's message and conviction may be the type of messenger that delivers a democratic presidency. Biden maybe not. Booker not really. Cuomo probably not. Reagan and Trump are great messengers above all, and that, rather than their messages, has propelled them to the presidency. Democrats, get the right messenger!
2
It's interesting to note that when Republicans find anti-Semites, neo-Nazis, Klansmen, misogynists and open racists on their tickets, that's never seen as unacceptable to the American voter and disastrous to the party. Perhaps nobody can be so low and craven that he does not fit into the Republican fabric.
But when Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez calls herself a Democratic Socialist and defines it as all should have access to education, health care and a job, that is unspeakably unacceptable to the American voter and disastrous for the Democratic party.
But then, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a very dangerous woman. She has the edge on most all politicians. She has conviction, a message, charisma, leadership skills and fire in her belly.
2
David Brooks,
At some point, if democrats continue the equality, education, safety net, etc platform, those working rural Americans will come to Democrats. They only stick to GOP now because of right wing deception, lies and propaganda. It is inevitable and the only hope is that it wouldn’t need to take 15% unemployment recession to trigger that.
The Trump GOP story is simple and emotional. American carnage. Brought on by corrupt, weak, Democrats and corrupt GOP. Red-blooded Trump Americans are winners and fighters. They'll do anything - through their man Trump - in order to stop our country from being destroyed by crooks, elitists, and educated know nothings (as well other countries - every country other than the US). Red-blooded Americans will make America Great Again! Yes. It is a very masculine story.
What is the Democratic story?
@betterangels Yes, a "masculine story" but an egregious lie, when one looks at privileged, crooked Trump and his cabinet of billionaire/millionaire cronies, eager to divide the spoils of America and take advantage of perks — Trump created a swamp.
A "simple and emotional" GOP story because it's a lie.
Let's focus more on truthful.
1
We are in a Gilded Age. The characteristics are familiar to all living in it. Huge inequality; wealth corrupting the political system;anger by those not participating; a stock market unmoored from business etc.etc. What follow is unclear. In the past we had a stock market crash followed by reforms and a progressive era. That scenario is the most probable.
3
Maybe the Democrats in the rarified air you occupy, Mr. Brooks, are not compassionate, but the grassroots Democrats with whom I converse are a different breed, especially the younger ones.
We have a sign in our office that says Democrats Care--it lists all the things we believe in, like healthcare for all, education, decent infrastructure and schools and much more.
We walk the talk. We have helped established Little Libraries in our community for people who live too far to walk to the town library with a focus on young children. We help individuals when they ask, not with a handout, but with a hand up.
We are working on improving race relations within the party and outside of it. And much more that I can't think of right now. All of this is in addition to our main purpose: to elect good Democrats to office to carry out our ideals.
I invite you to come meet us and learn what grassroots Dems look like, sound like and act like.
3
Forget the conservative republican views on what must be done with education or health care based on their cultural orientation about the individual and the individual's responsibility within a community. That's nonsense. The democratic story must focus on race and class because within corporate capitalism that's what they do. They sort and select and the uneducated buy into it. The educated Blacks don't buy into it and the people who teach at the universities who teach sociology, anthropology and political science don't buy into it. Read Erik Olin Wright. In a conventional democracy, state power is subordinated to social power. When corporations control political parties the social power of political parties is subordinated to corporate economic power. Then when corporate control state power, they accomplish their control of political parties and thus have control of state power. This means that when you have social control of economic power by way of a Democratic State (people have more input), you then have a more democratic regulation of Capital. What Sanders and Ortiz are talking about resonates because they are talking about the social power of people. The more participation of people in a democracy helps to proportionate who gets what when and how within a given economic state of capitalism. People want a little more of the pie and they are saying: maybe we should start with who gets educated and who gets good health care? That's the real democratic story.
I am hoping for a story to be told by a Bernie Saunders type who can also inspire business and innovation. A person who can genuinely help turn a safety net into a springboard. Someone who can inspire a capitalism 2.0 and a democracy 2.0 which moves both closer to the Golden Rule.
2
Democrats do have a story, Mr. Brooks: "Democrats fight for the underdog."
That one simple message explains most of the party's positions in a nutshell and answers every scurrilous charge from the right about "class warfare" and "identity politics."
I wish Democrats would tell that story.
5
Whenever anyone tries to shame me online or label me as a "libtard" or whatever childish nickname for Dems/Progressives/Liberals is popular that day, I always point them to this quote by JFK about what it means to be a liberal: “If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people-their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights and their civil liberties-someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal", then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal.”
9
I'm scratching my head trying to figure out why anybody would care a whit for what a lifelong Republican deems useful advice for the Democratic party.
The GOP cared nothing for FDR's New Deal. They've never stopped trying to dismantle it. They cared nothing for JFK's New Frontier, they've never stopped trying to dismantle that. Clinton was a center-right Democrat on many issues, as good as the GOP would realistically hope to find should the Democrats occupy the WH. Barack, no further elucidation necessary.
The children? When has the GOP ever given a damn about the children? Always looking to slash funding for education. Decrease regulations so the children can gamble on whether the foul air, water, and soil might be stunting their brains and bodies. School lunches? Afterschool programs? Spending whatever it takes to make sure each child graduating high school is truly literate, versus grumbling about the social safety net for those who got high school diplomas yet are completely unprepared for the real world? The children indeed.
When will the NYT retire David Brooks and give us a serious thinker. Do progressive Democrats pen columns telling Republicans how to best prepare for the coming elections?
3
Brooks 2020!
"Compassionate Technocracy for a future-oriented tomorrow!"
"Racial justice be damned!"
"Trust business!"
The slogans just write themselves.
1
Democrats have to learn to consistently push back hard when right-wing politicians twist, distort and misrepresent the policies of Democrats.
Republican supporters prefer simplistic labels because they confuse and distract many voters from noticing that Republican policies are toxic to, and destroying the American middle class. Focus on how health care is becoming increasingly out of reach. That's the Republican version of making America great again.
2
David is missing the point by focusing on fringe candidates, like Bernie Sanders and Ocassio-Cortez. The vast majority of Democrats want:
- A strong (Capitalist) economy, with rules that don't favor the super-rich
- a strong national defense that doesn't favor Russia over our allies
- A commitment to mitigate the negative effects of climate change
- A human immigration policy that doesn't separate families
- Protection of minority voter rights.
- Sane policing that doesn't put African-Americans at risk.
- Healthcare that is universal and puts patients before insurance companies.
- A limit on campaign contributions by special interests and large corporations.
- Separation of Church and State. Especially as it relates to a woman's right to choose...
And most importantly A LEADER WHO UNITES ALL AMERICANS.
7
David... Please construct a story that the conservative voters can follow rather than constructing stories that progressives may develop. I can't agree with the progressive and far left stories and don't agree with the Trump and isolationist wing. So what is the story for those of us who believe in limited government, individual freedom within legal boundaries, and cooperation with foreign allies against tyrants?
Dear Mr. Brooks,
Please read your colleague, Miclelle Goldberg's column in today's paper.
1
If you are a Democrat and you believe David Brooks, or Ross Douthat, or Bret Stephens, or Joe Lieberman has any useful advice for you, you are either very young, very old, or have recently been dropped on your skull.
2
My impression is that the Democrats need a new FDR.
This isn't about class warfare but it does involve not being afraid of special interests (something where Obama and both Clintons failed) and you can be certain that Republicans will react just as vehemently as they did to FDR.
2
"The story Donald Trump tells is that we good-hearted, decent people of Middle America have been betrayed by stupid elites . . ." That wasn't the story I heard. The story I heard is that white Christian Americans are victims: of black predators, latino rapists, muslim terrorists and globalist (jewish) bankers. The other story he told is that Hillary and Bill are cheap southern hucksters who should be thrown in jail. While the Dems told scary stories about Trump, he appealed to anger. Anger trumps fear. At least in the Electoral College system, another enduring vestige of America's Original Sin.
3
David Brooks says the country can unite around the project of helping our children. And yet, the US birthrate is the lowest in memory, and much of the support for the Democratic Party comes from single and/or childless people. How do you square that circle?
1
Democrats believe in our fundamental constitutional promise of equality for all citizens. Inclusive, unifying — not punitive, discriminatory or fascist. The "story" is still there, now those apathetic souls who sat out the last election need to fulfill their civic duty, rekindle their patriotism and vote, in every election, at every level. It is that simple.
2
'We need to rally around each other to build the families, communities, schools, training systems and other structures to make sure the next generation surpasses this one.'
To me, this sounds like Hillary's message in 2016, and I believe that it was lost in the noise. Whatever mistakes HRC made as a candidate, she did win more votes than any white presidential candidate in US history with this basic message. It wasn't enough.
Please tell us, Mr. Brooks, what sensible, middle of the road messaging will overcome the credulous white rage in the Trump cult? These folks aren't interested in stories of rebuilding communities to better serve our children. They respond strongly to race-baiting and are not interested in careful analysis of policy. The electoral college gives them the leverage they need to impose an ill-considered agenda on those who would rather see progress on all fronts.
I see the peril in pushing hard-left in an alt-right country, but the tragic experience of the current administration amply demonstrates the peril in trying to calibrate the thoughtful 'middle of the road' approach. Much s I enjoy your writing, I don't think we have a story that 'pushes people toward reconciliation'. Sad times.
1
Octavio-Cortez is one of many candidates running for office in the 2018 midterms. As an independent, I don't view her as representative of the Democratic Party. What makes Democrats successful is their appealing to the constituents in their regions. And each region has a different story and a different need.
Watching modern politics might have been very frustrating for Mr David Brooks. I remember watching him on the PBS NewsHour during the 2016 presidential campaign. He didn't like either Clinton or Trump. It was obvious that Trump was a malicious liar, but the news media was still trying to be fair to him back them. Remember that, Mr Brooks?
2
I agree with Mr.Brooks 100%. The Republican Party has been playing race card and winning elections. The Democratic voters are not same as the Republican Voters. The Republican voters are white and they are 70% single group. The Democratic voters are mixed like African-American, Hispanics, Muslims, Asians, Haitians, Middle Eastern, LGBTQ and labor union and their total is less than 30%. The Republicans are energetic and united. The Democrats are always fighting among themselves. The Democrats are PURIST. The Liberals are reluctant to vote. The Democrats should not play race card and avoid all kinds of Litmus Test. Winning is the only option by all means.
Brooks veers through his own story line, to conclude the "alliance between oppressed racial minorities and the oppressed white working class has never materialized, and it looks very far from materializing now."
Wrong. 1. The problem with racism isn't "alliance." 2. Racial injustice is a middle class issue.
America's original sin was slaveholder divide and conquer strategy. Most white southerners didn't have slaves, a disadvantage competing (with free labor). They didn't need alliances, just economic rationality.
Africans were brought because they could survive Carolina's malarial swamps (English kids, beasts of burden, died, unlike up north). White debters who escaped, blended in, not Africans. Needed: a moral, political defense. Invent racism.
Or as LBJ said "convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man” and he's conquered.
If paycheck Americans just saw interests, not race, they'd vote for different people. They wouldn't need an alliance story.
But Trump, and GOP voters, aren't working class. They're the Americans who barely afford mortages, for better schools, status, networking. It's their one main debt, asset, investment. They have a self-fulfilling idea: minorities depress home values. Voila: injustice.
Minorities and majorities want similar things, like schools. Middle class demands them. Racism blocks it.
1
When I was in college more than 40 years ago, in-state tuition at the University of Michigan was $500 per semester, quite affordable even in 1970s dollars. A lot of my classmates were kids of guys who had a high school education and a union, and with those two assets could raise a family on one income, put their kids through college, and lead a comfortable middle class life. That way of life has been obliterated of course, and the disenfranchised, atavistically seeing life as a zero-sum game, attribute their fall to the increasing prominence they see in black, brown, gay, and female people. The GOP's evil genius has been to exploit this narrative brilliantly--you have gone down on this great teeter-totter because the Other has come up. The great failure of the Democrats is that they have not even tried to offer a counter--narrative. There are hopeful signs that this is changing.
5
David Brooks makes an excellent argument for a constructive, youth-oriented approach to Democratic politics as we skid toward 2020. People will, as Brooks says, be fed up with Trumpian negativity and be ready for something positive to devote their energies to. But there should be another component to Brooks's plan. In addition to "constructive" we should add "repair" to to the program. The devastation wrought by Trump and his enablers is deep and wide. The environment, foreign affairs, public morale--all are in desperate need of repair, and any new administration should shoulder that task. Repair can be as positive as any forward-thinking, constructive plan for the future. The two should be joined and pursued with equal vigor.
1
A witness to the Bernie Sanders/Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez rally in Kansas the other day said the two of them played the old Clinton "for the children" card, promising the unemployed poor free college for their kids, guaranteed income for their kids' parents—no work necessary, free healthcare, free whatever…
They didn't tell those people how they proposed paying for all those freebies.
They didn't explain—as Obama had explained to Joe the Plumber, (now the metaphor for the overburdened middle--class chump), that they would "spread the wealth around" Marxist-style.
That is—that their plan was to snatch the money away from the kids of the overburdened middle--class chumps.
TRUMPELSTILTSKIN
The Ds versus the Donald, the difference stealth
Is the equitable distribution of America's wealth.
The Ds will make us all equally poor
The Donald promises us gilded grandeur.
The Ds chances to win are one in a million
Even Bernie would choose his very own billion.
1
In an America with a racist president and proud of it, it is hard to imagine race doesn't have a part in everything nowadays. Even business. Starbucks anyone?
Count me as one who is wearied over these non-stop "What is the Democrats message?" pieces. Here's why I'm voting for Democrats all the way down the ballot:
They are not the party of trump.
Beyond that, I don't give a rat's behind if the candidate wants to abolish ICE, out-law student loans or whatever. When it comes to impeachment (and that is not an "if") I want someone who has the sense of decency and patriotism to end this nightmare.
The only party that can and will do that are Democrats. That is why last month, after being a Republican for 38 years I joined the Democrat party.
And I will vote Nov 6th.
4
So Mr. Brooks wants everyone to be nice and work together towards progress. Meanwhile, the American Fascist Party (formerly Republican) destroys the environment, our relations with our allies, trade with allies and very shortly a woman's right to live her own life, all the while stoking racist hatred. Its almost as though he thinks this is just a passing moment. Mr. Brooks lives in a gaseous bubble of privilege and has no clue that we are far beyond the point of playing nice and winning on "youthful optimism". Not with 42% of the populace pining for Mussolini. The only way forward is to wake non-voters to this threat and motivate them to show up. The smiling march towards human progress can happen after the fascists are thrown out of office and we begin to restore democracy.
2
Oh my lord how dumb are the democrats?
There is a clear platform for them to run, and coopt the power of republican hate machine.
They have the option now of running on the platform of "Them Nazis, us good."
Them Nazis? Look at the fodder: deportation of legal immigrants. Stripping of security clearances who speak the truth. Money grab and stealing by republicans. Concentration camps for children at the border. Military threats to countries. Desire for military parades. Nazis running for house and senate with full aid and comfort of the republican party machine. The "decent" people in Charlottesville.
Could the combination of Fox, AM radio, organized theocrats, and the great leader himself do more to help the democrats?
But no.
Why would democrats try and win, when they can lose? Why would they abandon their milquetoast comfort of perennial victimhood and self-pity?
Why would they choose to attack a clear and present threat to the American republic, when they can whine instead and cry that we are no longer singing Kumbaya around the firelight (recyclable logs, fake fire). I see them running to the far left now, promising free everything, and it plain makes me weep.
The heat in the kitchen is thus: Free has no power; fear and hate do.
Tame the heat dems, or get out of the kitchen.
My simple narrative: I don't want to live in a Thousand Year Trump/GOP Reich - which is where we are rapidly heading (yes, it's now 1934 in Amerika). By contrast, the GOP - via the Electoral System, gerrymandering and voter suppression - are aching and striving to establish this Reich.
3
David Brooks' repetition that Democrats are socialists still doesn't make it true.
Expecting every citizen's rights to free speech, equal protection, the right to vote, etc. not only to be protected but fostered by our government is a Democratic principal. It should be a Republican one. It's hardly socialism.
Believing our fellow citizens shouldn't be starving to death when state, local, religious, other private charities, and extended families cannot, or will not, take care of those who are unable to take care of themselves was a fundamental duty in major Western religions long before anyone thought of Socialism. So pious Republicans should have been as energetic in their support of, for example, the New Deal and Great Society programs as Democrats.
But somehow having Democrats stand up for people who have the least power gets branded as "socialism." Why? Because it is inconvenient to pay attention to what we claim as our fundamental values as a nation?
3
Clinton and Obama did pretty well for themselves, but did they change America for better? As far as I can see inequality grew bigger while wages barely grew, thousands left behind and racism is coming back. Why after years of successful Dem presidency we got Reps in power? Isn't because the people don't feel that Dems are fighting for them? Isn't it because they are the same no matter who is in the power? How should we judge the politicians? Just by years in the power or how much they did to improve lives of Americans? Sure, we can pretend that classes do not exist, or that there is no racial problem, but that could not solve the problem Wasn't racial discrimination solved only when people said we had racial problem and we need to address that?
1
Racial discrimination is resolved?Because we said it was a problem?. Dem Presidents followed GOP as well. What happened under Clinton and Obama was unmatched sustained growth, relative peace, Irish peace, Balkan peace, under Clinton a balanced budget, higher worldwide respect, under Obama an actual increase in manufacturing jobs though small, a balanced Supreme Court, recovery of a financial disaster that Bush administration incompetence couldn’t slow, saving the auto industry and banking industry the disasters that Obama could handle versus Katrina and Maria. Decrease in abortions also. Decreased in uninsured proving that it was possible and a decent economy. Now we have hate as a life style choice, disregard for checks and balances, no thought of children’s future, inviting a fascist dictator to OUR White House and showing total disregard to our Electoral process. I think it does matter.
1
David, here's my idea for reconciliation. How about you acknowledge the role you played in making sure the Democrat's story didn't succeed, by giving cover to the extreme tactics of Republicans in failing to call them out on their lies? How about admitting that the financial collapse was largely the result of financial greed and deregulation run amok, and not, as Republicans would have it, the fault of the small minority of minority first time homeowners that Republicans blamed? How about admitting that the housing bubble was the result of a failed attempt to use market based solutions to address social issues? How about pointing out that we know how private markets work at addressing healthcare issues - look at dentistry - and that Republican claims of better solutions were aimed at solving a different problem - not how to make healthcare more affordable for sick people, but how to make health insurance more affordable for healthy ones. How about conceding that the topic of global warming has been politicized by the right, and that Al Gore was motivated by science, and not, as conspiracy theorists would have it, a desire to increase the reach of gov't in people's lives? How about confessing that you helped whitewash the Republican narrative and that talk about gov't inefficiency was in fact a code for "it's not worth doing unless somebody can make a profit off of it"?
3
Placing an emphasis on racial and ethnic identity and "white privilege" will just seem to validate the white nationalist line that white people have something to lose that they need to defend.
Attacking the "one-percent" will just seem like the Democrat's version of the Trumpist line that elites have betrayed America.
You can not beat Trumpism by copying its politics of resentment.
4
Brooks constantly amazes me, and not in a good way.
Consistently, Mr. Brooks would rather argue phillosophy than pay attention to the train wreck he and his party have caused for our great nation. Instead of providing Democrats with free advice Mr. Brooks, why don't you redirect you philosophical and moral querries toward the GOP House and Senate members who consistently and spinelessly bow to everything Cadet Spanky McBonespurs says and does. Where's their accountability Mr. Brooks ?
Mr. Brooks, you seem determined to approach current events with myopia and maintain a view of the GOP during the 1980's and 1990's when you thought it could do no wrong.
2
David, I think you are only qualified to ask: What is the Republican Story?
2
Maybe it’s like paternity: it’s not necessarily an important issue between a man and a woman, until she sues you for child support.
I like David Brooks but his commentary here appears naive. Unfortunately I am one of the darker voices in the room, beset with cynicism, fear, and a memory of history that suggests strong parallels between our path now and and violent paths of the past. Our world is not just a national stage anymore, despite what tribalists and nationalists believe. We have significant trends toward fascism around the world, with the economic pie getting smaller and smaller and the degradation of the environment becoming more pervasive. All of these trends will eventually collide. I believe we are headed to a major war in the next five years, and it is that event that will ultimately unite us in an effort to survive. The children have always lost. They have always been an afterthought to everything else. And our president doesn't belong in the same room as a child. I
When David Brooks starts giving advice to the Dems, I stop reading.
Time for Brooks to take a long vacation.
2
This is David Brooks' column of the year.
To me is is all about the primacy of reason, of which there is precious little in the faith based scam promoted by the idolatrous Republican Party.
3
The story for Democrats is FAIRNESS for everyone. Almost every Trump/Republican is unfair to a large group of people. The tax cut for the wealthy is the poster child, but also the phony immigration policies (DACA, separating children from families,etc.), dumb tariffs that are starting to kill our farmers and consumers, on and on.
1
FAIRNESS won’t work because fair is an opinion and the best you can do is 50/50. There will always be someone who thinks somebody is getting more for less.... because there always will. It’s also such a static concept.
1
.
Conservatives ascend when progressives have no vision and road-map for progress; liberals ascend when conservatives protect and unnecessarily perpetuate unjust ideas, institutions and practices.
Todays leftists appear to have adopted John Lennon’s “Imagine” as their entire philosophical platform:
Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people living for today
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people living life in peace, you
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us
And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people sharing all the world, you …
With no road-map of how to get to their utopia these idealistic snowflakes are floundering. Hint: don’t blame national history or white men for your problems. And government handouts (socialism) only work for a short time – study Venezuela’s story.
So, for now, conservatives will be ascendant.
2
Didn't this 'utopia' work in Norway, Sweden, and in many other European countries for quite a long time? Of course, we are not Switzerland, but we are not Venezuela either.
3
What is the Republican Story? What I see now is a Republican party that supports Putin, KKK, Alt Right and Neo Nazism. Why does this story of treason and hate appeal to so many Republican voters? The Democrats are the hope for this country to save us from financial ruin, Treason, Hate and nilhilism represented by Trump and the Republicans. Analyze your party first. The Democratic Party is just fine and a better option for patriotic Americans.
3
The next to last paragraph sounds exactly like a page from an Obama campaign speech. So. . . now what?
1
“We,” David? Have you come over to the dark side?
1
A “conservative “ who is “future oriented”! A sign of the times?
Ah, yes. More pious pap from Rev/Rabbi Brooks. You know, the recently redeemed "real" conservative who's been a flack for the rightwing since he first appeared as some "expert" pundit. Now he moans and fingerwags about a "climate of negativity and hostility" which his GOP has created at least since Reagan and Gingrich if not Nixon.
So...stop lecturing about "unity" and ignoring "class", Mr. Brooks. Your hypocrisy...or is it recent conversion...is too obvious. Direct your new enlightenment to your fellow "conservatives".
1
Democrats - Stick to the basics - jobs, security for the family, and education. Show that Trumps ideas are flawed by presenting better ideas. Beat him in his own neighborhood. Don't call his voters idiots, like it or not, you need them. Show them that they need you. Be strong and compassionate. Don't try to out bully a bully. Outsmart the bully. Believe in the country. Punish those jerks who stole money in 2008 - you never really got around to that did you? In your campaign ads, show videos of children being ripped from their parents by ICE. Show videos of Trump with Putin. Show videos of your candidates with poor people - do you have any? No? Get some! Stop whining about Hilary. It wasn't "her turn". She wasn't queen or heir apparent. Move on. Offer a future for America. Like it or not, Trump offered one, and it sold. roll up your sleeves. Get some mustard on your tie. Get out of DC and into the country. Don't just talk to other democrats. Yes, Trump is a jerk, and slept around, but so what? That argument, as crude as it is, won't work for you. Kennedy and Clinton - Roosevelt too, had affairs while they were president. At least Trump did it being president. So focus, focus, focus. This should be a walk in the park, if you offer real ideas and real solutions.
1
Oh brother...mailed in.
2
I wonder if Mr. Brooks or any other NYT writer will call out their own newspaper as being the biggest propagator of the multicultural/ identity politics narrative.
5
The working (white) people on the right and the oppressed minorities on the left are destroying
Once again, straight to the comments to understand the straw dog Brooks threw out there (to mix a metaphor) and to read some eloquent rejoinders to his blinkered vision.
3
How many Democrats are proposing to abolish ICE?
How many Democrats are anything that approaches "socialism?"
The media gets sucked into the Republican hype and distorts the discussion.
It's true that America is failing its future, but conservative ideology with its emphasis on individual responsibility and devolution won't fix what's wrong. The communities, like the one where I live, that are suffering the most won't get better without help. That help could come from the state, but it's more effective if we have a federal effort to stop the downward spiral.
We are not walking into something unprecedented. The nation before the Great Depression was brutal to those at the bottom of the heap. Isolationism exacerbated problems.
We can do better. We should do better.
1
How about "It is the Constitution Stupid"
2
When will David Brooks get a Pulitzer Prize? He deserves one. Seriously.
The thought, "You can get a lot of facts wrong if you get your story right" needs to be considered more fully. What does right mean? Does right mean whatever is expedient? Does right mean what is morally correct? Does right mean something that will lead to a good outcome?
I am afraid that what Mr. Brooks means by "right" is whatever works in terms of securing victories. These aren't the right stories for Americans in my opinion. We need stories that will strengthen our society by promoting values of freedom, liberty, ability to advance, caring for one another, the value of hard work, and environmental stewardship among others.
1
How can we ...."be rebuilding social mobility for the young" etc, when the undercurrent of our government (all three branches) is designed, by the basic tenet of the Republican party, to prevent this. The milieu of "local", which I appreciate as of utmost importance, (also as implied by the constitution), is so dependent on macro economics.
Given that Brooks completely missed the trends that led to the Trump presidency, I don't think Democrats should seek his advice on how to run their party.
His own party has rejected the "big government conservatism" that Brooks championed and chosen white nationalism instead. Instead of offering advice to other parties he should think about what he can do to reform his own.
1
This column is a load of empty rhetoric. What is America's "story"? It turns out to be the same story as that of any other large-scale human society: there comes a point when the wealthy and influential refuse to pay their share to support that society, and the burden is shifted to the poor and the modest in means. Vast estates (corporations) go untaxed, while small farmers (wage earners) are impoverished. It happened in ancient China. It's happening in America today.
Ultimately, the American "story," like any other "story," is a matter of who gets what and how.
The story the academic left tells about truth is this: that perception is reality and truth is what somebody in power says it is. Until they realize that this is what Trump believes and that this is what is not working, they will never get to a position of power. Normally, such things like metaphysics, Truth, and ontology can stay in the background and let disciplines like ethics and normative discourse do our heavy lifting. But now, we need to see that the academic left's idea about power and truth, drawing from a helpful and meaningful Pragmatism of James and Dewey, needs a different application in the political domain. For example, we talk of biological truths that would lose their meaning if reduced to physics. This is very helpful. We need a better understanding of these principles, within our shared collective political discussions. Otherwise, and this was predicated in the early seventies by the philosopher Rorty, who was a huge lefty, we will be stuck with Trump like figures. The right has its own issues with this, but that is another story, about how reason and tradition lost its way to such things as Rove's big tent moves. The academic right never taught truth is variable to power, but its politicians sure came to and still do believe it.
The Democrats need to focus on whatever will swing the vote their way in the those congressional districts and states in The Heartland that went Red by a slim margin in 2016. That, more than anything else will determine who controls the electoral college and Congress in early 2021.The only one in the party who seems to be talking sense, in that respect, is Seth Moulton, who recently was interviewed about that on Morning Joe. When asked what that party platform should be, he said that it should start by asking and then LISTENING. Ideologues of all brands have trouble with listening.
1
dems’ story? not treason, not family separation, not robber barons
2
David, your columns remind me more and more of the higher-toned German media meant for export in 1944 to 1945. You fail to acknowledge that the once-progressive GOP has morphed into the Hitler-Stalin pact under Trump and the "Freedom Caucus."
At this point in time, either you're "for" this treasonous administration and its collaborators in the GOP who just "tut, tut" or you're for our Constitution. It's that simple.
1
Hahahahaha. Repsplaining - how rich.
2
Stop with this feeble advice. If you still identify as a Republican reptile, your opinions are tainted by conflicts of interest. Either become a Democrat or shut up about what the Democratic Party should do. Having said that, I agree that Democrats have gotten involved with secondary issues, many of which can be handled state to state: gay marriage and other gay issues, transgender bathroom issues, and abortion rights, gun rights, as examples. The key issues stem from the lousy lifestyles most of us have due to inadequate pay and horrible jobs with no benefits, ridiculously costly healthcare, crumbling infrastructure, college costs and no jobs for graduates, to name a few. Trump and Bernie both talked up these real life issues that don’t just affect small segments of the population. Trump knew what to say but apparently was only saying these things to get elected. Unless the Democrats demand sanity on these issues, who needs them?
1
Mr Brooks wants a story from the Democrats? How about the one where they save America from the malignant designs of a narcissistic (insert Tillerson's characterization). The Democrat's story is writing itself. Mr Brooks story, on the other hand, could use some more work.
3
David, it doesn't matter what the story is as long as we get out from under the nightmare we currently have. It could not be worse than it is now. Get a clue. Mickey Mouse could win over the treasonous GOP.
1
"The story Donald Trump tells is that we good-hearted, decent people of Middle America have been betrayed..."
Well stories can be true or false--fiction--comedy or tragedy.
This is a joke--right?
Trumpies are racist, phobic, vengeful, shortsighted egocentric haters. Just like Trump.
2
The race comes down to either you are for border security or open borders with no security.
2
brief, Democrats have stayed away from this narrative because the long hoped-for alliance between oppressed racial minorities and the oppressed white working class has never materialized, and it looks very far from materializing now.
Perhaps it never materialized because MLK was murdered.
1
David Brooks' generation presided over the shuffling of American wealth out of the hands of ordinary people and into those of a tiny elite. Young people aren't even having kids anymore, because things are so bleak. Yet Brooks remains committed to "family" and "business" as things that are still going to save us somehow... this is a sick joke.
This newspaper's op-ed section is staggeringly disconnected from the realities of the people it should be serving.
3
We may not know what the Democratic party is, but I sure know what it isn't....cruel and willfully ignorant.
I would rather have an unfocused Democratic Party than anything the Republicans are peddling.
2
Mr. Brooks, who I think generally is a decent and thoughtful man, has drunk the GOP kool-aide on just what Democrats actually think.
1
The story is that conservatives killed it through greed and arrogance.
2
Americans actually love socialism so long as you call it something else.
1
The gall of Brooks lecturing the Democrats about "race or class."
GOP/ Brooks/Trump: heal thyself!
1
Cogent perspicacious article
The narrative is and always will be liberal vs conservative views of life and the world in general. I have been trying for a long time to understand people like Trump and his cronies and supporters but I simply cannot find what makes these folks tick. They are all so set in their ways and afraid of any kind of new ideas clinging to the ones they learned as children. In the 60's they refused to see that Vietnam was a disaster; in the 70's they refused to see Nixon was a disaster; move on to the 80's and Reagan was a disaster with his "tear down the wall" bunkum; in the 90's there were the dear Bushes who led us to war. Now we have their crowning achievement -- the idiot. What next - a clown. This is not my America nor my kind of political ideas.
2
Trump’s slogan was Make American White Again. Democrats’ slogan should be Make America Decent Again
3
Lost long ago is JFK's salient point that a rising tide lifts all boats. While both parties are guilty of losing JFK's meaning, the Democrat Party has morphed into one that relies almost exclusively on class warfare, wealth redistribution and outraged victim-hood as their ideological bedrocks. They see prosperity as exploitation and wealth & success as a finite pie that only they properly understand how to allocate. They pit groups against each other and hope that the larger majority sees it their way. It's the mentality of the mob and eventually it is a dangerous one.
Groups and organizations do not have rights. Individuals have rights. As long as everyone's rights are the same and equally respected & upheld, everyone's opportunity is also equal. But the left is not interested in equality of opportunity, they insist on equality of outcomes. In a free society, outcomes can never be equal because people have different abilities and work ethics. Equal outcomes cannot be mandated by legislation unless we become Cuba or the Soviet Union.
The Democrats in particular would serve their base and their Party much better if they lost the class & race warfare rhetoric. They would better serve America if they focused on the success of the individual - even if that means being willing to stop bailing out people who are willfully unsuccessful as a result of their own poor decisions. Don't hold your breath waiting for this change to develop.
4
Mr. Brooks should be glad he didn't pursue a career in political consulting.
3
If we want this country to remain a world leader (image already quite tarnished), doesn't it require seeking win/win ideas? If someone won't compromise with you, don't YOU often dig in your heels? I do, even though I'm an Independent. Few disagree that finger pointing (as most comments seem to do) is near record levels and viable solutions scarce. Mr. Brooks conclusion takes a middle road. He acknowledges the "climate of negativism" and "long-term fear of decline." But Isn't he especially "RIGHT ON" by stating nations come together not by discussing problems but by doing something for their children? Good example- today's online article re First Teacher parent movement to bolster kindergarten readiness in poor Boston and Dorchester areas. How about promoting that as national model? How about promoting nationally family court (Google bill H.Con.Res.72 introduced July 24, 2017!)) and CPS reforms to insure kids don't get ordered to live with abusers, creating cycling bad behaviors? Isn't it hopeful that teens have been inspired to join forces versus gun violence (Never Again) and fighting climate change (Zero Hour)? The 10th item in July 20 letter to editor re what most Americans agree on was "Children belong with their parents." Shouldn't "if not abused" be added? Isn't it hypocritical for media to fail to alert public re separating OUR kids from protective parent yet expose immigrant kid separation? Don't how kids turn out EVERYWHERE affect EVERYTHING- how could it not?
The message for Democrats in the next election should be to vote to save our democracy. Republicans are destroying it one day at a time in plain sight.
3
Mr. Brooks, would you PLEASE spend your energy trying to knock some sense into Republicans? Now instead of throwing gratuitous comments tearing down Democrats into a column on something else, you're writing entire columns tearing them down? Democrats are opposing authoritarianism in the United States right now, and Republicans are abetting it. That is the simple truth.
2
In politics, nothing creates cohesion like anger. It has worked for Trump; therefore, it's logical that the Democrats should remind each other how angry they are. Of course, it's not much fun for those of us in the center who refuse to join the cacophony.
Perhaps the Democratic Socialists have discovered the secret of electoral success, but to many of us in the center they are just tiresome and unreasonable as the Trumpists.
I find it really strange that David Brooks, a Republican apologist, seems obsessed with advising the Democratic Party. I know that Democrats are not supposed to know anything about religion, being Godless socialists, but:
Matthew 7:3-5
3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
1
Considering Brooks' Republican Party has given us Donald Trump, he may spare himself further shameless humiliation and the world greater harm by offering suggestions to the Democrats. Ocasio-Cortex won the primary with 13,000 votes in one of the bluest districts in the country.
Trump, Clinton. Ocasio-Cortez, Brooks, Wall Street: the country may actually be tiring of New York.
Who said “all politics is local”. It was a good Tip. If I were running for Congress I’d focus ont the issues that matter in the district. If elected I’d vote for measures good for the whole country including my district. After all the position is United States Congresperson from San Francisco.
Hope of a return to striving to be the nation the USA aspired to be at its founding is a good story. A return to seeking to form "a more perfect union"?
"[I]ncreased devotion to that cause" would be good. "A new birth of freedom" sounds nice.
What am I doing? Obviously you don't need non-American inspiration! Forgive me. :)
2
“First, by 2020 everybody will be exhausted by the climate of negativism and hostility.” Are you kidding? Trump and the GOP can only survive in this climate, and they do everything they can to intensify it. If you want proof, just look at Trump’s tweets from just the past two days. Every word in the tweets is designed to intensify anger, grievance, hatred and mistrust. Trump knows that it is only because of this this climate that He got elected and retains massive GOP support. The big mistake the Democrats have been making is to underestimate the pervasiveness of this climate and to think that if they “aim high” when the GOP aims low,mother climate will go away. No. The Democrats need to be tough but truthful. They need to sharpen their wits and their tongues—and their timing, It is typical of the not sharp, day late, dollar short Democrats that they have left it to Trump to make the first claim that Russia will intervene in 2020 to help the opposition.
I'm sorry, did I miss something here, or is Brooks saying the Democrats have NO STORY that will actually unite the electorate?
If was the typical sympathetic voice who was warning Democrats not to alienate the white working class, then my reply would be "What should they do instead?"
But if ALL of the choices are wrong, and you're hearing it from a conservative who is offering no real options, than why am even reading this column?
Like I said, I might've missed something, but of choosing between "race or class" is the WRONG choice, that means not choosing either of them is the RIGHT one?
But then you just criticized Ocasio-Cortez for doing just that, correct?
So, what else is there?
2
Occasio-Cortez is a person running for a single congressional seat in an already deep-blue district in blue NY.
The corporate media hacks like Brooks however seem to have gotten the memo from their owners to act as if Occasio-Cortez is the Democratic nominee for President in some fictitious 2018 Presidential election!
The amount of hand-wringing we are witnessing would be laughable but is seems to be an orchestrated right-wing campaign to turn Occasio-Cortez into the new "Nancy Pelosi" even before she is elected to office.
2
As Eldridge Cleaver said, “You either have to be part of the solution, or you're going to be part of the problem.”
David, for all his “reasoned” writing, is still a Republican apologist and part of the problem. He is not the person to which Democrats should listen for advice.
1
July 24, 2018
The mature politician makes for Party power – or to say - the tree grows from soil and cultivation. In fact both parties are the makeup of their collective success to yes – get elected.
Sure Presidents Clinton & Obama were indeed proper guardians & delivers for best available results.
America doesn’t need a new or improved party but we need to encourage and produce the best men and women that want America to have its own special brand and voice that make for the beauty of politics' vitality capturing voters winning – yes – without lies or grandiosity of greatness as just deals & deals & biting any and all opposition. Democrats are its history and its honoring the communities that want the making for enlightening the path albeit each district and what it all means for sharing a common awareness for the state and the nation – without freaking ideologies of demagogues or the worthless terror of what history had to bear in the last few centuries – because the rulers were bent of the cult of personality as if shamanistic delusions from China and later today Russia or to many in the theocracy of Islamic revolutionary genius - all for the power of the idea and then the inability to deliver the pragmatics for bread and butter and modern additions of electronics conveniences. Let's guide civil servants to be ready to lift up and pick the pieces of the failed Republicans; that produced a fake leader Donald Trump & sooner he's out the better for America...
1
It’s simple folks.
Republican Party Goals -
Deny Climate Change
Tax cuts for the wealthy
Privatize SS & Medicare
Repeal Obama care
Repeal Roe V Wade
Close Planned Parenthood
Repeal LGBT rights
Deregulate banking, finance
Limit consumer rights
Limit environmental controls
Citizens United - campaign $
Fight gun control.
Democratic Party Goals -
Address climate change
Increase taxes on the rich
Protect SS & Medicare
Support Planned Parenthood
Protect consumer rights.
Protect the Environment
Support education,
Support LGBT rights,
Regulate banking & finance
Support the poor & unemployed.
Repeal Citizens United
Gun control
6
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is looking for a way to deliver on what Thomas Jefferson imagined in the Declaration of Independence: "...[that] all men are created equal..."
2
If the majority of the comments herein — angry, contempt-filled, and self-validating — are truly representative of where the Democrat Party is heading, we can look forward to Dems being more of what they are today — a group of frustrated urbanites with no means of winning national elections.
Forget red state, blue state. Review the red county, blue county map published after the appalling DJT beat the equally appalling HRC for a glimpse of the near-permanent future. Well, at least until Democrats actually sober up or become mature again. And, no, Ms Ocasio-Cortez is not the future nationally.
2
The one political strategy that's always worked: Tell the people you're talking to what they want to hear. Talk about race and social justice to young people. When you're soliciting contributions from Goldman-class voters, talk about the economy. When facing retirees, reassure them you'll protect Social Security. Then, once you're elected, just do whatever you want.
1
The Democrats message should be “get out and vote you idiots.”
1
As many readers object, Brooks premises are that Democrats are united, negative, lefties- not technocratic modernists. The Democrats, as Ms. Ocasio-Cortez has said, is a big tent, with many flavors, opinions, that are all welcome. I agree. It is the Republicans under Trump that are Luddites, living in the past.
I love Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, even if I do not agree with every position she might have. Her energy, her intelligence, openness, and honesty are refreshing. I want the Democrats to move left. We have imitated and sucked up to Republicans for too long. Democratic conservatives are welcome also. When George Will, the conservative columnist, tells everyone to vote Democratic this year, as he has done, it refutes Brooks attempts, as he is wont to do, to sow discord among the Democrats.
3
"America is failing its future. We need to rally around each other to build the families, communities, schools, training systems and other structures to make sure the next generation surpasses this one."
I think you have found the magic key. There are places like Arizona, which are hell-bent on separating out it's children in the guise of "school choice", leaving slim pickings for students who are most in need of our support. I cannot think of better preparation for the future of such kids and for our economy than coordination of schools and businesses in providing up-to-date curriculum, activities, and hands-on training for not only contemporary jobs, but socialization in the sense of learning to work with people from a variety of backgrounds. D
Democrats are dropping the ball if they continue to excoriate the Trumpets, ICE, Wall Street, religion, the wealthy, etc. We know all about what tactics those factors have used to halt American progress. Democrats' job is to move on and overtake the negative aspects of such factors instead of name calling by, as Michelle Obama said, "Going high."
1
1."In brief, Democrats have stayed away from this narrative because the long hoped-for alliance between oppressed racial minorities and the oppressed white working class has never materialized, and it looks very far from materializing now." AND
2."President Lyndon B. Johnson once said, "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."
It appears that racial animus continues to trump( no pun intended) economic interests and the question remains whether rising levels of prosperity for poor whites and poor people of color in time will make the Johnson comment untrue.
2
The story Donald Trump tells is that we good-hearted, decent people of Middle America have been betrayed by stupid elites who screw us and been threatened by foreigners who are out to get us..........You can get a lot of facts wrong if you get your story right?
Mr Brooks missed the whole neo-Nazi, Charlottesville VA "both sides at fault thing"? Mr. Brooks' wombly equivocation pieces are getting worse.
2
"You can get a lot of facts wrong if you get your story right." I hope Mr Brooks meant that Trump won because he had the right story for the Tribe of White 'Victims'.
See how I did that, Mr Brooks? I used single quotes, just like you should have used for 'right', especially if your intended audience includes Democrats and other people who want Trump out.
Also, I question the value of retelling the 'right' story in the Trump voice: "betrayed by stupid elites who screw us and been threatened by foreigners who are out to get us".
Trump supporters read it, and buy it again. It is not helpful.
Finally, there is a LONG HISTORY of selling ideology with "do something on behalf of their children". Politicians will always want their way, and "our children's future" will always be invoked for getting their way.
Unfortunately for Republicans, unity grows daily.
2
2018 campaign slogan:
Everything’s for Free!
3
Every time I read an article by David Brooks, I'm confused. I don't understand what he's trying to say. His pseudo-intellectual, broad generalizations strike me as someone who is out of touch with reality and hasn't spent much time in the real world with real people on real issues.
1
When listing oppressed people,donot forget Native Americans. I so rarely see any mention of them.
1
Stop! Stop! I can't take anymore. First Comey and now Brooks, both lifelong, die hard Republicans, are coming forward to share their wisdom on the best way to beat Republicans.
I guess neither one of them ever heard Republican Jackie Robinson's prescient words in August, 1963. "A new breed of Republican has taken over the GOP. It is a new breed which is seeking to sell to America a doctrine which is as old as mankind - the doctrine of social division, the doctrine of racial prejudice, a doctrine of white supremacy."
Maybe when the dog whistle became a megaphone, they both woke up. I seriously doubt it.
1
Imho a good start from David Brooks.
How about the following:
1. improve el-hi education
2. fix physical infratructure
3. control costs and increase access to medical care with some kind of single-payer plus secondary coverage system
4. simplify and reduce the personal and corporate income tax systems, but make them more progressive, and institute a value added tax to pay for all this
Is this too much obvious good sense to ask the United States of America?
Americans are compassionate people who all want to be rich, and that raises conflicts. "Rags to riches" is the American dream that many have achieved-- sometimes with a combination of gumption and ability, other times by being at the right place at the right time. Today, many can't maintain their families, much less increase their wealth. They are angry. How to resolve the conflicts that arise when ones know that burning coal is destructive and uneconomical, yet one's livelihood depends on the coal mine. One's family has worked in the mines for several generations; family and friends live in the area; yet, the only solution offered is re-train and move. I want Americans to welcome and assist refugees, but not to make Americans themselves refugees. One huge problem is that we have deemed corporation to be people. From the middle class on up, most are dependent on corporations for jobs and investments. Individual shareholders don't have the power to sway corporations anymore. The money managers are all Ivy League and care only about short-term gain. If individual shareholders had any power, CEO's would not be making today's outrageous salaries. So, does one support the angry right or the ultra compassionate left. I'm an Independent who often votes with the compassionate left, but I'm not poor. I'd love to see a real middle, but the middle is too dependent on big dollars to win elections, and I fear that corporate people is what will do in the compassionate left.
1
More reductionist claptrap from Mr Brooks.
Democrats stand for:
Environmental protection, especially of the planetary climate kind.
International partnerships to promote free trade and increase security.
Innovation in new energy sources and storage technology.
Consumer financial protection from predatory institutions
Heath care reform and universal access.
Gender pay equity and reproductive freedom.
Educational reform and protection from federal loan sucking diploma mills.
I certainly heard all of these themes during the election and thereafter but it seems many people only heard about Hillary's e-mails and Mexican rapists.
5
I don't think doing something for the kids is a winning political strategy. First, kids don't vote. Second, the people who do vote think about themselves first as a general rule.
1
All these so-called "stories" have become increasingly hollow to even the most dim-witted voter. (Teetering on the edge of the dustbin is "Make America Great Again.") The Democrats don't need a grand slogan or "narrative." They'll win back Congress and statehouses if they put forward contestants who can persuasively address the particular needs of a majority of their constituents and come up with plausible, fresh, sensible ways to fix some of the glaring problems holding this country back - politically, economically, socially. If Trump's win proved one thing, it's no longer parties that win elections, it's candidates.
3
David Brooks often talks about the biblical exodus tradition as the basis of American faith and action. We compared ourselves to the Jews in Egypt to George III and England. Crossing the Red Sea was the Atlantic. The Promised Land was New England. We used this story to understand our stance with other countries in the 20th century with our wars and help to peoples in distress.
There is also the American Dream. Roughly it means that you can start again and if you are dedicated to your goals there is a good chance you can succeed and raise yourself. It doesn’t always happen and there are factors that are making the rich richer and the poor poorer that we have little control over with Congress run by corporate America lobbyists. But it can happen with good education (not so easy to find) and a loving family (sometimes also not so easy to find).
Take West Virginia, where my father’s family came from, is the poorest state in the Union and almost without hope and that is why they voted for Trump big-time. They are an example of a state that needs to be revived. They cannot do it themselves. The government needs to step in to get some industry going beside coal (which is definitely on its way out) and good education for all. Come on – they need free college. That would be both exodus and American dream come true for them, and we should do the same for so many others across America.
The essence of biblical religion for today and the American Dream for now. Get ‘em together.
1
It appears Brooks, along with Trump and the GOP, embraces "The Rule of Gold" rather than "The Golden Rule."
While I am an independent, I can support whichever candidates embrace "The Golden Rule" - which signifies compassion and economic balance.
2
Mr. Brooks,
You are entirely correct in your focus on the question, "What is our story"?
Humans are products of stories. We invented language and storytelling, and thus we have invented (periodically re-invented) ourselves by telling stories.
Our world and our natures are dauntingly fluid and complex, and we require some simplifying and bonding agent like a story. We choose our stories, or they are chosen for us - some combination, and then we read our lines and act in character.
Presently, what IS our story? Easy. Just take a good look at the larger patterns of our speech and actions, the dynamic movements in our society, and work backwards to see what story they are consistent with.
So whoever wants to create change in society must focus on their story. How inspiring it is? Who are the characters, and how do they develop? Who do we admire/fear? What are the longer term implications of choosing one or the other? Because we live inside of stories, but we operate inside of empirical events and trends like budgets, deficits, technological changes, shifting military alliances, movements, and so on.
This is no small matter, and these stories are so large and all-encompassing that it's like fish swimming in water. As Marshall McLuhan said, "We don't know who discovered water, but it certainly wasn't a fish."
We must find enough distance from our defining stories that we can see, and perhaps choose a new one, or at least a new script in the old one.
It’s not about “class warfare”, it’s about a check on unprecedented economic dominance by a few self-interested wealth and power hoarders. A reminder to Mr. Brooks, that is what most political and military revolutions have usually been about. This includes one of historical prominence you may have heard of in the eighteenth century.
4
"We’re walking into the unprecedented", for the USA yes. We have an unprecedented assault on democratic values, like voting rights. We have an unprecedented assault on history, facts and truth. And what is truly ironic is while Mr. Brooks calls for "a series of unifying projects to make national progress" we have an unprecedented assault on unity, community, and progress. The Republican election machine has for the last forty years been fine-tuning these assaults to build their "permanent majority". The forces of Mordor are coalescing against you, Mr. Brooks.
4
The next generation will comprise THE WORLD here in America. We are no longer a homogeneous, mostly white European descendants people. Refugees from famine, violence, persecution and economic disasters are finding homes in America and we as a democracy need to make room for them, by creating jobs and culturally sensitive narratives which make this diverse population feel and be at home here. Talking about racial differences is no longer just an intellectual endeavor. It is REALITY and we better start acting like it, Democrats and Republicans alike. Sensitivity and acceptance of the differentness of others must be the lesson and endeavor of our society beginning with vigorous education in our schools and colleges and workplaces. I know this is being done already, but the scale is much too small and tentative, it needs to permeate every walk of life and workplace.
1
Lol David. It’s always the white guy who says why are you Negroes so resentful? And of course the question answers itself. Nonetheless let me refer you to Frederick Douglass: power concedes nothing without a struggle.
3
Trump is all about fear, all about division, all about getting even, in short he and his cohort are fear based, negative people.
To win the Democrats must not play Trump's game, he is better at it than they are. We need to be about lifting all people up, we need to be about not holding anyone back because they look different than us or speak a different language or go to a different church. We are going to need all of our talent, all of our energy, all of our people, to succeed in the coming years. We can't afford to have so much of our time, talent, and treasure sucked off in useless wars. We need to focus on lifting our people up and helping our friends in the world. That also means we stop doing business with those who mean us harm, China and Russia come to mind as first examples. Lastly, we need to return to the civility and manners that used to be a hallmark of our nation. We have become cold, cruel and nasty, we are better than that.
To be the people chosen to lead our nation back to rationality and compassion, we need to demonstrate those traits. We need to have a clear and concise vision of what our nation will look like under new leadership.
5
The sentence that reads "The story Donald Trump tells is that we good-hearted, decent people of Middle America have been betrayed by stupid elites who screw us and been threatened by foreigners who are out to get us" should read: The story Donald Trump tells is that we good-hearted, decent White people of Middle America, etc. Another case of Mr. Brooks fatal flaw: the tendency to soft pedal the truth so as to maintain what he sees as the dignity of conservatives. Disappointing.
6
As an outsider, I cannot offer much advice about how to win elections in the US since the motivation of many American voters seems alien to me.
For example, “Americans trust business more than the state…” This appears to be true but for the life of me, I cannot understand why. The US government seems to operate in the interest of corporations and the wealthy leaving 90% of the population with overly expensive health and education systems neither of which seem to work terribly well. (This is a matter of fact, not opinion. There is no end of data comparing how well different health and education systems around the world work.) The reason is, of course, that the objective of these two systems in the US has been redirected to maximizing corporate profits rather than delivering healthcare and education.
Apparently suggesting to the voters that there are better ways of doing these things is anathema. Hard to understand why.
2
The disinformation campaign, run by wealthy donors, like the Russian bots, but legal, by the gift from the conservative Supreme Court. A reactionary response can be expected. The wealthy conservatives (and aspiring wealthy) went too far, and the common people are becoming "woke". This is revolution because a large portion of voters will pivot. History tells us what happens next, unless the distraction includes war declaration and martial law.
1
It is unlikely, in fact impossible, that Trump will become a better president before the election (assuming he's still in office). He's enjoying himself too much as a disruptor and demagogue. On every front--domestic, international, environmental--he's making a botch of things. Most Republicans are okay with that, but the majority of Americans are not. I think the call to arms should be that old standby (ever since the movie "Network"): We're mad as hell and we're not gonna take it anymore!
4
@H. Scott Butler
In fact, as he discovers his powers he is upping the ante. His monstrous actions are dangerous to children and other living things.
For example, Rouhani was/is a moderate in Iran. We'd be better off not attacking him and empowering the more extreme.
Also, Trump is clearly in thrall to Putin, and too dumb to have any idea that Putin probably doesn't like him, but is using him.
The cowardly bully has a history of destructive selfishness.
4
We have to face the fact that 40 to 45 percent of the people living in this country love Donald Trump not in spite of his natavist bellicosity, but because of it. The Democrats will never sway them; they are gone. What the Democrats must do is very simple—get every eligible voter in their districts to the damned voting booths.
6
#1- Reasonable tax structure
#2- Health care reasonable for all
#3- Reasonable costs for education
#4- Infrastructure repairs to create jobs , revenue and a big stimulus
#5- Rebuild our alliances with the world
#6- recognize and act on climate dangers
#7-Protect our environment
#8- Redo our voting system so all are fairly represented and all vote
#9- Reconsider the supreme court as "for life terms' and put limits on them to serve and allow non political qualified people to nominate the best choices.
#10- Assure the rights of all people are protected
#11- New , qualified candidates.
These are a few of the "radical" things democratics need to offer.
5
LIFT THE CAP, LOWER THE RATE, BOOST THE BENEFITS
That would be my platform if I was running for office anywhere in America. Meaning:
1) LIFT THE CAP. Stop exempting earned income above ~$120k and all unearned income from the ~15% combined payroll tax. Apply it to all income, earned and unearned. Then...
2) LOWER THE RATE. Give back about half of the resulting increase in revenue by either lowering the rate or exempting the first ~$20-30k of income. Then...
3) BOOST THE BENEFITS. Use the net increased revenue to raise minimum retirement benefits to a livable level, extend Medicare to all, subsidize education and job training, and kick-start long-overdue infrastructure rebuilding coast-to-coast.
I would post online calculators and encourage people to figure out for themselves how this policy change would effect them and their children and parents, now and in the future. Let the ~2% whose immediate income would drop vote against it. Let them spend $10B spreading lies against it. Let them sucker another 30% of Americans into voting against it. That leaves a 68% majority, which is plenty.
In keeping with your positivity vibe, I would also stress that AMERICA IS NOT POOR. Our per-person after-inflation GDP has roughly doubled in the last 4 decades: the problem is not that we can't afford a great America, but that we're not circulating the money through the real economy the way we did in the first 3 post-war decades.
2
You lost me here:
The story Donald Trump tells is that we good-hearted, decent people of Middle America have been betrayed by stupid elites who screw us and been threatened by foreigners who are out to get us. That story resonated with many people. You can get a lot of facts wrong if you get your story right.
1
Just because Ocasio-Cortez points out that economics and race are linked doesn't mean she is a divisive candidate. Nor does it mean that white poor people will be ignored. I'm surprised Brooks doesn't remember LBJ's observation that he white poor are kept in their place by the existence of black poor a rung beneath them in status. This is how white poverty is linked to racism in America. The most productive thing Brooks could do is grapple directly with the problem of why the poor of all races don't make common cause with one another.
4
I'm not sure what this means: "You can get a lot of facts wrong if you get your story right." The facts preceding this comment were that "decent people in Middle America have been betrayed by the stupid elites," that they have been "screwed," and that these decent people "have been threatened by foreigners who are out to get" them. So, those facts are wrong but the story is right. But if the facts are wrong, then the story is too. That Mr. Brooks can't see that is a symptom of the disease the Right suffers from: delusion. These "decent people" think that people with college educations and IQs over 80 are "elitists." There aren't any "foreigners" here out to get these "decent people." The Right has been working tirelessly the past 30 years on self-victimization. Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, and David Brooks have used "false facts" (even Mr. Brooks admits this) to paint an admittedly false truth. That's where the Right is now: everything is a "false truth." Shouldn't someone on the Right have the presence of mind to reflect on that? Republicans have control of the wheel and are driving us over a cliff, and they're blaming the liberal elites for their misdirection. Classic gaslighting.
5
Exactly the point being made by David Brooks - the Republican story is good, but all the facts are wrong. So, who won? But, maybe we don’t want to win.
I don’t understand all of this negativity to David Brooks who is offering sound advice. You all sound like the Republicans listening to Obama and the Dems - just say NO to the communist liberals.
I am not a starry-eyed millennial. I am an Obama-era Dem (one of those 20-somethings who thought we had fixed everything) and I walk around every day with a broken heart that. Far from fixing things, our party's stubborn centrism and political cowardice contributed to the rise of the current monstrosity in the White House and the intense suffering Trump has caused.
"Humbled" doesn't begin to describe how I have felt for the last two years. But I've come to believe that's a good and very necessary thing. We sorely needed to do some soul-searching.
What began to emerge with Bernie Sanders' popularity - and now continues with the rise of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortes, Beto O'Rourke and others - is the need to push aside stale leadership, special interest groups and big money. We need to embrace a fresh, inclusive and, yes, "radical" progressive message for the new generation (of both citizens and voters) that Mr. Brooks mentions.
Even in the heart of reddest America, parents want affordable childcare and free doctors appointments. They want good public schools and elected officials who listen.
And when they finally have all this, I believe much of our country's blame-casting, scapegoating and vitriol will end.
Democrats: DO NOT BE AFRAID TO BE FIERCE. Creeping around fearful of alienating voters is what got us into this mess. Think big. Be bold. Switch up your leadership. This is the future -- if Trump's election hasn't taught us that yet, we don't stand a chance.
3
Have you been blind for the last three years or do you deliberately refuse to see? Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump were all about a challenge to elites. Both campaigns were focused on elites screwing the rest of us. And both campaigns got that right; in part, that’s why Donald Trump is President. The Democratic message has to pick this up and amplify it. It doesn’t matter if a person is black, white, gay, straight, Christian, or atheist. The top one percent has screwed us all and it’s up to all of us to take our country back, not from the Republican lackeys who cater to them, but from the top one percent itself. The policies have to be a fair tax system that encourages elites to share the pie, a fair minimum wage, real family friendly policies, real affordable health care, bankruptcy reform, antitrust enforcement, meaningful estate taxes to prevent the concentration of wealth, and support for Social Security and Medicare. The story we tell is that there is enough for everyone to have a fair share here and we are the party dedicated to making that a reality.
3
"If I had to advise on a Democratic narrative I’d start with three premises"....Wrong. The narrative is: Trump is a vulgar, bigoted, narcissist. He is unfit to be President. He does not represent American values or what our country stands for; and with few exceptions, Republicans in Congress are a bunch of boot licking sycophants who lack the morality and courage to stand up.
4
Sorry but I don’t vote for story tellers. I didn’t vote for Reagan nor did I vote for Trump. And it turns out HRC won far more votes than Trump despite his story of making America great again.
Unlike the writer, I worked in a machine shop early in my career. I don’t kid myself that we can solve our problems by innovation. In fact, innovation destroys jobs. And there is no story that can change that.
Democrats have lots of good ideas. Low cost or free community colleges is one idea that protect the working poor from the false promises of expensive for profit “colleges.” And free or low cost day care would give respite to shift workers with kids.
What the Democrats need is simple pride in what they want to do - solve problems.
Oh, and until last month I was a registered Republican. But at age 67, I can see that the Grand Old Party is a sham. A place for the wealthy to screw the little guy.
4
Exactly the reasons why race, directly traceable to our founding documents, and class, also embraced by our founders by limiting the franchise to white property owners, are problems that have never been adequately addressed. The problems fester and condemn future generations. If democracy does not allow for a public debate on these issues, then, to paraphrase Dickens, Democracy is an ass.
2
I really don't agree with the premise that as a rule individuals trust businesses more than government.
Every day, in every location, people are dealing with government and its consequences. How clean is your air? Does your water make it to your home still safe to drink? Are your roads safe and well-regulated? Do we know that gas station is giving me whole gallons of gas?
Most of the time people are not thinking about this because it's working well.
As for why some people do trust business more than government, have you stopped to consider the hatchet-job the GOP has done on public perception of government? For much of my life, the Republican Party and its media allies have all acted to amplify Reagan's saying that the nine worst words to hear in the English language are, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
Republicans often talk about how we need to remove regulations from business so business can grow. They never seem to ask what would happen if some cruel and costly restrictions put on government--usually by those self-same Republicans--were removed, and how this removal might benefit We The People.
2
National service is the unifying force. We must demand that people learn a work ethic and, along the way, participate with the diverse population that is America. This applies across the political spectrum allowing those in the inner city to truly demonstrate their desire to participate while calling the bluff of the rural poor who lazily devolve into criticism without action. With National Service, everyone will participate in shaping an energized America.
1
Will Rogers once said ""I'm not a member of any organized political party.... I'm a Democrat." "Democrats never agree on anything, that's why they're Democrats. If they agreed with each other, they'd be Republicans."
True then, true now.
The Republicans have told us for years that freeing corporations from taxes and regulation would result in greater prosperity for all Americans. Not. While the corporations hoard cash, the infrastructure of the country is crumbling, our citizens cannot afford healthcare and many are falling further and further behind.
Ed Rendell, former governor of Pennsylvania, was right. Democrats should be the party of investment. But unlike Republicans, Democrats will invest at home in America. The wealth of America should not be measured on a balance sheet, but in what we build. Roads. Bridges. Passenger Rail. High speed internet. Water and sewer projects. Electric Power grid improvement. Solar and wind energy. The list goes on. Finally, invest in the American people. Basic healthcare should be available to every American citizen without the fear of wiping out life savings or going bankrupt.
MAGA is a sham. It's a corrupt giveaway. Expose it for what it is and offer Americans a clear choice.
3
24 July 2018
The irony belying both the title and the sub-title is a vividly, stark contrast with the very essence of the Republican Party. Aggressively pandering to race and actively cultivating classism is the potent formula that successfully catapulted Donald Trump to the presidency. Consistently and persistently appealing to racial superiority, frenetic xenophobia, sheer homophobia, and blatant genderism serves to both bolster and embolden GOP stalwarts to advance their agenda of self preservation in light of the increasing seismic change of racial and ethnic demographics shaping the electorate. The president's expressed tone and conduct, at the top, sets the stage for the fomenting and the inciting of the violence witnessed across the nation directed at minorities. The GOP prefers this approach to encouraging racial internecine to justify exciting 'the base' of the Republican Party controlling the dialog by knee jerk response to alleged 'classism, the 'us versus them' syndrome. America will survive, and triumph, over this myopic campaign sowing seeds of dissension. The Democratic Party exemplifies the diversity reflected across America. Robert F. Kennedy so eloquently expressed this reality in 1968: "Some men see things as they are and say why. I dream of things that never were and say why not?" And, this positive vision is echoed by MLK's "We shall overcome" speech in 1963. LBJ's invoking those very words in 1965 set the stage for passage of the Voting Rights Act.
3
As temperamentally moderate, I increasingly feel alienated from the Left, with which I once identified. I feel they are in a bubble very much similar to the one on the Right (reading only one type/side sources, even sometimes only one source and shouting loudly. How do you even start to form an opinion if you don't read all sides and listen to different argument? Self-righteous, more "virtuous" than you? What is the difference between intolerance, left or right?
2
I have never read a David Brooks narrative of any aspect of our history which he has gotten right. He either doesn't understand our history at all or he intentionally recasts it to serve his own ends. Nonetheless, beyond his mistakes what seriously flaws his accounts is their tone of avuncular authority, as in, "Let me tell you what really happened..." One can only hope that anyone young or ill-educated enough to be influenced by his writing will be exposed to wiser--or, dare we say it?--more honest men than he.
1
"Racial justice socialism seems to be the story of the contemporary left. This story effectively paints Trump as the villain on all fronts, and Democrats do face the distinct problem of how to run against a bully like Trump. But is it good politics for the entire Democratic Party to embrace it?"
Yes, Mr. Brooks, it is good politics that reflect the truth about current state of events. Look at your colleagues', Michelle Goldberg. essay that makes excellent point why it is time to embrace this very kind of politics.
1
Wow, truly groundbreaking suggestions by David Brooks. I love bold and exciting prescriptions like "rally around each other to build the families, communities, schools, training systems and other structures to make sure the next generation surpasses this one." Do these advocate for any specific policies, like Medicare for All, Free Public College and Student Loan Forgiveness or the Publicly Funded Jobs and Infrastructure Programs championed by the party's left wing?
No. They are the same type of bland corporate nothing-speak that does absolutely nothing to change people's economic or social well-being, and sidesteps actual policy ideas.
If not programs like those, what does Brooks propose? Is it a "series of unifying projects to make national progress?" What does he think the Bernie wings' goals are if not these?
He and the rest of the "New Democrats" in the mold of Gary Hart, Bill and Hilary Clinton and Barrack Obama need to realize that their bland technocratic neoliberalism has done nothing but enrich the already rich over the past 30 years.
Hopefully voters have gotten wise to it, although they have surely not came to such a conclusion based on the writings of the NYTimes centrist to conservative leaning editorial board.
3
It isn't the story of New York and Florida, nor the story of the old Confederacy. 95% of network and cable media tell us what happened today on the Atlantic Coast.
America left the Atlantic seaboard more than a century ago.
California now leads the nation, not the Bronx. The West Coast overwhelmingly voted against Trump, and will sweep out the Republican Party from control of the House in the mid-term election.
The story now is America meets Asia in Los Angeles. Spanish is spoken here, as well as English. The big tech companies don't want tariffs, so Republicans can go home.
1
The reason that David Brooks does not address the Republican Party is that:
[a] He has given up on the Republicans entirely.
[b] His real agenda is to mislead and misdirect those traditionally allied with the Democratic Party.
[c] In spite of his best efforts to appear calm, he is scared to death that the U.S. voters will turn to Democratic Socialism.
For Democrats and all Americans, a future oriented reconciliation story is a worthy goal, indeed. So, what story is likely from the other party in the same hypothetical time period?
2
David: How about this story: The Greatest Generation won the most terrible war in human history and thereby became the most mature generation that this nation has had. They came home to get an education, have a family & work hard to achieve the American Dream. They were largely unified in policy. They saved Europe from Communism; fought Russia to a standstill, winning the Cold War; achieved the first real civil rights for African-Americans since Reconstruction; built an enormous economy; and increased our economic security with well thought out social programs while passing balanced budgets for the most part.
The baby-boomers came in and pretty much undid everything that our parents achieved. Exploded debt, engaged in stupid wars and increased deficits to enact tax cuts and more social programs. The boomers own kids are adopting their attitude and pushing for ever more social programs regardless of cost.
We are no longer seen as a nation to be emulated by others, just a nation to be exploited & challenged. In politics, the boomers are still fighting the Vietnam War and have two conflicting visions of what America should be. There is now no national unity or the spirit of compromise. There is only an ugly division that sees the "other side" as evil and immoral, leading to a "fight to the death" syndrome.
How about that for a vision of America's future? Step 1: stop name calling and start negotiating with one another. Maybe the rest will fall in place from there.
1
Well David, you're nothing if not predictable, again attempting to use red herrings and straw men to make your weak tea case that can be summed up as: conservatism is good for everybody.
But I do agree that if the Dems continue to focus on demographics and "hot button" issues they will continue to lose. However that's NOT what Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez represent. In fact, they represent the New Way, as opposed to the Clinton's tired old Third Way. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez are leading a revival of populism, of returning power to the People, instead of the donor-centric approach of the last 40 years by both parties. While the mainstream Dems and DNC have tried their best to demonize the word "populist" as the pejorative synonym of the ill-educated white racist, the same way the Republicans made "liberal" a dirty word, they have turned their back on the energy and power of millions of people, giving them no choice but to stay home or vote for a charlatan like Trump. They should study history more and realize that if FDR had not turned toward the populist ideas advanced by Huey Long, there would've been no New Deal, nor an explosion of the middle class.
Brooks is right that the Dems need to find their story, but it's one already written and proved, they just need to re-read it.
2
Democrats should take their name literally and run on a platform to restore democracy, after the Republicans have spent decades in Congress, in the states, and in the courts tearing it down, brick by brick. Republicans practice voter suppression, gerrymandering, extra-constitutional court-packing (I'm looking at you, Mitch), and obstruction in Congress when they don't have a majority to block progress on the issues citizens care about. Add to those the championing of unlimited, dark money in politics, and you have a recipe for a failing democracy. Some would call it a donocracy, as donors now rule.
Democrats need to advocate for progressive policies, yes, but they also need to stand for making government serve the people again. People want fair elections, limits on money, fair districts, and overall more accountability and transparency in government. Trump won because many people just don't trust the government anymore. He was the only one promising to fix it. Unfortunately they were conned, but that frustration is still.
Restoring democracy can be a winning issue for Democrats, if they are bold enough to lead with it.
4
The Democrats story should address the same issues that Trump has addressed from the other side of the aisle: international trade, immigration, health-care, and environmental regulations. Trump has successfully identified the issues, and like all Republicans, responded by cutting taxes and reducing the power of the federal government. So be it. The Democrats must now provide the alternative: A stronger, more active, more involved federal government.
1. Federal subsidies and/or tax incentives for US-based industries, instead of trade barriers, (something other countries do, and the US already does at the state level); 2. Minimum wage laws, instead of immigration restrictions;
3. Universal Health Care, administered by the government, instead of the patchwork, and privately insured ObamaCare;
4. Stronger regulations and enforcement on Food, Drugs, and Environment.
2
"We need to rally around each other to build the families, communities, schools, training systems and other structures to make sure the next generation surpasses this one." Hmm, sounds a lot like "It takes a village" (who said that?). But I don't know if Brooks is right about the Democrats needing a compelling story to win the next elections; I'm hoping that a few choice slogans will suffice: "not crazy," "not corrupt," "not incompetent," and "not in cahoots with the enemy."
2
As long as you and other conservative writers keep referring to Ms. Cortez or Bernie as socialists they have 0 chance to succeed. The majority of people in this country hear the word socialist and they immediately think of the Marxist/Lenin ideology. That is a no no in the US. Ms Cortez and Bernie have never ever said that they want the government to take over the means of production, which is the definition of Socialism. All they want is a level playing field for all of our citizens. Every citizen in the richest country in the world deserves a superior education. In the past that meant a high school education. Times change and now it means a college education or a high level technical education after one learns to read and write. Every citizen is entitled to good healthcare especially in this for profit healthcare system that also worked years ago but does work anymore. Capitalism is still the best system for everyone however capitalists must have regulations. Big business will pollute the air, water, the ground and people in the pursuit of profits. Working people deserve a living wage and must be allowed to organize and be represented by strength. None of these issues have anything to do with owning the means of production. We need another term that does not call people like Ms Cortez and Bernie socialists. All they want is equal opportunity for all with a level playing field in the basics.
5
The GOP, for the last 20 or so years, has been the party of No. Taxes, no, regulations, no, rights, what rights? Over the last 18+ months, the politics of no has been on display and while much has been undone, any positive movement on healthcare, immigration, or business reform has been hampered by lawmakers that can't find any measure of consensus.
While the Democrats have kept quiet while Trump and the senior ranks of the GOP make America the greatest country located between Canada and Mexico, they have not been silent on policy choices.
America needs functional healthcare. America needs schools that help kids succeed. America needs infrastructure that moves people and goods safely and on time. America needs social supports that let people perform at their best.
Surprisingly, it's not money that's going to fix most of these problems, it's policy work that supports a level playing field.
1
Humans are storytellers and story consumers by nature. Even the wonkiest among us have to concede that a good story resonates in a way that statistics do not. Trump’s “triumph” is proof of that: A recycled trope that evokes nostalgia of a bygone era speaks to the importance of a comprehensible narrative that threads together vision, persona, and worldview.
Clearly, to be successful, the Democrats need this. And for the sake of the country, I hope to heck that they can agree on a single narrative that appeals to centrists as well as the more ardent of the party. Because the narrative is not just “a vision thing”, as Bush 41 once lamented; it is everything!
We must create a patchwork narrative that encompasses the Dems’ different factions, one that is simple, genuine, and restorative. It must not come from a place of anger, but from a deep seated, patriotic belief that we have it in our power to be better, “more perfect.” In the spirit of Langston Hughes, the phrase I keep thinking of is “Make America America Again.”
In this time of national crisis we must not lose our way engaging in tribal warfare and arguing over semantics and slogans; we must save our country. So many of us are in this together and above all, we mustn’t forget that.
1
I had to go back and re-read this essay because there seemed to be a disconnect between what I read and how commenters responded. I have to say I believe you got it right this time, David. A story is more important than policies.
"Make America Great Again" is a story that hit home for a lot of people. What Trump said after that didn't matter as much as the way he said it. Mrs Clinton had policies down pat, but without a story they were never heard thanks in part to the media who were enamored with the outrageous republican candidate.
Your suggestion of making our children's future the Democrat's story is a good one. Have you thought about consulting for the Party? They need all the help they can get after "A Better Deal", which might work as a bedtime story for insomniacs.
1
Although this is clearly not the preferred position of most comments, Brooks is right. By moving further left to endorse positions from the most radical wing of the party, Democrats may seize defeat from the jaws of victory, winning by larger margins in blue states and losing the Senate and the Presidency.
More importantly, they will probably lose the House as well in the "20s" because these positions won't lead to victories in red state local races in the 2020 election, which means GOP-led state governments will be able to continue their voter purges and gerrymandering to protect their voting advantage after the census.
There must be a large number of voters throughout the country who just want simple decency with enough government to protect us from capitalist excess. This doesn't mean that we can't have comprehensive healthcare or other programs, but first the country needs a good palate cleansing.
4
Thanks for the advice, but no.
The GOP has used this open narrative to ram through really unpopular legislation. Worried about schools? Private charter schools (with no quality control). Believe in freedom of speech? Allow corporations unlimited campaign donations (and for non-profits to keep their donor lists private). Believe everyone should be free to pursue work? Get rid of pesky labor and environmental laws (but also guaranteed health care and disability benefits and the right for a lawsuit).
The new Democratic story is about the real affects in our society: Of monopolies, graft and the stratification of our society. It might be offputting to those who are used to the GOP story, but to anyone with a sick family member, or knows someone who needs an abortion, or someone who has a friend who came out, or someone who is in debt, or.... they know the real story and it will resonate. Enough.
3
I think the difference between the parties is straightforward. GOP: maximize personal gain now (otherwise known as greed). DEM: make the country better for future generations. These simple propositions account for a very large portion of the policy differences between the parties.
2
Shock and awe. Mr. Brooks is sounding more and more like a Democrat. Could it be that he has finally seen the light? The conclusion of this article was especially prescient-"rallying around families, communities, schools..." He was no longer emphasizing the role of big business, attitudes to win at any cost and the failed 21st century system of capitalism so endeared by the Republicans. Could it be he has broken the chains that bind?
2
This midterm play the "Impeach Trump Card" and hold the "Future" card for the national election. Right now the polls show extreme Democrat and independent dislike for anything Trump. Republican polls show extreme support for Trump, but that's wrong, its really extreme fear of Trump.
I've never read a more disingenuous Brooks re issues rightly framed by class-conflict, and especially in a political-economy structured on competition in the marketplace and, as well, thereby competing interests. Simply review the recent Trump led GOP tax reform. It was nothing less than a stratified redistribution of the nation's tax burden away from those most benefitting from our market economy and the institutions of administrative government protection of its opportunties and privilege. Must be nice to proclaim all that class denying piety from an insulated, privileged perch.
2
"Back in the 1980s, the Democrats told two different stories. One was the compassion story associated with Mario Cuomo and Ted Kennedy: Too many Americans are poor, marginalized and left behind. We must care for our brothers and sisters because we are all one family."
and
"I don't here these two stories anymore" [the other being New Dems etc.]
The Bernie wing calls for battle against concentrated wealth, etc. Mr. Brooks as usual never seems to get to "why the battle?"
See my first paragraph above (his second). That's the why, and was the gist of Joe Biden's great speech at the '16 Democratic Convention.
Brooks writes: "Americans trust business more than the state, so socialism has never played well." This does seem true among the Trump supporters in the formerly confederate states, but for those of us who do not think of the federal government as the Yankee government, who see democracy disappearing with Citizens United, this is not true. Yes, our current Trumpocracy is not trustworthy, but neither is corporate America run on greed. Government for the people, not for corporations, is the Democratic message.
4
I absolutely agree with Brooks. We Democrats have to run, and win, before we can even begin to tackle the seemingly intractable issues of race, class, and gender. Winning is the key word here. If we alienate a bunch of people by calling them deplorables--even though some of them are--we risk losing everything. We see it happening right in front of us now. The gains made by the Obama administration on many fronts are being dismantled. We have to build it back, brick by brick. If it means finding a good, uplifting story or two, let's do it.
4
The "Left" has been left aside for decades, and is being reinvigorated by the young "Turks" who are resurrecting what used to be a moderate Left. I hope that the focus, as in the platform of Ocasio-Cortez, remains on a big picture of who we are and what a nation that represents what is good for all its citizens looks like. We cannot be so nearsighted that we see only an anti-Trump, single issue, or identity politics as our focus. We need a 50-state campaign, and a multi-issue platform. As I have often said, Dems CAN walk and chew gum at the same time, and do it so that ALL Americans benefit and we preserve the nation we aspire to be.
1
Democrats don't have the luxury of creating a sentence fragment that will be their campaign standard. We have lots of ideas because our voters are thoughtful, and so are our candidates. We don't have cohesion like the Repubs because we are a wider, more disparate electorate. We have many different issues and concerns. The unifying theme for us is social justice, and I'm not sure that's such a disadvantage. Now that people are awake and aware of what happens when we are civically lazy, my hope is that we can begin to work together more cooperatively, understanding that incremental change in the right direction is better than heading the other way. We'll see. Either way, I don't think Mr. Brooks' premise is correct - Dems have always rallied behind inspirational figures rather than specific proposals.
2
The primary win by Ocasio-Cortez seems to have done wonders to revive the conversation about a policy agenda which has the potential to evolve well beyond what many political pundits expect. Entirely possible this platform gains traction and the Dems regain both houses of Congress in due course.
Then, I hope the Dems find a presidential candidate for 2020 with the presidential stature and articulate delivery of Obama combined with the courage, fire and determination to deliver on promises that Trump has shown. Early in the Trump's term I heard an eminent commentator say to the effect that history will remember Obama for nothing more than being the first black President. I didn't accept that at the time but can see the possibility of that now in the context of the impact Trump has had so far in his short reign - even though I am opposed to almost all of what Trump represents. Goes to show that determined action at a cost will trump talk and vision in achieving outcomes.
1
I had a discussion with a European friend who is familiar with European-style social policies and wishes we'd called the party Social Democrats. The social policies of countries that look out for the well-being of all equally, not just the powerful and rich, who really don't need help.
The equation of the more progressive amongst us, who are more than willing to share our excess in order to make sure everyone has a chance, with Russian or Venezuelan governments, is just plain wrong.
Somebody called it Eisenhower socialism. I think that's just about right. Encouraging avarice leads to extreme hoarding and looting and the current toxic environmental policies that ensure we won't have a habitable planet even for the scions of the superrich (no matter they think they can protect themselves, they can't).
Short term profits at the expense of the future is as stupid as it gets. Promoting wars for profit is even worse.
The fact is, people like the Waltons don't need more money. Their employees do. That's just common sense.
Moderate socialism is not the villain here. Greed and exploitation and hatred and blaming victims are bad for all of us.
The boogieman - as seen for example in Putin/oligarchs corruption and Venezuelan power grabbing, not to mention Trump's - is not "socialism" but a lack of social awareness and conscience.
If preachers are taking the widow's mite for profit and status and encouraging you not to read the Gospels, it's time to wake up and think for yourself!
3
David Brooks makes some thoughtful points. In bringing the country together he correctly suggests we make the future of our children and grandchildren a priority. I completely agree. His fatal error is that he does not once mention climate change. More than economic, social or cultural threats we are at the beginning of a life and planet threatening period. Congress has known this for 31 years since they were presented irrefutable evidence of climate change and its devastating consequences. Brooks and Republicans continue to block climate reality sacrificing their own children and grandchildren. Evidently Republican greed knows no limits. David, have a conversation with a millennial, even the few enlightened republican millennials. They know exactly what is at stake.
2
The tendency, even for moderate Republicans, is to underestimate the degree to which the right-wing has degraded our language—our stories about who we are and what we stand for. There’s nothing in the emerging Democratic narrative that is damning, including its condemnation of branding people as of one race or another and concern with economic inequality. These concerns fall well within the liberal traditions of John Stuart Mill, for example, or, crazy as it sounds to some (I suspect not Mr. Brooks), even Adam Smith—one might even throw in much of the writings of Edmund Burke. And such concerns have always been major themes of major American pragmatic thinkers such as Dewey, James, or, more recently, John McDermott or Carol Gilligan.
There’s much in the Republican story that is damning, on the other hand, including the “decline of the West”—which is what Trump’s awful slogan ‘Make America Great Again’ means—a story more appropriate to the reactionary elements of European history and thought than pragmatic American culture.
Mr. Brooks’ concern that the Democratic Party might be signing its own death warrant appears just shy of stereotyping liberalism—one of the so-called Conservatives’ chief political tools. He’s on the edge, and he shouldn’t be. He’s too smart for that.
1
The last thing Democrats need is another lecture from David Brooks - a man who supported the Iraq War while claiming he was taking the moral high ground. A man who couldn't bring himself to express outrage over Valerie Plame getting outed. A man who referred to the Tea Party as a "grassroots" organization when they came out with their confederate flags and posters of former President Obama sitting on a pile of bananas with a bone through his nose on April 15, 2009 - the day when we paid less in Federal Taxes than we'd paid in over 60 years. Hey, David Brooks, why don't you concentrate on lecturing your own party. We, the people, who actually won the popular vote don't need a lecture from you - we just need to get out the vote and insist that your party as well as Russia stop interfering with our right to do just that.
4
Narratives about social obligations in our society are scarce. I didn't notice any in this piece. Or, perhaps they don't exist here. If they did, where would we turn for solutions? To the Government or to our employer? The latter is the option Americans have chosen as their redeemer in sickness and in health with little thought to the circumstances of dependence upon an entity concerned with private profit rather than social justice. Put our Government to work for its people. I'm afraid Brooks would shutter at that social democratic thought.
The Democratic Party story is seriously handicapped by its old guard, establishment, right wing, corporatist, self-serving, "stayed-too-long," leaders, who should step down, in the interest of the health of the party. I refer, of course, to Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Steny Hoyer, Joe Manchin, Diane Feinstein, etc., etc. They are completely disconnected from the people they are supposed to serve. They all must go, for this party to survive. There MUST be an observable difference between Democrats and Republicans. (p.s. Brooks, as usual, is spouting about things of which he knows NOTHING. How does he keep his job, being so misinformed?) see below>>>
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/miles-mogulescu/democratic-leadership-loo...
2
"If I had to advise on a Democratic narrative I’d start with...."
Fortunately, you don't have to advise Democrats. The last thing Democrats need is any advise from conservatives. You could better spend your time giving advise to Republicons, although they seem impervious to logic, or reason, or simple facts for that matter.
Maybe you could do another book report or two?
2
David, with all due respect, you also thought that fringe Republicans aligned with White Nationals could not elect a President. W
How is that working out.
2
Mr. Brooks:
Nice of you to help out the Democrats with more sage advice from the right. However, I often wonder why you seem so detatched from your own tribe. Is there nothing you can offer the Rebublic Party in the way of advice that might help them to move us in a more communal direction?
I, for one, would surely appreciate more balance in your choice of where you hand out your ever interesting opinions. In short, get off the fence!
1
Beware of the fox near the hen house. Nothing David Brooks says can ever be construed as being helpful to Democrats. He is the Manchurian Candidate of Editorial writers. He uses what I call William Buckley logic, perfect logic, wrong premise to soothe and sound like he is full of solutions. His only goal is to undermine the Democratic Party and Democratic principals in service to the Republican/Conservative/Evangelical axis who in turn in in service to the American Plutocrats. Allowing this fox into the hen house is a grave mistake. Ignore him.
2
We Democrats don’t need your Republican opinions Mr. Brooks. Spend more energy convincing your conservative associates to reject their president’s immoral policies on immigration, the environment, taxes, tariffs, and racism. Plenty of opinions for you to tackle old boy!
1
He's right this time. You can't do either/or and you can't sew them together. I'm hoping the intraparty fights turn into intraparty arguments that come to some intelligent conclusion. Debate, decide, commit.
1
I am in favor of single payer health care. It will allow people of working age to explore their occupational options, resulting in a better match of talent and accomplishment and greater incidence of creativity.
I am in favor of quality free public education founded on a corps of properly paid teachers rewarded for the love of their calling. This will cultivate our greatest resource--our population--and ensure our future.
I am in favor of full exploitation of the natural and cultivated gifts of all of the cultural and social segments of our kaleidoscope country. This will enhance our resilience and adaptability when interacting with any and all of the peoples in the rest of the world.
I am in favor of a regulated form of capitalism, preventing the unhealthy concentration of economic power in few hands, so as to encourage the continued renewal of our economy by new actors with fresh ideas and perspectives.
I am in favor of a safety net that ensures that no people in this nation are left to sleep or die on the streets, maximizing both our national quality of life and the achievement of our people as individuals.
I am a Democrat.
1
Great thoughts on unity. Unfortunately, stoking division and anger and pushing identity politics has become the stock-in-trade of this newspaper.
Brooks is so wrong--the Abolition of Ice is the keystone. Without it, the cultural Marxists have no hope of achieving their "grand collective"--a nation without sovereignty and constitution. So sad such a bright fellow could be so naïve.
1
"In fact, Democrats like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama went to great lengths to assure people they were not embracing this story."
Yep, and other than those two presidents the Ds have been getting creamed. My hope for Obama to be different lasted about two seconds, and evaporated when he put Geithner in charge of the Treasury. O was/is a decent person but politically he's another centrist Davos-y Democrat. People aren't inspired by that, and the Rs rip that kind of candidate to shreds.
You might need to govern by hitting singles, but to win campaigns, you gotta swing for the fences.
Look at the messages and initiatives of the current Republican Party: weaken public education, deregulate laws that curb polluting our air and water and food, destroy unions, preach racism, bigotry and hatred toward non-Christians, immigrants, LGBT and people of color, embrace fascism and Russia. Democrats need only to repudiate and loudly proclaim that we reject these policies. Stop looking at the Democrats, David. Your party is the party of treason and traitors.. We are not!
1
David Brooks discussing what Democrats are thinking? As if he'd have a single clue! Ridiculous.
David everything you said was true. The Democrats are divided into the old boys network and people like Seth Moulton. Fresh new ideas. Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi have' been there done that' and it has not worked. I believe the Democratic party can only win if they have to move aside and let the youth in America, and in the party bring it forward with a new story. When those teens got up after the school massacre and told this story's, America got behind them 100%. We cannot blow this election the ones that are coming up in November, if we are to save this country we must band together and if need be step aside for the new.
1
"Its the economy stupid."
James Carvelle won the election for Bill Clinton
with that slogan.
Mr T is busy wrecking the U.S. economy and the Democrats are mostly talking silly talk.
The economy will likely be worse in 2020. The folks who will be the worst hit are Mr Trump's base.
There's going to be inflation and higher interest rates.
Two big problems: the U.S. has highest cost, least effective health care system in the world. This leads to lack of labour mobility.
Henry Ford gave workers health care instead of a pay raise. Then they were handcuffed to a Model T.
Lose your job, lose your health care.
The lucky few are the oldies on Medicare....but that's
only 20% of the population.
The Democrats need a reality check.
Call James Carvelle.
saludos de sunny Yucatan
ancient Canadian economist
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office" - Aesop. I learned the secret to fighting bullies when I was a child - a quick wit. All the Democrats need is someone young, attractive and witty. Hey it worked in 1960.
1
2020 ??? Big assumption that voting will be allowed. Martial law, anyone ??? We must rid OUR land of this pestilence, and the first step is voting out HIS Collaborators in November. If not, ALL bets, and liberties, are off the table. Seriously.
1
It will be a foregone conclusion if the voter truly admires the candidate. The rest will follow. Let's get a Congress filled with service Academy grads. In November we can elect McGrath-KY, Sherrill-NJ, Luria-VA and Enderlin-GA to the House. All are USNA alum. Several are women. Each represents the best of honor.
Whatever the Democratic story is, it's irrelevant compared to the massive failure of the Republican party as it fully descends into an anti-Constitutional, anti-rights party that enables and supports the worst president in history, who is likely to be found to be both a criminal and a traitor.
Republicans are not "conservative" in any traditional sense of that word. They are extremists who value only their interests above the interests of the country.
4
You point out that the Democrats are focusing on race or class now but ignore the half century or so that the Republicans have practiced, essentially, white identity politics ("Southern strategy," Lee Atwater, "welfare queens," and now policies that curry favor with white nationalists, among other things).
Between this column and your July 19 column expressing your belief in the virtues of local power over federal power (a farce to those of us who have seen local power wielded to harm minority groups of all kinds), you are displaying quite a level of tone-deafness.
Certainly Audre Lorde had people like you in mind when she wrote that the master's tools will never dismantle the master's house.
Are you in thrall to perpetuating white supremacy because it keeps you in a relative position of power and authority?
I don't intend to sound vengeful, but your columns are reinforcing an imbalanced and unfair status quo at the very moment it endangers our society. We are in desperate need of large, small-d democratic changes lest we descend further into the abyss of more widespread and horrific violence.
Your pablum isn't cutting it. Think harder and write more carefully.
3
"If I had to advise on a Democratic narrative ..." STOP right there David Brooks. Who would say something like this:
"The Democrats are emphasizing fighting grit these days, not compassion or technocratic expertise." Know where to even begin responding to this nonsense. Remind me, who was it that showed compassion for the the separated children and their mothers ...
"Maybe this year is different, but for 100 years, Democrats have tended to win with youthful optimism and not anger and indignation." You can't possible be serious, but I guess you are. Do millennial ring a bell?
And, finally this piece of pablum: "America is failing its future. We need to rally around each other ..."
Yeah, great thoughts all ... the Democrats have been practicing your brand of surrender for a couple of decades now while your party has taken a no prisoners stance ... NOT NO MORE ... RESIST OR PERISH
1
The Dems can start by offering candidates who are not at all like tRump - i.e., not liars, ignoramuses, sexual predators, and clown shows.
Next, put working families first by shoring up the ACA, eliminating the disasterous tax breaks for the wealthy, rebuilding infrastructure, restructuring student debt, and getting serious about climate change.
2
Important topic, to be sure, but it just feels like more deflection by this all-too-familiar apologist for the right.
Let's not forget the most important topic and headline of the day...
"What's the Republican Story?"...
to explain all the shameless enabling and self-serving denial going on by the only ones in DC that could actually do anything about what Trump is doing to this country.
So there's some re-deflection for Brooks to consider.
1
Of course this article was going to be written. No, David. There is a choice, and it's CLASS. The reason for which is that the majority of race base issues stem from economic inequality. If you'd like I can point you to literally thousands of peer-reviewed studies that affirm this. The question then, is why do journalists keep insisting that identity politics and economic ideologies are inextricably bound? The answer, is because it is politically polarizing. The simple fact is, they don't want working class blacks and whites holding hands, demanding higher wages, etc., because that's a pretty big voter base. So the goal here is to make sure any kind of "socialist" rhetoric maintains an atmosphere of liberal social values, to ensure an immediate off-switch is flipped by any right-wing voters. Oh yeah, and always talk about ICE and immigration, that's a surefire way to maintain polarization.
Ridding Americans of anger and indignation is an important step, as important as humanizing politics. Humanization is what has gone missing and it is what we must vote back in. Trump's use of boastful bravado and all caps threats is a morose joke. Right now, the despicable rules and we need to vote it out the door.
2
very thoughtful..and …
We've had "The New Deal", "A Better Deal", "Hope and Change", "Bridge to 21st Century", (not to mention "The Great Society" and Compassionate Conservatism"), and now "America First" along with the narcissistic "I'm with Her".
What's the next flavor? Per Mr. Brooks, how about "Kids R Us"?
By the way, under oppressed groups please add Native Americans...the original oppressed.
1
We are the sum of our experiences - our jobs, family role, culture, education, religion, business, athletics, friendship, etc. In each roll we have an opportunity to excel or fail. Few succeed in all areas but some success is necessary for happiness.
The many correlations between economics and race are largely the result of discrimination in a good way – a way that entrusts wealth and assets and children to those with good judgment. The inexperienced and the poor need to prove themselves in some way before than can be trusted with other people’s time and money. If abortion is you best option – you’re not ready.
Democrats have become the party of helping losers stay losers. Business can exploit them without government help but it is a lot easier and more permanent with government help. Donald Trump has invigorated the economy and created new opportunities for anyone (in the country lawfully) who is willing to work and try something new. Anyone who says socialism and open borders will make things better than Trump has already accomplished, will never be persuaded by the facts.
1
It's quite astonishing that it's not good enough to NOT be the party of racism, bigotry, hate, lying, hypocrisy, discrimination, class warfare, nationalism, isolationism, incompetence, ignorance, and militarism.
3
@alan When your opponent is this bad, opposing these things might be good enough to win the next election, but beyond that the Dem's really do need to say what they're for as well.
1
Brooks writes that Americans’ “core long-term fear is American decline.”
In making this sweeping assertion, Brooks reveals which Americans he thinks and cares about.
Mr. Brooks, many Americans fear having their children shot by the police due to the color of their skin. That is a core, long-term fear. Many Americans fear being bankrupted by a hospital bill. That is a core long-term fear. Many Americans fear that they will be discriminated against (or worse) for expressing their gender identity. That is a core long-term fear. Many Americans fear being unable to put food on the table. That is a core long-term fear.
For many Americans, worrying about something as abstract and Brooksian as “American decline” is a luxury they can’t afford.
And that’s why Brooks is particularly unqualified to offer advice to a political party premised on compassion, inclusivity, and justice. He should stick to advising the party of white men concerned with American decline that has long held his allegiance.
3
.
.
.
I would agree with the person who said that that 1) fascism, 2) white nationalism, and 3) religious fundamentalism keeps them up at night.
But people I'm acquainted with who, unlike me, now feel empowered to embrace, for the first time since George Wallace, fascism, white nationalism and the superiority of Christianity among all religions -- are delighted.
It has been shocking to discover how many of them have been hiding in plain sight - seething with resentment.
What's equally shocking are the large number of people who seem to honestly think that this is just "business as usual" in Washington - and no great cause for concern.
The growing willingness to embrace false equivalencies is surreal.
My greatest fear is that the US will provoke or suffer from a large terrorist attack which in the current environment could unleash a legislative and public backlash. With enthusiastic acceptance of a descent into darkness akin to that prompted by the Reichstag Fire and the Enabling Act of 1933.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/true-story-reichstag-fire-and-naz...
1
How about also bringing civility and thoughtfulness to our approach to problem solving? And moving away from childish, boorish and repugnant behavior? We are fundamentally decent people and should say no to the horrific behavior we have seen from this WH.
2
David,
Much to be commended in this story. I would go further and say "Drop identity politics altogether." Identity politics are inherently divisive and do not lead to reconciliation. Focus on doing the right thing for every one. Remember the candidates like Ronald Reagan and Bob Dole who tried to win with optimism? That would be a nice way to counter today's fear-mongering.
In my experience, even well many well-paid professionals now believe that the top one percent is taking far more than their fair share. These “middle managers” are also well educated and perceptive enough to know current trends are socio-economically unsustainable. Most people are just itching for some good old fashioned “class warfare”. Bring it on, it’s a winning argument.
3
David Brooks is a master of spinning false dichotomies. Psychobabble! If he were to advise Democrats in the run-up to the midterms and the 2020 election as he suggests... Democrats would surely recognize the Conservative saboteur in their midst.
I've become very suspicious of polling data. If the Russians meddled with our voting records, there'd be no more obvious place to start than with poll statistics for "the story." Why do the media invariably interview three 60ish white men to confirm their support of Trump? It's been suggested that the 88% of Republicans who continue to support the president are in the same shrinking pool of those willing to answer the same tired old questions: anti-immigration, uninformed health care costs, false tax-cut promises.
It's simple the Democratic story is always the one that you and your Republican friends are against. Women's rights, Minority rights, Gay and Lesbian rights. Government that regulates and legislates. The Democratic story for the past 60 years has been one that tries to include everyone no matter where you are from. The worker from the Bronx has everything in common with the worker from Wisconsin, Iowa or Pennsylvania. It's time that rural folks recognize that Republican policies are not going to help you. They are Thugs, Cheats and Liars look at who leads their party.
Incredibly and for the first time in a long time I suddenly found myself at the bottom of this column! Welcome back David Brooks.
How about this David? We are not traitors who support a criminal president who was most likely placed in the oval office by America's greatest geopolitical rival. We are not attempting to obstruct the inquiry into his alleged crimes. Stop worrying about the Democrats, David. The political party that you have shilled for for 40 years is in full treason mode and has done more damage to this country than Al Qaeda or ISIS could have ever dreamed of doing. Unless those who are found guilty face long sentences or executions, there will not be an America worth saving.
David Brooks, I have to confess at the outset that I have not read your opinion piece. And why? Because here's the deal: Democrats do NOT have to walk in lock-step the way that the Republicans do. We can embrace a Conor Lamb in Western PA who is more center to right and we can embrace Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is on clearly on the left. That's who we are. The MSM these days seems to be concentrated on two things: WHO are the Trump supporters and WHAT is the Democrat's message? You all are getting very tedious. November will tell us what we need to know.
1
It looks like Mr. Brook and Ms. Goldberg had met in staff canteen.
Mr. Brooks said: "The Dems need new narratives, this means much better stories, the old ones are completely worn out. We need some for the future, this means for the next generation, comtemporary ones, something convincing also for "moderate" conservative Dems. Maybe my usual local touch, community and so on, anyway, we really need something new even no one knows what we gonna figure out then.
Ms. Goldberg answered: "Exactly, that´s what we need - for my Left Wingers also. You are perfectly right David, they are also fed up with promising the restoration of what came before him. The country is desperate for a vision of something better. You know, we Leftists don´t believe in this local stuff so much, but there is no other way also for us, we have to welcome politics that inspire people to come to democracy’s rescue either.
Hm. You know what? You gonna write a column for the moderates - local, communities, all your issues - while I´m gonna do it for the Libs, with some more fantasy. That´s the way the left is, you know. Wait: I will not introduce some visions by myself, let the readers create some by themselves."
Mr. Brooks: "What are we waiting for? Let´s knuckle down!"
And here we are on 07/24/2018: Mr Brooks has written his column on future visions for the moderates - this one - and Ms. Goldberg "Democrats Are Moving Left" for Leftists.
Something for everybody.
But it´s not about candidates.
2
And why should Democrats take advice from a Republican on what their message should be?
1
For starters, the Democrats need to plan to run against Mike Pence in 2020, because one way or the other the dude in the White House now is not going to make it until then. And beating Pence should be about the easiest hill Democrats have climbed in generations.
2
Dems master plan: Dissolve the borders, allow the newcomers to vote, minority becomes the majority.
Trouble is they’re trying do accomplish that now by rousing up blacks, Hispanics, gays, transgender, etc.
It won’t work on a national level. They don’t have the numbers.
2
I still don't get why an intelligent person like David brooks sill calls a single-payer health plan a far left idea when it is practiced by every advanced nation including some that are far from leftists!
1
Amen, David. Again, I'd say Joe Biden would've been the answer in 2016 . . . .
The Democratic Story is the hyper-neural reaction to whatever the current Republican Story is. In fairness, both are sad stories with no happy ending in sight. Both spend most of their time pointing at the other Sneeches without "starz upon thar's". Forget the advice, David. Nobody takes it these days. They just give it....
1
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is part of a generation that was raised with a racial injustice narrative that previous generations didn't get.
1
Just read the book Listen, Liberal by Thomas Frank. It will explain far better than anyone the Democratic story and what has happened to them.
Why wouldn’t Democrats support their candidate no matter what story they tell? Because Democrats first lend support to issues that are important to them. Unlike Republicans, Democrats are unwilling to shuffle into line behind the anointed Dear Leader.
“They did because Americans trust business more than the state, so socialism has never played well.“ Brooks
“In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” Reagan
The problem for Republicans: they do not believe in democracy. Republicans spread a “faith” in corporations and distrust in elected government. Republicans exploit our worst impulses: fear, greed, hatred, racism, misogyny, Christian sharia law, resentment and spread propaganda that government takes their money, oppresses us, gives advantages to non-whites, women are incapable of medical decisions, certain Christian beliefs must be imposed on all. To keep it fresh Republican pundits compose narratives that Democrats should follow. Most of them are just stuff that Republicans make up.
Sadly this column neglects the social contract, the democracy, majority rule, and the Republican madman in the WH who is threatening America, all American allies, world trade, and thermonuclear war. Whoops! Given our current reality, it would be refreshing to read Brooks’ perspective on how to deal with Trump and the rabid “Freedom Caucus” instead of advising Democrats or waxing poetic over books he read about morality, family, ethics, and community.
Of note: missing from “Those who have been oppressed — women, African-Americans, Latinos — need to stand together and fight for justice.” are Jews. Ask the Jewish community if they have been oppressed. Wake Up!
1
Mr. Brooks, it's all about perspective. My life history has been totally different from yours and it influenced how my desires for my country are determined at the ballot box and interactions with my elected members of my local, state and national governments. I would not presume to give advice to the Democratic Party, I am an Independent. However, you get paid for your opinions and we are still able to exercise this freedom. But, it doesn't mean you know what you are talking about.
There is no future unless we act immediately on climate change. All David Brooks' historical perspective has no place in the discussion. Hasn't he noticed that the world is on fire? Better that he had focused on the Republican story--the Trump story. The application of hoax to describe anything that is worth discussing. The general stubbornness of the Republicans in the sense of not being swayed by anything along the lines of facts or even their own stated beliefs. The greed is overwhelming the earth. Here's a bit of mythological history which is as true today as it was in ancient times--the lesson of King Midas. Let us focus on the ancients and make some effort to apply those wise tales. Time is running out.
"They did because Americans trust business more than the state, so socialism has never played well".
Mr. Brooks is correct that Democrats need a convincing story to tell but it is clear his perception of what Americans trust (and confusing socialism with a more state centrist economy) is flawed.
In fact, an almost universal complaint I hear from Americans is that we do not trust business, especially corporate America. Unbelievably, this is true for Trump voters, as well. Big business is most often cited as public enemy number one among working class voters. It is no wonder Bernie Sanders has been riding an enormous wave of popularity with independent and many democratic voters.
Furthermore, socialism does not have to equate with stalinism. An alternative to corporate thievery could be worker owned companies and cooperatives which in many cases today are very successful. This element of socialism has very little to do with choosing business over the state. And universal health care is really no different than public education, public highways, public safety agencies, etc. So what is the big deal with single payer health care? Conservative pundits would have us believe that Stalin himself will come back from the dead if we enact such a "socialist agenda".
In the end I think the average voter is smarter than Mr. Brooks gives them credit for. And unfortunately this often means staying home on election day because they are tired of hearing dogmatic nonsense.
The word "Socialism" has lost its negative connotation for many younger voters. However there are still enough knee-jerk old cold warriors out there to put the final nail in the coffin of any movement that includes the word in its name.
That said we all have to recognize that many of our societal problems are rooted the highest level of wealth inequality ever recorded and the lack of social mobility that this causes.
Too many voters still believe that "Socialism" only means taking money out of my paycheck and giving it to some deadbeat. Many still can't distinguish between it and hard core statist Communism.
I agree with David Brooks that focussing the platform on improving opportunities for America's next generations is a winner and if we can avoid using the "S" word for a decade or so all the better.
As I read Brooks’ recommendation for the Democrats it sounded remarkably like Hillary Clinton’s “it takes a village” approach. So much for that. Fact is, every campaign Tells more than one story. When people are angry, it is never enough to give them some rosy story about youth, building community, the future, etc. The campaign has to acknowledge and channel their anger. In American political history, two stories perform this function. One story blames foreigners and people of color. The other blames the rich. Trump is the undisputed owner of the first story, and Hillary Clinton ceded to him the second as well. This was political malpractice since it left unhappy, angry voters with only one choice. Brooks’ recommendation would lead to the same result.
Mr. Brooks, the stories told by Democratic commenters here are the story of most Democrats. Are you listening? If you were you could address them without your own story getting in the way. I believe somewhere in all this you agree with most of the democratic ideas. You are welcome to say it out loud.
David Brooks. I do wonder where you receive, or how you formulate, your vision of what is happening "with Democrats" these days. Where are you getting your narrative? Look at the competing platforms within the Democratic party that you label as the "Socialist left" of Sanders - inflammatory language certainly and extreme to say the least - and in your characterizations of some past winning strategies for Democrats implying that is where Democrats should go. Have you noticed lately? The politics of hate and fear won pretty big last election. Now you are preaching reconciliation between your characterization of a "gap", a gap which from a values and substance standpoint - a platform standpoint within the Democratic party - is quite small indeed. While you preach reconciliation, you use spurious examples (demolish ICE) to demonstrate a "gap". What is your real message here? Fear those extreme liberals? I think we actually see little ground swell for abolishing ICE among the left, but rather an attempt to call out the horrible abuses carried out by ICE and the need to change those practices. Your not so subtle demonization of Sanders and the so called extreme left, and this does little to help an accurate analysis. You continue to give advice to Democrats. Try advising your own party also. And please read Michele Goldberg's recent article. I wonder how you feel about it.
Democrats vs. Republicans in America 2018?
Both parties appear meaningless, useless, in fact harmful paradigms when we consider the challenges America faces. The Republicans have a force mentality, the military mindset, coupled with religious nonsense, not to mention a vulgar wealth outlook. We can expect no leadership there. What real example of honor, character, intellect can be expected of Republicans?
The Democrats are no better. Sure it looks good on paper to be less for religion and the military mindset and mere vulgar wealth, to be for science, education and the environment, for example, but let's face it, Democrats are far more for economic redistribution, for leveling, for advance of this or that minority group to point of resentment and revenge against what they perceive as the privileged, which adds up to hardly a recipe for salvation of the human race considering the challenges in the world.
The world requires disciplined, highly educated, capable of self-sacrifice human beings. In fact probably at no other time in history, except in times of war, have heroic human beings been so necessary. We typically think of times of peace as not requiring heroic human beings, and that only extreme conditions such as in times of war have heroic human beings been necessary. But we are in a bind, we require intelligent, focused, creative, self-sacrificing human beings with few if any illusions to navigate the human race through the challenges ahead.
Not much worthwhile here, David. But let me congratulate you for agreeing with web Dubois’ observation in the 1930s that in America white workers have always chosen racism over mutual cooperation with black workers. This led Dubois to posit a need for fundamental reworking of Marxist dogma on class antagonisms. Might you not acknowledge your debt to him? Or are you merely confirming Keynes: The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed, the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences, are usually slaves of some defunct economist.
America seems susceptible to demagogues. First, Reagan; now Trump. Unfortunately, progressive demagogues like Sanders, I fear, are not the antidote to the Reagan/Trump demagogues. Many have bought Sanders’ simplistic rhetoric, but all he and they will bring on is a battle of demagogues which he and his followers are almost certain to lose, leaving us, America, with the horrors of the Trump/GOP warp drive to undo the rights and protections afforded ordinary citizens by the Constitution. Since 2016, Sanders, besides the Russians and the GOP Congress, has been Trump’s greatest ally in Trump’s quest for absolute power.
"Choosing between a focus on race or class is the wrong choice to begin with."
Funny you should say that, Mr. Brooks. Because that is exactly what Donald Trump and his band of acolytes is doing.
In fact, he has managed to polarize this country with his particular form of bigotry and racism to the point where we are not only isolated from the rest of the world, but also amongst ourselves.
The question now facing us is not how far 'left' we can swing, it's about how left we have to swing to counter how 'right' we've swung.
It's time the country begins to resemble itself again for the free and democratic society it was always meant to be, instead of this bastion of Republican and Trumpian ideology -- By any means necessary.
David Brooks is correct on point: the Democrats need a theme for the 2018 elections. Here is a suggestion coming from Oregon: https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/a140c5_e78071ef8aae4b2ab29a719f3d36f3bb.pdf
The Love Wins posters all over Portland declare:
In Our America, Love Wins. All People are Equal. Black Lives Matter. Immigrants and Refugees are welcome. Disabilities are Respected. Women are in Charge of their Bodies. People and Planet over Profit. Diversity is Celebrated.
The Democrats need to seize the idea of LOVE as the central theme to what Democrats stand FOR and point out the opposition is the party of FEAR, HATE, DISCRIMINATION, INEQUALITY.
Mr. Brooks has championed an idea of the Republican party that for decades has existed only in op-ed columns. He failed to see what the party was becoming and no longer has a political home. Now he comes to the Democrats offering his sage advice. No thank you.
Boy, David must be truly desperate to get rid of Trump--he's trying to help Democrats position themselves for the election. Maybe he's considering all of those invitations from his commenters to give up the Republican label and become a Democrat to achieve his true desire--to elect smart, articulate and honest politicians who know and care about their voters' health and well-being, not just conning them for their votes.
Corruption is rampant in the United States. Americans across the spectrum know this, but it’s not even mentioned here. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez are anti-corruption. That’s the message, and it will be a winner.
1
Positive solutions must be conceived by acknowledging there are problems that need to be fixed. Our political system is broken due in large part to unlimited money in politics from unknown sources, and gerrymandered districts that dilute the power of the vote for minorities. Income inequality is out of control, and the Trump tax cut just made it worse. Our nation's reputation around the world is taking a terrible beating due to our president who views each country as a cheat who is not fair to us. There are certainly positive solutions to all of these problems, but the most direct and effective way to start is to get this corrupt administration out of power, and to undue the Citizens United decision, and to have congressional districts established in a fair manner. While I wish we had the world as it should be, as you envision, but for now we need to deal with the world as it is. No modern election has been won except by mobilizing people to address problems, and that starts by getting them to accept that there are problems.
1
As I read these comments, I see a Democratic party party increasingly fractured and marginalized.
Like the Confederacy after the 1965 Civil Rights act, Democrats are destined to lose for a generation.
I hope I am wrong.
1
Here's the story "From many, one". This is as simple as "Make America Great Again", and unlike that meaningless slogan, actually extols American values.
Meanwhile out here in CA, the state democratic party is trying their best to not win the elections that matter NOW-- any republican seat in the house. They spent their time discussing the race between reliable, ELECTABLE Feinstein and nowheresville Kevin DeLeon, and decided to endorse him against her. Because she is old, a woman, and not far enough to the left. To which I-- lifelong dem reply- MEH. The democratic party needs to put resources in to immediate and winnable elections. We can probably win every seat just by exposing the evil that a Nunes for example is, and by asking voters-- "what has he done for your community? That is his job, not fawning before the beast that is trump." I beseech all of you democrats writing today-- the only thing that matters is Nov 2018. Register, vote, get people to the polls, monitor questionable voting stations, call in party officials if you see unreasonable lines forming or bad treatment of minorities. This is democracy we are fighting for, not some cozy vision for the next presidential election. There might not be one of those unless we win NOW.
First things first, I think we're missing the elephant in the room. According to 2017 World Bank figures the US spent 3.1% of GDP on Defense, more than twice the European Union, a difference of over $300B (a year!). This is a choice and Trump is right (don't shoot the messenger), it's way out of wack. Democrats aught to partner with Republicans to seek a new global balance on defense spending and lead the way on what to do with spoils.
Ninety Nine percent of the narrative from the Democratic party and the left of center Media is not the positive message of any sort that narrates hope and victory. It is rather an extremely negative message of anger, disallusion and hopelessness all aimed at Donald Trump every day ad nauseum. How can anyone hear anything but that constant nails on the blackboard rhetoric that is similar to the the old ever running propaganda of othe cold war? Replace half of that with ideas and proposed policy from intelligent prospective Democratic candidates and just maybe the party wont blow the best chance it will ever have.
1
The Democrats are abandoning the middle--where politics is so vital for finding real solutions based on compromise and practicality. With Republicans already so far right led by a malignant narcissist psychopath and his delusional Christian base, the days of bipartisanship are fading fast--meaning no solutions to ever-growing, real problems. A socially progressive, economically conservative, SENSIBLE party must emerge soon. It will pull the remaining Republicans who don't care for the right-wing evangelical platform, the independents (most important) who care about issues, and the left-leaning Democrats who don't want what Brooks describes in this article.
1
That is a great deal of optimism.You would need to have the optimism required to take on something impossible, like being the mayor of Newark. Cory in 2020!
I don’t know about that exhaustion by 2020. Smart people I talk to are afraid that the partisanship - especially on the New Right - will escalate towards an actual split. Take the idea of three Californias and start the Pakistanization of the USA.
Boredom will not extinguish the racist, oligarchical, me-first-America-first illogical but successful coalition led by Trumpists.
The current political state is beyond an identifiable trend.
The realization that a great proportion of the nation - 88% of Republicans - still support the President, and with him the Congress, in the disassembling of beneficial environmental, financial and voting law, and the humiliation of our national character abroad makes any logical determination of a trend or predictions for political outcomes useless.
We have a treacherous, mendacious, narcissistic, belligerent, xenophobic, misogynistic president--and Mr. Brooks is talking about rallying around each other? How exactly does that work in the days of Twitter, Facebook, Fox News, the Freedom Caucus? How does that work when citizens have no obligation to serve the country?
We have a Republican party leadership who, more than any time in recent memory, thinks that the ends justify the means. A leadership that deludes themselves into thinking they can control or accept the ptolonged presence of the guy in the White House.
We have rising economic inequality--a problem that might take a catastrophic event to begin to correct.
How do we merge all this? How does one compromise with people whose job has been to denigrate compromise?
I do not know what will happen, but I do not think Mr. Brooks's suggestions amount to much more than wishful thinking, at least for now. We do need to aggressively push people to get out and vote. How to deal with big money, with those forces controlling the Congress and the courts--that will be an epic tale.
my question for you mr. brooks is in light of the highjacking of the republican party by trump and the ilk that do his bidding, how can you in good conscience continue to call yourself a republican? it seems the party of lincoln has has left you a long time ago! don't worry so much about what the democrats are doing and focus on what's wrong in your own party. that it's been coopted by a dangerous and corrupting cancer should be your major concern.
You suggest a platform based on renewed social mobility. Meanwhile, your GOP wants nothing to do with raising the minimum wage, while also supporting laws that permit non-compete clauses in the employment agreements of the lowest of workers. So, in your GOP world Walmart can pay as little as it wants and add a clause that disallows the person from looking for other work. I guess in your view, those people can always go to church and ask Mitt Romney to help.
Can't the press just leave Ms. Ocasio-Cortez alone until she gets elected and actually does something of substance? Until that happens, it's all just talk, like this "Democratic Story" that Mr. Brooks writes about. People will vote this fall as they always do, basing their choice on whether they like their Congressperson or Senator without any regard for some story, which always gets torn to bits once it enters the maw of Washington, D.C. anyway.
Politics is the art of deception attuned to the darker side of human nature. Often, those who lead evoke not rational appraisal of common benefit but tribal fears. We are susceptible to the exaggerations of those who promise to defend us from danger inherent in 'other'. Yet in America we are a nation that has managed to weave together vast waves of immigrants from around the world to create the greatest innovations in the history of humanity. Yes, like all social groupings we are subject to profound irrationality. Enter Trump who stirs such irrational fear and so creates the illusion that he is the powerful bully who can shield us from 'difference'. He never seeks common ground nor shared purpose to unify us to achieve goals we choose together. Instead, he evokes hate filled paranoia that rises as a tide of irrationality to sweep away an imagined enemy. Trump is a self serving demagogue who knows deceit better than most. He plays us with every word he speaks. His constant lying, deception and distractions keep us in chaos making rational and objective appraisal and choices difficult to reach. Yet, his strategy places him in a position of greater power. As a fragmented and polarized Nation we cannot rise as one to oppose his version of fascist rule. To preserve our freedoms and democracy and remarkable capacity to work as one we need instead to talk with one another with respect, consideration and evidence. That is the point that Brooks emphasizes as most important. Amen.
1
I live in the SF Bay Area where to say "Don't Blame Me, I Voted for Hillary" is a given. The old 'birds of a feather, flock together' has become more and more true in these polarizing times we now live in. To state this in a passive tense is to ignore the fact that we create the world we live in, in thought, word, and deed.
Brooks somehow manages to consistently find that disappearing Middle Way that we're fast losing sight of. This last piece is no exception, IMO.
Americans will inherently go to either political extreme if moderation is no longer an option.
As a liberal, I feel empowered by Mr Brooks hubris to write an article entitled “what is the Republican story?”
So, what is the story of Republicans? That changes daily - you’ll have to wait for Trump’s next tweet ... and Mr Brook’s interpretive dance to normalize and rationalize that tweet.
Democrats have a story of inclusion, health care, education and protecting the environment. Let’s stick with that.
2
The Democratic party’s democratic story: “WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Their mantra: Make America Constitutional Again
America *is* failing its future. The difficulty is in convincing a white and greying population that controls wealth, political influence, and culture that its future doesn’t look like them; that it’s dark-skinned, doesn’t speak English as a native language, is immigrant, is making money off of the gig economy, and worships in a different way.
Dear Mr Brooks, Republicans win because they cheat. They lie. They stoke irrational fears and they use people like you to stake claims that simple human decency is left-wing.
1
When .01% of the population own as much wealth as 50% of the poorest, when 10% of the population own 85% of the wealth of the nation, when the largest employer in the country, Walmart, has 85% of it's employees on some sort of public assistance, then it is beyond obvious that something has gone badly wrong with our 2 governing political parties. Government by the people, for the people, does not exist today. People complain about the amount of public assistance the government spends, but a large portion of that is really corporate welfare. By allowing the wage stagnation and corporate profit escalation of the past 4 decades we have abdicated the burden of the employer to pay a fair wage and placed the burden of keeping the population healthy on the government. This is a wholly destructive social system, since a sense of self worth and community pride are derived from a job, not from public assistance.
1
Should we be calling for single payer?
Obama's biggest mistake was incrementalism. He did not go for the whole program, he compromised to satisfy the Insurance Industry and traitor Joe Lieberman, compromising integrity in the process and what did it get us? A half-way program that Trump is doing his worst to destroy.
Yes, go for the whole deal. Incrementalism is the enemy of progress.
2
I think David Brooks, and maybe the Democrats, make this problem sound more complicated than it really is. The Democratic coalition has lost too much of the middle class that works for wages. During the years that Obama was president, right-to-work states increased from 9 to 24. Michigan, Wisconsin and Indiana went from Blue to Red.Lots of working people who showed up for Obama ,didn't show up for Clinton.Some of them went for trump. Since the New Deal people who work have been an integral part of the Democratic party. Without them Dems struggle. A few months ago teachers in right-to-work states [West Virginia, Oklahoma, Kentucky, Arizona and Colorado] organized and bravely acted. There wasn't much comment from either party. Those people were politically diverse but pulled together and accomplished something valuable. That's the future of the Democratic party. It's not complicated. If we don't see this, we are making a mistake.
1
Thank you! Your emphasis on “story” as the foundation for our reminds me of a wonderful 2015 film with George Clooney, Hugh Laurie, Britt Robertson, and Raffey Cassidy.
Robertson’s character, a high school student, listens to multiple professors describe the impending end of civilization from global warming, overpopulation, nuclear war, starvation, and pandemics and then asks the only useful question: “So what are we doing about it?”
Her answer comes in a childhood story of two wolves fighting. One wolf is full of darkness, despair, gloom, paralysis. The other wolf has a story filled with light, hope, dreams, plans, creativity, action . . . Which wolf wins? The answer: “The one we feed.”
The wonderful U.K. series Dr. Who has probably gotten it right -
“In the end, we are all stories.”
Let’s hope we feed the right wolf.
Fox news describes the dems as focusing on race and class; you should believe little of what they have to say. In reality the dems focus on jobs and worker protections including minimum wage, healthcare and retirement. This focus is labeled as “socialist“ by Fox. Rather than engage in rhetorical socialist communist label games, the dems should meet the challenge head-on and ask why it is that all members of society shouldn’t benefit and only the 1%? The right wing notion that God rewards the wealthy no matter how ill gotten the gains has destroyed Christianity and is in the process of destroying our economy.
The anger and optimism of the young will provide the story.
"We are all in this together" used to be the American story.
The Trump story isnt about "good-hearted folks" - it is about fear- in a raw and victimized form. He is the guy who cheats his customers, they tell themselves it is not happening.
NPR had a story about a Baptist church in a tiny village in Alabama where their form of Christianity was just racism, excusing their lies about others (Obama a Koran-carrying muslim, Hillary, tool of Satan", etc, and daydreaming about when they die and go to heaven. They felt God gave them Trump, "a sinner", to save America. It shouldn't be too hard to come up with an American dream better than just the death of ideas, of compassion, of hope.
2
I know that paid Commenters have to write about something, but Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s election in my District was not representative of anything larger. She ran in a district with 50% Hispanics, in an off year election primary where hardly anyone voted.
She does have a great telegenic smile though.
Mr Brooks, like many center Republicans, needs to face our real choice. A Republican Party that is willing to shred the Constitution to retain power, or a Democratic Party that embraces the heart of that Constitution and believe that all humans are created equal, no matter what color, sex or religion. We cannot take the time to save the Republican Party from its worst abusers. The Republican party can do that on its own time. But it is a tough love thing. Republicans who find the far right unacceptable, will have to stop voting for the Republican agenda and candidates until the Fascist fever passes. Or we could just goose-step our way into a dictatorship. Actions have consequences.
1
Of course racial justice and economic justice are linked! There is no justice if entire segments of society are denied it.
Good piece. Hating Donald Trump is not a recipe for success. The rage and "resistance" has been way overplayed. The Democrats have turned their base into lunatic ranters, mostly the ultra rich hollywood people. There is no vision, no hope no change. Having an Evil Villain is all well and good but what are you offering. Social change has come a long way, what is the new America? Workers have been left out of this equation. These people are not necessarily racists, homophobes, or KKK members. They are Americans who were left out of the recovery. What have the wealthy Democrats done for them? That's what needs to be addressed. They voted for Trump to show their disgust with a party of the wealthy.
David Brooks has been a Republican since time began. If we are to believe him, he despises Donald Trump, thus his conundrum. He should fix his own rotting party before dare suggesting fixes for the Democrats.
You think too much, Mr. Brooks, as always. Simply put, there's a wave acomin' and it ain't concerned with you.
The working (white) people on the right and the "oppressed" minorities on the left are destroying America. I don't hear American dream, can-do spirit, land of opportunities anymore. All I heard are complaints and complaints. Of course it is much easier to complain and to fault others. But if someone refused to study hard and climb the ladders, whose fault is it? In the good old America, people ency rich people by thinking I want to be them. In the current America, people are jealous of rich people by forcing "redistribution". Indeed, America is duck and I don't see much hopes. It is human nature at work. Just be realistic. Multiculturalism is against human nature. Democracy can only happen in racilaly pure society. No force can fight against evolution from the last thousand of years. It is all in our DNA. Therefore, I think segregation and divorce are the ultimate solution. In fact, it is already happened. America is divided by zip code. NIMBYISTS are on both sides. So stop pretending.
As an IT guy the message is simple: It's time to reboot America. On 11/6/2018 we ALL go to the voting booth and hit "Ctrl-Alt-Delete"
Ctrl - Put controls and sanity back in place
Alt - remove alternate facts and lies
Delete - corruption, bigotry, hate
Still working on the hat, but you get my point. :>)
2
Agree with David about the need for the Democratic party to put forward a compelling, overarching narrative on what they stand for. As for what that would be, I would emphasize the principles of democracy itself. Among other national tragedies, GOP is the party of voter suppression, gerrymandered districts, stolen supreme court judges, no representation for DC's nearly one million residents, no money for guarding against voter system hacking; and on and on and on... Democrats need to own this issue, and that means no gerrymandered districts for Democrats either.
Countering all this is essential work for democrats and our democracy. Sounds like a wining issue to me.
4
Beware Republicans offering advice to the Democrats. Many of them can't stand Trump, but that doesn't qualify them to advise the Dems.
4
What you're saying fits with what the Dalai Lama said in a Times column written with Arthur Brooks around the time Trump was elected. He recommended creating a compassionate society that feeds a universal hunger to be needed. This could be the basis of a powerful story.
It's a story about reclaiming our personal dignity by being proud of what we do, in terms of how we serve others and in recognition of the gifts we receive each day. It's a story about reclaiming America's dignity, as the example for the rest of the world.
And it's a story of having the self-discipline, each of us as a person and the country as a whole, to act on the basis of what is helpful. You have to serve somebody.
And it means going beyond stories to real action. We have had so many visionaries that have promised but not delivered enough. Actions speak so much louder than tweets.
I'm not saying this as well as the Dalai Lama did (surprise!). Read the column.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/04/opinion/dalai-lama-behind-our-anxiety...
1
I get what Brooks is saying, but the Democratic Party’s story is able to have more than one message. And that is why it will win over the Republican Party 98% lockstep support for Trump.
1
GOP pundits like Brooks have re-defined reality to fit their own goals and concerns. Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders have proposed policies and legislation that would be supported by Eisenhower and Nixon---but in today's rancid political climate, these ideas are called extreme, even as these same policies are accepted and proven successful in most other advanced western nations. How can David Brooks or any of his "conservative" brethren call this honest or fair?
2
One observation about Mr. Brooks warnings about focusing on race or class is that the whole GOP template for stirring their base is focused on race and class and they interpret everything through that lens whether it is there or not.
The old America, where we are "all in this together" is thrown aside to stir fear in some guy on Social Security in Ohio being terrified about the Texas border, where the people who actually live there say there is no problem. "We will lie to you for your vote" has been a successful strategy. Perversely making abortion a burning issue for old men, it has been a useful tool to sow fear and helplessness into the GOP base.
3
Dear DAVID BROOKS,
The DEMOCRATS are a diverse group and we all know that there is no clear message that we can send to match a REPUBLICAN message simple minded message. We work very differently and recognize that any message will not agree with any majority of DEMS. This IS the real problem because we are not a bunch of simple minded folk like most found on the other side. OBJECTIVELY the one you came up with FEELS watered down and weak. The best agreement is that TRUMP is not who most of us are OR who we want to be like. The best message is who we decide to be that day based on the principles that allow FREE SPEECH and ENCOURAGE disagreement. This is why we have no easy message.
1
A hybrid socialism with capitalism is the future, and that is what the Democrats will embrace. The socialism will take shape in education, medicine, environmental protections, infrastructure and housing; The capitalism will take shape because people will still want to make more money, people will still want to innovate, make a name for themselves, become independent, even though they are taxed to the gills to provide for the socialism. This hybrid has already been seeded. It is now starting to grow. Trump and his archaic populism are just a reminder that deregulated hyper-capitalism trying to suffocate socialism is a rigged system for the uber-wealthy, a ruse packaged as American. The people will react to this Trumpian hyper-capitalism, deregulation on steroids bump in the road. If it's not working class rights who get it, so be it -- everyone else will, and they will vote for this message in droves. Free community college, universal healthcare, world class infrastructure, clean environment, regulated finance, affordable housing and the rich taxed to high heaven. That's the future; the rich and comfortably well-off should let it happen, if they want a healthy, vibrant, quality country for their lineage to enjoy.
3
I sincerely appreciate that Brooks "humbly" admits that he's not really sure what the Democrats "story" is as the "tectonic plates are shifting". And I believe that one of the reasons that his humbleness is appropriate and his perception murky is because he insists on viewing the contemporary the Democratic Party from 30,000 feet. Not once in the column does he mention extremely broad support in the party for such fundamental issues as combating climate change, the corrupting influence of corporate money on our politics, common sense gun control, criminal justice reform, combating voter suppression attempts, and protecting women's reproductive rights. Issues matter greatly, Mr. Brooks, not just amorphous sociological categories.
4
America revolted against the British government. If from Theodore Roosevelt Americans have wanted the government to be a counter weight to business we have never been too fond of government supplying everything. From Franklin Roosevelt onward support for various government programs to help people from Social Security to Medicare have gained in popularity. Unfortunately as in almost everything race played a role in who got the benefits and who supported them. Sanders, & socialism really run counter to the politics of personal ID. What most Democrats are for is using government to help more people who are not benefited from the changes in the economy.
1
As a 71-year old, I've learned to avoid Republican advice to we Democrats. This column is the exception that proves the rule. For months I've wondered where was the voice of Robert Kennedy? Why aren't we calling out our better angels?
Offer a decent life to the living and a better life to their children and we Democrats can win.
LIfe is lived forward. Arguments about how we arrived at our current dysfunction are largely irrelevant. Focus on a better future for all, including those who disagree with us, and we'll win.
And don't forget the nuts and bolts of politics. Register new voters and then turn out all registered voters on election day.
3
@thomas briggs Yes, I think Robert F. Kennedy may supply just the right example for the Democrats! He was learning in a hurry how to talk about economic inequality and about race.
One quibble, though: Arguments about history are never irrelevant. We know about RFK from history!
David Brooks, please make yourself the first NYT columnist to read David Reich "How To Talk About Race and Genetics" (@ nyti.ms/2GmRY2n) and learn that:
“'Race' is fundamentally a social category — not a biological one.... This means that when a teacher looks around a classroom of students of diverse 'races,' she or he shouldn’t see them as members of fundamentally different groups of people. 'Race' has trivial predictive power about an individual person’s biological capabilities."
Say that out loud until you finally grasp these facts. Then read Ch. 11 of Kenneth Prewitt's "What Is Your Race?..." to learn that he, former USCB Director, has thought hard about "race" and class and has concluded that the Census should end its "race" system and instead gather SES data, that is focus on class.
Then end this nonsense about Bernie Sanders' socialist story and your use of the phrase racial justice socialism. Sanders simply wanted a discussion of policies that if implemented would do far more for all lower SES classes than any future affirmative actions could possibly do for "race" x, y, or z.
This can be most easily understood by you, and perhaps even Ocasio-Cortez (do not know enough about her yet), by learning about Swedish Universal Health Care that does more for the one million "new Swedes" from places like Somalia than the US Health care system will ever do.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Citizen US SE
2
Brooks column is one of his most provocative--but I'm not sure his opening question is the best for understanding what is going on today.
For me, the question is simply this: "What is the Democrat Party asking me to believe"?
--Because I'm a White male heterosexual, I'm automatically racist, sexist and homophobic? I'm not--and by the way, how dare you--you don't even know me.
--The wealthy are all evil and greedy--and we should take their stuff because they have too much? Sorry, I don't hate them for their success. One day, I'd like to be one of them. That's America.
--Because I believe in a higher being, I'm ignorant? Again, how dare you.
--Because I own a gun, I can't be trusted to use it responsibly? I can.
--Police officers are racist and abusive? Not my experience--and not most peoples' experience either.
--If I hand over the majority of my paycheck, politicians will take good care of me and my family? Sorry, I don't trust them. They've messed up everything else.
Donald Trump colluded with the Russians? Sorry, I don't think he had time for that--and besides, no one can find any evidence.
The media is non-biased? They are hyper-partisan. Every thoughtful person knows it.
Trump is a traitor? Seems like an hysterical charge--given what he says he wants to do--put American first.
Relax--you're really gonna love socialism? I don't trust politicians--I want to make my own choices.
Nothing Democrats say rings true in my world. Sorry.
@Jesse The Conservative "Nothing Democrats say rings true in my world. Sorry. "
-------
Maybe, just maybe, you need to expand your horizons a bit and see what's going on in the rest of OUR world.
1
Why such a long list? All that was needed was your name and title.
When the Democrats abandoned the labor movement with the adoption of NAFTA, they pulled the slowly unraveling thread that has led us here. The Democrats now lack a national focus and leaders. Give up on gun controls and put together a national platform (a contract with America?) supporting labor, human rights, the environment, ethical government, and fiscal responsibility. Simply saying "Trump is bad and we are good" isn't enough to win it.
2
I agree with Will Rogers. As he said: "I am not a member of any organized party--I am a Democrat." Seems to have it about right. Further, most of those of us who acknowledge to be Democrats, we not only agree, but we do not want our party to be rigidly organized like the Republicans.
1
Yes, lets tell a good story, we Democrats. Lets start with the only thing that is constant: Change. I constantly here people, particularly Democrats say we need change. But change toward what? Everyone wants change because they are not happy or content. The Democrats pretend they are the party of change and that they think this will appeal to the discontented, to gather up their votes. But, who do they really represent when it comes to wielding power. I watched them sell out the immigrant community, cutting a deal with the Republicans on the budget. Who were they really serving? The professional class, particularly academics who I am sure were very pleased with increased research funding and liberals who think that is all a very good idea. The problem is that this really doesn't seem to win politically in terms of vote counts. So for the moment as a Democrat I am in a slight minority. We will see in November if the Democrats can sell their appeal to the discontented enough to at least win the House.
"If I had to advise on a Democratic narrative...." David Brooks writes. Lately, the Times's conservative columnists have written one column after another in which they profess to care deeply about the future of the Democratic Party and to offer it advice. Their advice always boils down to this: don't move to the left.
If I had to advise on a Democratic narrative, I'd say this: don't take advice from former Republicans.
4
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez won because the folks in her district thought she was more like them than her opponent. A simple case of winning due to identity politics.
The Democrats certainly aren't going to win by talk of abolishing ICE. That idea is just plain stupid. Most US citizens realize that we need to control immigration.
1
Enough of this theorization though, Mr Brooks.
When it comes down to it, a lot of times we are forced to pick the lesser of two evils, perhaps Ms Ocasio-Certez's rhetoric is one-sided, she is not out to punish those who disagree with her. She just wants something for the downtrodden, race, class or whatever.
This is opposed to the GOP's selfishness in general and Trump's vindictiveness in particular.
You think about it, while imperfect for any means, President Obama has tried to walk the path you thought it was ideal, by ignoring race and a lot of times class, never mind he called some bankers a fat cat just to appease his base, since he has already displeased them with his distance in race.
Sadly, many, including yourself, didn't see heaven until they see Trump unleashing hell.
So here is a challenge to you, Mr Brooks, who would you vote in 2018 and in 2020? Theories are cheap but action defines a person
It's hard to argue against strategic planning for the 2020 election, but November is what matters now and November is a referendum on Donald Trump. If Democrats take the house, the political landscape will change. The Mueller findings may change it even more. 2019 could turn out to be maelstrom. If Trump feels cornered and he decides to fight rather than quit, literally anything could happen. The 2020 election may well end up being fought over issues not even on the table at the moment.
2
Even before the start of the U.S., this country has swayed back and forth across liberal to conservative viewpoints. As the Founding Fathers would see it, “we the people” are simply finding their way. Contrast this to purely partisan efforts, such as the majority of the majority only “Hastert Rule”, that are a cancer to democracy. Senator McConnell and the like simply spreading that disease.
Getting everyone in a room and legislating is hard. But people are petty and watching Fox News for entertainment is easy. Just as going to a Trump rally to see the show. No more Lincoln-Douglas style debates in a Twitter world. This is not about politics, but being part of the new-style reality TV show.
The real focus needs to be on ensuring one vote counts as one vote and not as a fraction of one. Having your vote count as three-fifths because of gerrymandered voting districts is wrong. That needs to stop. It also needs to go back to basics and legislate by majority rule and not just a subset of a majority. Get out of the “I alone” and instead how do “we the people” make it work?
There are lots of ways to solve any issue. Make suggestions to your constituents and then work it out with everyone in the room. Bring democracy back again. That’s the message we really need.
2
To me the Republican story has always been small minded and venal as it focuses on exclusion and the desires of the rich. Democrats need a story that is inclusive and the needs of everyone and must even include the corporate leaders who need a strong workforce who have the means to build a life for themselves.
Some how republicans have been allowed to build the story of us, whoever 'us' is, and them, everyone who is not 'us'. We are humans with common needs for security and growth. This must be the basis of the democratic story.
4
In general want taxes to pay for that which benefits everyone, rich, poor and in between. If they perceive taxes are not doing that, seem to benefit one class or another, they will vote to not pay them at all. It has to do with humans innate sense of fairness. Social justice platforms that appear to benefit certain identities over others and are doomed for failure. Equitable economic platforms are much more likely to succeed. It seems the only ones who don’t know that are the national Democrats candidates.
Coming from a party that has always emphasized race and class with current success seems ironic. However, I agree with another commenter. The house is on fire. We don’t need to think about what refrigerator to get. We need to remove the GOP majority that has always been in favor of classism and autocracy.
3
I never thought that i would like David Brooks's advice to the Democratic Party. He has been a partisan Republican for so long. But like George Will Trump has caused him to give up on his party, His advice now is sound. Democrats must stress economic issues. That should not be too hard. Free college education with state help is possible. But for students already enrolled and recent grads doing something about student debt is more important. For older Americans without adequate incomes shoring up medigap is essential. As most nursing home residents rely on it supporting it for them is a no-brainer. Older people are reliable voters. Don't forget gun control. Millenials after Parkland want that. I have just named issues that I think could be addressed on the national level. But as Tip O'Neill said all politics is local so there is room to address other issues there.
What democrats should avoid is attacking Trump all the tine. That is unnecessary. FDR did not waste energy in 1932 attacking Hoover all the time. FDR smiled a lot and sounded hopeful as he faced the greatest economic disaster in American history. I want the national party now to smile a lot and sound hopeful that they can fix the mess. And it is a mess.
You're right, David. Americans come together when they talk about their children. Democrats want to dramatically slow global climate change for their children, grandchildren and all future generations. They support the Paris Climate Accord. Republicans want to drill even more in the Canadian Tar Sands and the Arctic, thus putting even more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. They must not have children and grandchildren.
1
What you suggest is the right narrative IS the Sanders narrative. When he inveighs against bankers and oligarchs, it's precisely because they constitute the forces preventing the building of anything that would help the next generation surpass this one. This should be plain to anyone who's been paying fair attention to Sanders's message. It amazes me that you can't see it.
1
The core of Brooks's advice is consistent with the core belief of the Democrats -- which is that government works to improve the lives of all Americans including those whose lives are most in need of assistance. As David Goldfield's excellent book, "The Gifted Generation: When Government was Good," makes clear, this was once a centrist core belief of moderate Republicans as well, including President Eisenhower and even President Nixon, until the Goldwater-Reagan conservatives decided, as a matter of faith, that government was the problem, not the solution. It's the Republicans and their Fox News propagandists that push the notion that Democrats care only about race or class ("Black Lives Matter" vs. "All Lives Matter").
Now, Brooks is pushing the false notion that Democrats need to stop choosing between race or class and start focusing on how government can help the lives of all people -- which has been the Democrats' message all along. But as long as he gets on the bandwagon and supports the Democrats in 2018 and 2020, he can take credit for the idea if he wants.
Over the years I have been a David Brooks fan. But for some reason the last few articles I have read don’t resonate with me all that much. Perhaps it is because I am getting the feeling that this moment cannot fit into an op-ed. It is much more complicated than any one opinion writer can think about. Maybe the moment is just too big and overwhelming and I am getting worn out. Or most likely no one understands the moment and we are all grasping for some type of answer. One thing that I do know is that as time has gone on Bernie has come into focus for me and looks less out there and Ocasio-Cortez (aside from the abolish ICE stuff) is very refreshing and uplifting. Democrats have always had a messaging issue. Messaging can be difficult particularly when trying to deliver numerous, new and complicated ideas. My hope for democrats is that they find a way to coalesce around a simple message that resonates with many people and not go down the rabbit hole of anger and hate to win.
3
Looking forward to reading your next installment, David. What is the Republican Story? That should be a very interesting read, indeed. As to this analysis, you're not far off in some senses, but you're also way off in others. The Democratic Party story is the New Deal story. The Kennedy/Cuomo compassion story. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's story is not fundamentally different, and neither is the socialist story. Kennedy, Cuomo and other traditional democrats supported organized labor because workers were being exploited and squeezed by business, which focused exclusively on profits and rewarding its executives. And they were also champions of minorities, and of equal rights, and of civil rights. Those things did not reflect a wish to crush business. Just an objective that the spoils are shared more equally with those without whom there would be no spoils -- from both the production perspective and from the consumption perspective. Where the Democratic Party went astray, was led astray, was in the Clinton era, which encouraged traditional democrats to support a Republican-lite agenda. I would not agree that Obama's policies hewed more toward the Clinton camp, but as a pragmatist with an obstructionist GOP congress, he picked his battles. Hillary lost because she tried to continue that Republican-lite agenda. That's not who Democrats are. It's not who they've ever been. So what you're seeing now is a reemergence of traditional Democratic Party principles.
2
I think the rally cry for the Democratic Party should come from our Pledge to the American Flag; "Liberty and Justice for All". Nate Silver suggested Democrats running for office in 2018 ought to focus on three points. First, point out the breadth and depth of corruption in 45's Administration. Second, contrast the willingness of 45 and the Republicans to defund the ACA, Medicare, CHIPS, Medicaid, and Social Security, with, third, rewarding corporations and the 1% with substantial bonuses and increasing the national debt by trillions of dollars. Liberty and justice for all includes racial justice socialism. I do not believe Americans trust business more than state. Boycotts, protests, and suits over business promotion of unsafe products, business practice of two-face support of its employees and the environment and the constant battling to lower OSHA and EPA regulations. Even during the early months when the ACA was taken before town halls, the angry misinformed crowd pleaded not to have their Medicare taken away. What Americans don't like is being told you will get a large tax refund and you will have to use that refund to pay your raised healthcare insurance premiums and co-pays, because 45, illegally and immorally, won't fund the ACA. What Americans don't like is POTUS signing the tax reform bill at Mar-a-Largo surrounded by billionaires and told "I'm going to make you richer!". What Americans want is liberty and justice for all.
1
In her public speeches Ocasio-Cortez comes across as some sort of Chavista. Her's and Bernie's key proposals are impossible. There is no such thing as free tuition, some one has to pay. Who do they propose pay Harvard to educate students? Single payer health care is in financial trouble in Europe but does provide the basics. However, such a system will only work when all aspects of health care are strictly regulated, such as drug prices.
Much of the current discussion these days ignores the fact the we're talking about a congressional election, which depends largely on local issues. Ocasio-Cortez can emphasize her agenda in her district, which is heavily Democratic (I believe 70% in the last election). In districts with a high degree of unemployment, the emphasis should be on jobs and healthcare. And certainly candidates shouldn't run on gun control in districts where everyone owns a gun. The larger narrative can wait until 2020.
And remember Will Rogers: "I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat."
1
The story of America is the story of deciding how to protect individuals from the power of groups, and groups from the power of individuals. Republicans generally favor individuals over groups (unless they are non-homogenous individuals), and Democrats generally favor groups over individuals (unless it is inclusion of non-homogeneous individuals).
Republicans since Reagan have been telling the (compelling) story that "government IS the problem" ... that individuals are being hurt by the group. Democrats are telling a "Tragedy of the Commons" story, where individuals hurt the group.
The Republican story is "The Little Red Hen". And it is a valuable story. Lazy farm animals get in the way of hard-working, self-sufficient farm animals.
Democrats need to tell the story of a bicyclist on a windy day. Peddling hard into a fierce headwind, the bicyclist barely moves forward. Then the wind changes to a tailwind. The bicyclist peddles hard and simply flies. But soon, the tailwind is unnoticed ... "I'm peddling hard, and my hard work is what makes me fast". The US (and most of the white population in the US) has had a long period of tailwinds, that we fail to notice. Now we face some headwinds. And we need to make decisions about those headwinds. The world population is increasing to dangerous levels, and conflicts over resources are inevitable. The gradual increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is a cause of gradual earth temperature averages.
If the Trump administration's disastrous border policy has taught us anything, it's that Americans come together to protect children. Loving our children is the one thing that we have in common and therefore a message centered on the fate of future generations has the potential to unite a divided country: a future worth fighting for.
1
As I read this column, the lyrics, “ if not today, then when” came to mind. When will America be ready to confront these lingering issues of race, gender and sexual orientation inequality? When do we acknowledge that our economic inequality is not of a single origin and requires more than a one size fits all solution? When will we acknowledge that the desire for local control of the resources of public education is motivated in large measure by racism, classism, apathy and selfishness? When do we start to address the fact that our law enforcement and judicial resources are being weaponized as tools of racial and economic oppression? Kennedy and Hart were right, but so were Malcolm, LBJ and MLK. Democrats no longer need to focus on hope and change while excluding the realities people are facing everyday. Trump won in part because he acknowledged these realities. His solutions are not of the 21st century and ring hollow to people of discernment. But to those who have felt marginalized and invisible, simply being seen was reason enough to support him. Racism is real. Sexism is real. Our systems of education, economics and justice reflect these realities. It’s time to acknowledge these issues, face them directly and to let those who still feel invisible know that their issues matter. Democrats can’t be afraid to acknowledge people’s realities. Democrats must have the vision to see what is ailing our society and offer 21st century solutions.
3
Sorry, but the last person Democrats need advice from is David Brooks, especially when part of his advice seems to be that candidates shouldn't attack racism. Midterms are mostly run on local issues and concerns. Ocasio Cortez will represent one of the most diverse districts in the country. It's a long way from Iowa. The basic Democratic position is income equality or, more basically, equality in all its aspects. Mr Brooks does not endorse that view.
2
Perhaps many Americans realise how much ground they lost through globalisation, deregulation and other neoliberal economic policies supported by Clinton and Obama. The evidence of low wage growth, loss of employment opportunities and the resulting social and economic impact on particular communities is well understood. The overall economy may have benefitted through higher efficiencies but the lack of effective policies to share those gains and to invest in creating new opportunities seem to have caused the poor outcomes for the disadvantaged.
The economic issues will eventually dominate because all other currently divisive issues are capable of compromise or accomodation. And many including democrats may consider the Clinton/Obama policies as dated.
As a result Democratic Socialism as espoused by Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez (which is different to ordinary "socialism" as commonly understood) may now play a lot better in the next phase and potentially find a bigger audience in the red states too. The economically/socially disadvantaged in America will come to contemplate on the economic and related social horrors that await them and their children if the economic and technological trends of the past 40 years continue for the foreseeable future without radically new offset policies. They will seek out new ideas.
Trumpism, as unfortunate as it is, may prove to be the catalyst that gives rise to some rethinking of what passes for acceptable political philosophy.
1
Welcome to the Democratic Party, Mr. Brooks! The tension you point out has been going on in the party for decades, and your thoughtful input on honing the message is appreciated.
While I agree that some of the message is currently counter-productive ("Abolish ICE" is something Fox News could only dream of railing against), it seems to be truer now that the marketplace of ideas has lost its patience for nuance. It unfortunately takes more effort to grab and keep attention. More spine as well, and I am glad new leaders are stepping forward to champion bold new ideas to solve our country's growing economic problems.
We may go back to a time when the country respected white male institutions and authority, but I seriously doubt it. And as it has been the case for almost a century, the Democratic Party will lead the change to what's next. Welcome aboard!
3
Many of the commenters push back against Brooks' claim but then substitute platform positions rather than a narrative, as if they are identical. That's his point: they're not. The narrative is fundamental. It explains and supports the platform positions. The current president has overturned many of the former Republican platform positions--trade, tariffs, alliances--but the narrative of "American carnage" supports those revolutions.
I have to admit that I could not articulate the national Democratic narrative, much as I'd like to. "Healthcare for all" is not a narrative, it's a policy goal, and a great one. I for one think that David might have a good suggestion in an emphasis on our children and the future.
Of course, narratives also have to correspond to some reality. "Stronger together" is a great narrative basis for wonderful policy platforms, but it didn't reflect what we saw in the last campaign. It felt like a slogan rather than an identifying narrative. Any narrative that includes "together" or "shared" or "equality" has to be pretty open and welcoming.
1
We don't need any squishiness about building character, which is the conservative way of saying "be nice, stay in your place, and let the rich folks make the decisions."
What the democrats need is a coherent message about expanding and enhancing the middle class. The preamble to the constitution provides that the people of the United States, intending to form a more perfect union, to establish justice, to insure domestic tranquility, and to provide for the common defense, and promote the general welfare, . . .do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Domestic tranquility and promotion of the general welfare for the people require an engaged and educated citizenry, with the ability and the resources to provide life's necessities for their families: healthcare, education, and work.
The middle class is America and it requires funding - for infrastructure, for building a national healthcare system, and for educating the middle class to function in a participatory democracy. We need to raise revenue to do this and it will have to come from a more progressive tax system.
A healthy and educated middle class is the most powerful economic tool we can build and it is squarely within the constitutional framework of the U.S.
Middle class - take back your country.
7
It sounds to me like Mr. Brooks is stuck on the word "socialism." It seems he is reading into Bernie Sanders message through the lens of Socialism with a capital S. Bernie's campaign was about every person's right to the same or at least fair opportunities for healthcare and insurance, education, and a living wage to name a few. On some issues Bernie took the same position as Trump, for example against factories exploiting workers and moving production to low wage countries.
Mr. Brooks may see these positions as evil Socialist rhetoric but many people see this as basic fairness and human rights.
3
NO BRAINER. According to Heckman when we invest in very early life, 0-5, the rate of return is 13%. Who doesn't want a 13% annuity? Spend here:
Nurse Family Partnership
Subsidized maternal leave
Breastfeeding promotion
Parenting skills/ break intergenerational cycles
Prenatal care
Head start
This would also create a huge number of stable professional jobs like Nurse, counselor, parent educator, teacher, social worker. It would make communities safer, less addicted, & higher achieving, thereby paying us back that 13%.
4
I constantly wonder why on earth this country , among all the supposedly first-world countries, continues to NOT insist that taxes be used for the common good - starting with National Health Service that will not send people into bankruptcy and homelessness. It's perfectly obvious to anyone who actually looks that the military budget is bloated out of all proportion, and that a massive adjustment is needed there that could take care of health care for all.
8
This nation is now on the precipice of oligarchy.
The only unknowns are whether we will be in the mold of fascist, theocratic or authoritarian. It’s hard to forecast because all three forms mesh with one another to fit the socio-political agenda of the leadership. So, are pleas to the hopes of a new generation really viable, or is it just empty rhetoric? Can we realistically have a future society based on techno, academic, medical meritocracy? How do we find compassion for the poor when 30 to 40% of the nation see them as “takers”?
The real issue is rampant, unfettered Capitalism.
A Capitalism that won’t be satiated until it returns society to feudalism.
Economist Richard D. Wolfe favors a democratic model that empowers the government and the people to create worker owned cooperatives. It’s an idea that is a reality in Spain and coming to England. If we as a nation continue to support the current Capitalist scheme, oligarchy and fascism are inevitable as is the end of Democracy. Democratic Socialist are addressing some of our most timely needs. Righting hundreds of years of exploitation won’t be easy, but we have to start somewhere.
2
Mr. Brooks continues to make predictions even as he surely knows, and hopefully understands,the dimensions of ever present realities: interacting uncertainties, unpredictabilities, randomness and a lack of total control about anything, no matter the types, levels and qualities of one’s efforts over adequate or inadequate periods of time. As a professional media commentator, in a democracy, he surely has the right to do this.As an ethical person he also has a responsibility to not that one unexpected outcome of the role he chooses to play as a secular “prophet” is contributing to a toxic culture of not taking/being personally accountable for the outcomes of his semantics. Temporary or more permanent ones.He continues to be committed to “localism” as if only one other massive-failing -homogeneous currently operating option existed. Diversity, ranges and continua, each with their own known, knowable as well as unknown conditions and dimensions do not seem to exist for him.His certitude is ceaseless! He rarely considers the impact of a culture which seeds, fosters, empowers and harvests, amongst many, willful blindness of what IS, which should not BE. if equitable well being is a viable life style, value, and norm.Or willful deafness from voices, as well as muted. selected and targeted “the other” in our midst. Or willful ignorance, from our pouting, tweeting POTUS- down and sideways- in an age of unending information constrained by limited understanding and menschlichkeit.
Economic conditions have improved for every race since the Trump presidency. Democrats still want to divide people into groups and convey power and benefits in an unequal measure try to right some past wrong. This will most certainly fail.
1
Again, Mr. Brooks gets it wrong on the Democratic story. He equates the media's infatuation with idea that Bernie Sanders represents the Democratic party with the actual Democratic party. Although Bernie has some good ideas, he is hardly 'the' representative of Democratic party or what we stand for. Ocasio-Cortez is a new comer and has valid and important points and should be given the opportunity to represent her district. Stop trying to pigeon hole what Democrats "stand" for with these simplistic and frankly distorted assessments. I would take any advice from Mr. Brooks on how to reach out to the Americans who need to be reached out to with an ample serving of salt.
3
Political analyses generally try to reduce politics to a zero-sum game on the issues. Today, that's not working. Democrats are winning races on a wide range of issues now because they oppose Republicans who by default are thought to support Trump. From center to left on the political spectrum, that leaves a lot of room to run.
1
We've been here before, Mr Brooks. 2016 relived 1865's literal assassination of a national emancipation whose requisite reconstructive waves were countered by the self-serving particulars of "home rule" in a confederacy still bent on white supremacy. That said, and agreeing w/ the premise of your opinion, maybe Robert Mueller should be our Ulysses S Grant THIS time given that Trump's disastrous "succession" of Obama is definitely analogous to Andrew Johnson's immediate deconstruction of Lincoln logs on preserving our union. Otherwise, there will be no "better angels" left on whom to center our exceptionalism "belonging to the ages" again.
Ocasio-Cortez correctly links economic justice with racial justice. The Civil Rights movement brought Atlanta, Houston, and Northern Virginia into the 20th Century, enabling their rapid economic development. Largely in reaction, rural whites shifted to the Republican Party, clinging to racial privilege in exchange for cuts in education and health care. Isolated them from the information-age global economy, rural whites had no alternatives as de-industrialization devastated them. The strikes by predominantly white teacher’s unions in West Virginia and Oklahoma represent an awakening. Those rural whites who put progress above racial privilege can ally with minorities in a common fight for economic and social justice. Centrist Democratic Establishment big-donor politics in 2020 would literally destroy the Democratic Party and ensure Republican dominance until a new party could be built.
1
It's interesting for a Republican to be strategizing the best path to power for Democrats. Think about it. Could it be that he is terrified by what his president is doing to this country?
3
Democrats need an agenda with the backing up with policy and legislation that is in support of the peoples behind them, not the continuing support of the 1% , who continue thru governing policies and legislation's to come out financially ahead. They also need to get elected to form a majority in order to enact any legislation or policies. Change.
A new third party to be developed with a defined agenda to initiate policy changes in government.
Perhaps the system is what is really broken, not which issue the democrats should choose.
Perhaps many in America today no longer want this style of politics any longer.
Perhaps middle of the road politics is not what is wanted but a new definitive. A Bold Step to Change, enacting policies with change.(example: campaign finance reforms)
And we cannot go back to the 1950's. 60's 80's or 2010 or 16, only learn from what we did and make a new path off the road we were on, with a new agenda.
Unfortunately you can not separate economics from race, gender and culture. That said, Social Justice encompasses all of that. Perhaps this is the better term. Democrats will win on the platform of Social Justice, because they have that platform all by themselves.
Republicans stand for advantages to only businesses and the wealthy. This is why Americans are suspicious of Government, not because of any other factor. Even a moderate Republican like Susan Collins voted for the biggest Tax Reform scam ever perpetrated on our citizens.
Since when has the Republicans shown that they have an obligation to make this a better country for our children? They are taking away benefits like SNAP, rental assistance, increasing rents in Public Housing and trying to take away educational opportunities. These programs have helped many a poor and lower income person to join the middle class. What the Republicans and the Trump Administration are doing to break down our social justice shows in stark acts that there is no "compassion" in the Republican Party.
Trump et al, do not have a compassionate bone in their bodies, as proven by their craven attitudes.
Which leaves compassion squarely in the Democratic Party.
Social justice is long overdue as evidenced by our Justice system as it now stands. And the stacking of the Supreme Court.
We Americans are on our way to losing our Freedoms, unless we embrace Social Justice. This should be the rallying cry of all Democratic Candidates.
2
Perhaps Mr. Brooks has hit upon a “story” that may join oppressed racial minorities with the oppressed white working class - the future and social mobility of our young. When you think about it, the future of our young is really about the future of our country. The call to rally around one another “to build families, communities, schools, training systems and other structures to make sure the next generation surpasses this one” is a positive “story” to advocate. I grew up in a household that espoused this same view and so did my children.
3
@Marvin yes but then you lose the folks who think they are moderately successful and who do not feel oppressed.... the folks who go to work and have bar-be-queues and 2 vacations a year. ie. the majority of the country... i would prefer 'fairness' and 'mobility' without the words 'oppressed'.... thats more positive and inclusive...
Here are a few problems with your opinion:
The Right has been cultivating and feeding resentment for over 40 years now and it's not going to stop by 2020. Everything is blamed on the democrats and liberals and people accept this false narrative.
America is in decline - it is not fear, it is reality. Look at who was elected president and try and say otherwise. It is not as bad as Trump says it is and it is not for the reasons he gives but our standing in so many measurable respects have faltered. I would argue that this is largely due to diminishing amounts of funding directed to areas not military based.
When you speak of rallying around each other to build families, schools... I can't help but wonder where the money is coming from when your party has made it a priority to cut taxes to the degree they have. We need a strong infrastructure, affordable schools, a clean environment, a fair justice system but when was the last time the right gave any value to these things? Your party has made these things "liberal" and therefore suspect, so please don't now argue for the things that you, in support of a conservative agenda, have already trashed.
6
We do need something forward looking that deals with opportunities for the young. Let's not kid ourselves: most older Americans in former steel and coal mining towns are not going to work at good jobs again. They're too old for retraining, and even if they could get some computer coding classes, the jobs and companies aren't there. Even their kids may not be able to get good jobs without moving out of the area. But they want their younger children and grandchildren to get ahead, and that means a supportive base of good education and health care. The "socialist" label is a red-herring: it doesn't mean state ownership of business but simply more and better public services that provide that basic fair start, a safety net for those whose experience difficulties, and a minimum level of retirement income so that people don't have to fear the last decades of their life. The big message needs to be that America is still a place of skills, opportunity and wealth, and that we can use our collective wealth to help everybody get ahead. No one wants to be left behind.
5
I suspect the Democrats will once again be shocked by the results of the election. There is even less support for socialism than there is for Hillary Clinton. They have to learn the hard way what the voters want.
1
A rising tide floats all boats. But some boats have rotten planks and need repair.
Republicans win by convincing people that the pie is getting smaller and smaller. Any piece given to one group, whether it is the elderly, the infirm or historically disadvantaged, means that the individuals not in that group get less.
Democrats must counter the shrinking pie argument by pointing out that the pie isn’t shrinking. The super wealthy and large multi-nationals are simply taking a bigger share of the pie.
The Democrats lose when they focus on expanding the pie for one group. And when they focus too much on the mechanics. Do people want racially unbiased law enforcement or do they want fair law enforcement? Do people want single payer or do they want affordable, quality health care?
But the first and overriding mission of every eligible voter for the upcoming election is to vote the corrupted Republican Elites out of Congress. Achievement of lofty goals is not possible as long as the corrupt Republicans are in Congress.
Anyone who seeks national acclaim by dividing Democrats, whether that be James Comey or Bernie Sanders, is aiding the corrupt Elites.
And, a first order of business should be to pass laws that stem the flow of money, foreign and domestic, into politicians’ pockets. Mueller has already done a great service by exposing some of the pathways of foreign money.
Run on big ideas and get rid of those rotten planks.
3
Health care. Environment. Energy. Public Education. Infrastructure. Responsible foreign policy. Sensible immigration policy. Racial justice. Just to name a few ...
5
I love it when conservatives--who have lost their party to the Yahoos and were trounced in the election--tell Democrats how to plan their future. The future doesn't consist of joyless reformism and a bunch of training programs. HRC tried that tack and she is not President. So no, Mr. Brooks, that dog won't hunt. It won't even get out of bed.
4
The Democratic Story in the mid-terms and in the 2020 election must be one clear, succinct message: Dump Trump and his followers. That's it.
1
Focus on race or class?
Please take a look at who focuses on what.
Race: Charlottesville, kneeling black NFL players, Muslim ban, brown immigrants, etc.
Class: 1% tax giveaway, tariffs (tax the 99%), revoke Volcker rule (reckless gambling by a few rich guys), etc.
Divisive identity politics?
Actually democrats need to focus on the half of the non-white electorate as well the overwhelming swath of the gullible white electorate that is excluded from participation in the American dream (if such a thing actually exists).
The last time the US had a decent, qualified, intelligent, articulate, fact based, reality based, experienced republican president: Eisenhower.
This president invested heavily in infrastructure, education, and scientific research. There was a progressive tax structure also. Every republican president since this time has scaled back this investment. It shows. The infrastructure is crumbling, student loan debt is massive, the US has lost its once commanding lead in all things STEM. America is seriously in decline. We have a president who is a puppet to a hostile foreign power, who has the temperament of a toddler, ignorant, etc. One third of the electorate is low information, gullible. I could go on, but won't.
4
Free health care; free education; free income (redistribution); free food; free... Why in the world have I been a Rep. all these years? Hmmmm.
2
This is why we are so polarized. Simplistic reductionist thinking that does not take the issues of poverty, class, education and the purpose and function of a democratic government seriously. Shame on us for checking our brain and our citizenship at the door and letting politicians who are lazy undisciplined mouth pieces, without conscience, make our decisions.
Please, David, spare us another "Is this the hill you want to die on?" number. As a weapon of psychological warfare, it's lost its clout. Playing it safe has gotten us worse than nowhere; we have nothing left to lose. We're coming for the hill and by God, we're taking it, ready or not.
You should be asking whether it's a hill you're ready to die on.
Does anyone remember President Harold Stassen? No? He was what happens to Democratic Socialists, like Bernie today.
1
Here is the American narrative. White Europeans came to the shores of America, liked what they saw and found here. They infected, killed, and forced onto reservations the native population so they could take what they wanted. In order to make it work, they imported slaves and, begrudgingly welcomed more immigrants. Slavery was "transformed" into institutionalized racism and the "slave" mentality was applied to blue collar labor. When they revolted, unions formed demanding better treatment and a share of the profits. The pendulum swung away from the imperialistic, take by force what you want mentality towards a "more perfect union". We have approached equal rights and the ability to live you own life the way you want rather than hide in the closet as you had to do for centuries. The descendants of the original "pilgrims" have fought tooth and nail to turn things back to a time where taking what you want no matter who gets hurt is their view of the American dream. Now they are seeing the fruits of their labor. But the other side saw the promised land getting closer and they are not about to hide in the closet. Democrats can't sit back and allow the Republicans to attempt to undo everything people have suffered and died for. Republicans are unmasking the facade of what their goals are: white majority rule, widening income inequality, and a total unwillingness to care for those who need help. For Democrats to not offer an rebuttal to that is wrong, plain and simple
5
@Walking Man, whatever it’s merits, your pessimistic narrative is a political loser on the national stage. Democrats must find a plausible and optimistic story in order to return from the political wilderness. They may have to wait an election cycle or two for help from the Republicans, as the failures of Trumpism cool the ardor of voters.
Amen. Racial, gender and interest group based socialism is the dead end the Democrats are racing towards. Outrage and Resistence, sure, but that is a motivation for the base, not a unifying call to thr country.
5
So, my insurance company informed me that my monthly premium will increase by $90 next year. A lot of other people are going to experience similar sticker shock too.
Many regions in the country are increasingly unaffordable, and many families, living paycheck to paycheck, aren’t equipped to deal with a financial or medical emergency.
And this is the middle class we’re talking about. The working class’s decline is even more stark.
This is the story Democrats ought to be telling. America has morphed into an increasingly difficult place to live if you’re not rich. Prosperity is on the decline, social mobility has stopped. We are becoming a society rigidly divided by class.
No it’s not a sunny message, but it’s the reality we’re living in. “America is already great” or whatever nonsense the Democrats were peddling in 2016 isn’t gonna cut it. There is a huge upward redistribution of prosperity taking place, and unless it is stopped, we’re on our way to 21st century serfdom.
I don’t know how you frame that. I’m not a highly paid DC a consultant (a group that would rejec such a narrative, as it goes against their economic interests).
2
"We must care for our brothers and sisters because we are all one family." Maybe the tone is more indignant but the sentiment is the same. But I've got to ask the liberals out there, when you say, "we must care for our brothers and sisters", who is "we" ?
This is the basic question that I don't think liberals have bothered to ask themselves in their quest for expanded government programs. They forget that Europe (who they follow like the North Star) taxes everyone (rich and poor) at fairly similar rates to pay for those lavish social benefits. They do so mainly through a VAT (sales tax) of about 20% - 25%.
But even if you accept their argument that paying for benefits through the state is more cost efficient, the fact is that "Americans trust business more than the state". And contrary to Brooks' assertion, they are not willing to pay broadly high taxes in order to "care for our brothers and sisters". See the article below by Sarah Kliff of Vox. It includes polling on single payer healthcare from Kaiser. Keep in mind that Kliff and Kaiser are very supportive of single-payer. Yet, not only do 43% oppose "guaranteed health insurance where Americans would obtain their insurance from a single government health plan", but (tellingly) an added 20% (from the original 50% who had supported single-payer) now oppose it if it requires many Americans to pay more in tax.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/22/15676782/california-si...
Brooks, defender and gateway drug to the far right. Democratic goals: infrastructure, curbing runaway medical insurance for business and individuals, a sustainable place to live that doesn't have lead in drinking water, opportunity for small business and not monopolies, curbing the strength of the Kochs, who got $1,200,000,000 in tax cuts with their millions of lobbying and buying Congress. Yeah, radical ideas.
1
How many of those who say that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez' politics obviously would appeal to people in her district but not to people in Kansas predicted that she would win the primary?
2
I’d be more interested in learning David Brooks’ advice to Republicans. It’s pretty clear to me what Democrats stand for, but I have no idea what modern Republicans stand for. Voter suppression? Gerrymandering? Larger deficits? Higher healthcare costs? Separating the children of asylum seekers from their parents? A taller, more impenetrable wall on our southern border? Ignoring Russian meddling in our elections? Prosecuting Hillary Clinton for some imaginary crimes? Greater income inequality? A smaller safety net? Inaction on the opioid crisis? Inaction on a crumbling infrastructure? More guns in more public places? More religious expression in public places? Higher tariffs and more trade wars? Pulling out of more international treaties and alliances? More for-profit colleges and Trump Universities? Fewer environmental protections? Fewer endangered species protections? Fewer consumer protections? More corruption and self-dealing allowed for public officials?
To me, as a life-long Democrat, the Republican Party stands for a “platform” that’s at least 90 degrees from where it stood a few short years ago. As a life-long Republican, David Brooks could explain to the public what his party stands for nowadays.
7
To look to the future and help build a better world for our children/grandchildren, should be an easy case for the Democrats to make, when the current administration is killing the planet with polluting air, water and ground, turning national parks into for sale properties, deregulating banking and corporations that gave us the Great Recession, under funding public education and health insurance, breaking promises to do infrastructure and threatening nuclear war, while gaining foreign monies for the NRA and changing laws that protect immigrant families and children in general from getting shot. It can't be too difficult to run a campaign counter to all this, without going too far to the left. Just restore sensible laws and regulations that were present before this administration. Justice will be served for this careless disregard for families, values and life! God will not be mocked. You reap what you sow. The day of reckoning is coming.
I believe that a winning Democratic story is the following: we have to return the American government to all the people by wresting control from the wealthy and special interests.
1
The Bernie Sanders movement will cost Democrats the election - just as it did in 2016. Nancy Pelosi and Schumer are deadly. Elizabeth Warren has no leadership skills- will Cory Booker take up the mantle? The elites are really the wealthy of both parties. Trump and Kushner spent their lives evicting the poor. The tax cuts were for the rich - the more you make the less you pay. Trump is just a Fox mouthpiece. And that’s what his followers love.
David - You are totally correct. Americans want to be positive, they want to solve problems, and they want to see their sons and daughters with good jobs and a chance for grand children. They are not into negativity, or throwing in the towel. That indeed is a winning combination. The current climate needs to change back to one where Americans are winning, producing, helping, and civil with a capital C.
Good column, David.
If you look at current Democratic contenders, they are almost exclusively defined by their hatred for Trump. Take Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris. Their popularity is likely close to perfectly correlated with their most recent burst of indignation - something like “this week, Elizabeth is an ‘8’, while Kamala is only a ‘5’”, etc. That Warren “persisted” was once great for T-shirts and hats but won’t win an election.
Bring on someone who rises above the fray. Biden? As good as anyone right now.
2
Mobility for the young does touch upon many of the Country’s unaddressed problems: education, health care, the declining middle class, perhaps also opioid addiction and dignity for all.
But Sanders’ arguments against the growing economic divide play directly into our children’s future. And so does the GOP Congress supine servitude to their billionaire backers.
Claiming to address these issues is what got Trump traction - it’s time to admit he is a con and put some folks in Congress who mean to do something about it - not a coterie of thieves and rabble rousers, not wild-eyed radicals either, just committed convincing common sense candidates addressing the real problems with practical action.
Just the opposite of the GOP Congress and the Trump Administration kowtowing to a few billionaires at home and dictators abroad.
2
If only. Identifying problems and finding a winning formula are two very different things. While the right seems to galvanize around every imagined ‘enemy’, the left’s narrative of oppressed and oppressor, winners and losers, and power vs. the powerless ends up playing into the hands of many on the right who portray that as ‘white’ vs ‘non-white’ and ‘makers’ vs ‘takers’.
Tribalism is alive and well. And it likely explains why Putin and Russia have gone from boogeyman to welcomed guest on the right; they look like white America. And now even long admired men and women of the FBI and CIA are being cast as enemies. Because it appears they are ‘taking sides’.
I suppose it was only a matter of time in this grand experiment, the ‘melting pot’. And just the right demagogue came along. The white working class has far more in common with others in the working class than those who travel by private jet and finance the narrative on the right. But good luck getting them to vote that way.
We citizens are victims or our marketing system. Why do we buy X, Y or Z car? We are pummeled daily with ads on every media invading your space everywhere, which are small but carefully crafted to grab your attention and make an impact. Ads, Tweets soundbites for goods have now become substitutes for political discourse and we are conditioned to accept them.
Hillary Clinton had complex policy proposals, not tweet-worthy. When she did use a soundbite like "basket of deplorables" she lost.
Democrats should be optimistic, since the T administration is dark and pessimistic. Democrats should look at the big problems, not the periphery. Gun control gets 5% more votes but loses 6%. All sorts of identity politics wins minority but loses white votes, and so should not define a party trying to unify people. So I propose Democrats try to solve the following problems:
1. Declining low skilled jobs, automation, offshore transfer.
- Education, training, new technology
2. Division of citizens and lack of consensus.
- Define the problems as universal not Progressive vs. Conservative.
3. China is a juggernaut, is cheating but like Japan will eventually be successful on its own. Likewise India. So we need to plan for the future.
- Continue to negotiate and push for fair and open markets and an engagement in cultural matters. They are too big to bully for long.
4. International cooperation will win in the end.
Build America For the Future
As if business didn't own the state these days. Do you really think Americans trust business anymore (if they ever really did)?
2
My story?
If we continue on our current trajectory, our planet may have changed so drastically that it's plausible we enter the end game of human civilization within my children's lifetime.
Forestalling that *requires* elite expertise and the voting out of all politicians who deny what is plainly in front of our noses.
2
"We need to rally around each other to build the families, communities, schools, training systems and other structures to make sure the next generation surpasses this one." - David Brooks
Maybe, Mr. Brooks, we can't do any of these things for the "next generation" until and unless we address the intersection of race and economic injustice in just the way Ms. Ocasio-Cortez suggests.
Families, communities, schools and other structures are crippled by racism and pro-corporate policies that have crushed working people, kept people of color in increasingly re-segregated schools and shifted America's wealth dramatically toward the already wealthy. And Brooks thinks we should have more Boy Scouts and bake sales.
1
Look at the concentration of wealth and power in the 1 percent and tell me there isn't class conflict.
Those at the top haven't "earned" it. They inherited it and if they didn't they hid it in rewriting the tax code and in off shore bank accounts.
They consume, not make America's greatness.
Inequality is ripping the fabric of American society.
Conservatism has created a new feudalistic inherited class that knows no responsibilities except self aggrandizement
They control the American Congress.
They elected Donaldovich Trumpsky
1
"Democrats tell two other stories."
How about this for a third story: Democrats are not the party of Trump.
Really, that should be more than adequate by now.
2
David Brooks is on the right tack. People are sick of the negativity and insecurity of our times. A candidate that smiles and seems to care for all people and has plans for the future would help get the voter's attention. Many voted for Trump thinking he is the Saviour and bring back "the good old days". His mean treatment of cabinet advisors, militaristic undemocratic approach to decision making and sour facial expressions will not bring back anything good and ,hopefully,should turn future voter's off.
2
Here's a compromise:
painting Trump as the villain on all fronts in 2018,
then run on generational change in 2020?
I trust neither state nor big business but in a time of climate change and the growth of plutocracy, oligarchy and the corporate state I trust the state a bit more
1
We need to commit to “Jobs” and “Freedom”.
“Jobs” starts out by meaning investing in rebuilding our failing infrastructures of education, transportation, energy, and healthcare”.
But “Freedom” ultimately means reducing the idiotic and irresponsible grip that a tiny (0.1%) minority has on the productive resources of our society. As wealth is hoovered higher and higher up into fewer and fewer hands, it is less likely to be invested in productive ways. Instead we see casino crisis capitalism which is hurtling us all toward an abyss which may destroy our humanity, never mind or prospects for democracy.
1
I sure hope someone points out to the inexplicably still employed David that the two stories he doesn't hear from Dems anymore, the Mario Cuomo speech and the Gary Hart campaign, were both from 1984.
We lost 49 states that year.
1
I absolutely love it when conservative Republicans like Mr. Brooks try to tell Democrats what they should do when he stayed quiet all those years that the Republicans gave a wink and a nod to the extreme right in their party that partially gave us #45! Please figure out how to develop a message for your party. Leave the Democrats to solve our problems. We will focus on winning-with Conor Lamb in Pennsylvania and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez in New York. As Tip O’Neill once said “All politics is local”
3
Small wonder that, his favored interests having taken all the spoils, David Brooks would now want to seek "reconciliation". No "anger and indignation" for him. He's a winner, after all. The courtiers of this regime have done very well for themselves.
And he'll call the class-free passivity he urges on Democrats "future oriented", since we're all in this together -- if you forget who owns the national wealth.
You can't make this Brooks stuff up, except you can.
Dems need a “savior”. That’s how Trump was viewed by a large enough portion of voters to win (along with the help of Russian hacking). It’s too early to see if one will arise from the streets. But he or she must be someone who inspires, who has a positive vision, and who breaks away from the old guard of Biden, Schumer and Pelosi.
Mr Brooks once gain trots out the false equivalency of a far right Republican party with an imaginary far left Democratic party. The Republican talking heads keep doing this and getting away with it.
The GOP has moved so far to the right that now everything looks left. The likes of Nixon and Ford could not survive with modern Republicans. Mr Brooks' beloved Reagan would struggle in many respects to qualify as a modern Republican.
The simple truth is that we have been taken over by the 1% and it is not good for the majority of Americans. Trickle down has not worked and the next recession will show how far gone we truly are. We are a multicultural society, and we are governed by a load of old white , white haired men who are gerrymandering like crazy to maintain their control. When the fall comes it will be bloody.
2
"Choosing between a focus on race or class is the wrong choice to begin with."
Well, without crying racism where there is actually none, and encouraging class struggle by creating extra-constitutional protected classes, the Democrats have nothing to offer.
"Americans trust business more than the state, so socialism has never played well"
not never, remember FDR. the only way this statement makes sense is if history started with reagan. even so, is it still true? probably for the republican voter but the majority of people in this country can see where capitalism has left them and where it is headed.
"Narrative, story, the message" -- none of it matters if the content is not authentic and truthful.
Every person I know is seriously worried about the cost and availability of health care, for themselves, their family and their friends. Is that so hard to connect up to the environment? Or Medicare, Medicaid, costs of prescription drugs?
Every person I know is seriously worried about their financial future, or that of their children and grandchildren. They know that a good education is essential. They also know it costs money, and can no longer end with high school.
Immigration is a side show in some ways, but has become a litmus test for whether or not one wishes to protect the American way of life and/or jobs. These arguments reek of racism. Our system must be reformed, if for no other reason than the debacle we just witnessed at our southern border.
Most people do not actually like liars and bullies, but they do want to see themselves and their beliefs respected. And they want this country to project strength both from pride (patriotism to some) or fear that a weak U.S. cannot provide the security and financial well being they need.
Focus on the essentials, admit that they are hard to do, require money, and stop bothering with nonsense like getting rid of ICE. Getting rid of racism and hatreds of all kinds -- yes, or at least working toward those goals.
1
It may have once been true, David, that "Americans trust business more than the state, so socialism has never played well".
But if you went and talked to a lot of people younger than 35, I bet you wouldn't be so quick to claim that anymore.
Which is not to say that said cohort necessarily trusts the state very much either. But that's because they realize the state has been bought and co-opted by business, so that both are arrayed against them. Still, they recognize it might be easier to fix the state than to fix business, as a responsive state might well become their ally in their dealings with the excesses of business.
Remember, business has no master except itself, and never will. It's raison d'etre is to maximize itself and its profit, even at the expense of anything else. The state can have the people as its master if it is arranged properly and worked for hard enough. And a people mastered state is the only thing that has ever proven successful at checking the excesses of business.
2
Why on earth would one consult the Clintons and Barack Obama on what the Democratic Party should do? They're not democrats. They're Rockefeller Republicans. Actually to the right of Rockefeller Republicanism. Wolves in sheep's clothing.
1
Democrats might try this story - why aren't Republicans and their evangelical acolytes breathing fire and brimstone about Trump’s moral depredations? They had plenty to say when Obama wore a tan suit.
9
Right on David. This explains what the Dems have to do. Will they? They seem to love this leftish stuff. You've nailed the problem.
1
Poor Mr. Brooks, the voice in the wilderness calling for "reconciliation." But what is there to be reconciled? The "Purple State" notion was good copy, but based on fantasy. The country has always bee (except for a few wars) divided, and what if present today is just another time-related division theme.
There is an intersection between race and class, but Democrats, especially the limo liberals wont accept it. There is no such thing as the "white working class." Does it imply that if one is not white one does not work? Reagan made this a theme in 1980.
Brooks' call for a local, grass roots, community, bottom up, basis for national renewal implies that people of all races and classes should somehow band together for the greater good. But this is blowing smoke given the zoned, exclusive nature of American housing, given the great gaps in funding and the ability of teachers in wealthy and poor school districts, given the presumption that any general benefit will be merely one of redistribution.
The time has long passed when a reality check is in order. Now what is needed is a better understanding of the real divisions in the US and consideration about how to moderate them. No country is "one big, happy family" and it is time to recognize that no realistic proposals for national renewal will be based on that fantasy.
Mr. Brooks,
The Democratic Story is opportunity for all and a better future - just as it always has been.
There is no need for someone in a smoke-filled room to invent a top-down Democratic narrative to which every candidate across the nation blindly adheres. Rather, there are lots of good Democratic candidates running all across the country in races from Senator to dogcatcher - talking about issues that matter locally to their constituents. The specifics of the national message for this point in history will emerge from the bottom-up choices of the voters in each precinct.
Meanwhile, the Republican Party has devolved into the Party of Trump. Mr. Trump won the 2016 election by about 70,000 votes in three states that cemented an electoral college victory - hardly a mandate. There is no need for the Democratic Party to question its message; all the Democrats need to do is get out the vote.
8
There is good advice in this column. I don't see criticism of the many position points democrats stand for, but I agree a unifying "story" is needed to pull it all together under a motivating umbrella message - the alternative to MAGA.
4
David, please stop smoking whatever you are. There is much to be angry about. Wake up. I don't know about your kids, whether they are fully committed to America or not, but my kids are, and they have been concerned about their future, the planet's future. Much of what Bernie educated them on, during the 2015-16 campaign season, resonated with them. They might not agree on everything he says, which as we all know, he has been repeating for 25 years, word by word. You can call it socialism, or leftism or any which category you want to put it under. For them, its their future they are worried about. The environment, education (pre school, secondary, college, university), health insurance, quality of air and water. They are appalled by the christian right, the ultra religious folks (witness Israel putting religious identity before living breathing humans that include non Jewish) and the interpretation these folks toss out as gospel words. You will never get it, because you live in the rarified air of the beltway, although you do make attempts to venture outside and interview regular folks.
7
AS a practicing Realist, and someone from the very very small so called silent generation , born prior to WW 2, of the greatest Generation, a young man in the civil rights era, my take is. The Social Democratic Welfare State Model championed by the prior Democratic party, offered something for everyone, but when infused with so called Globalization by the elites, it never delivered. Hard to believe even with an orator like Obama, and a Clinton asked to carry the ball how the Democrats ignored their life long traditional base. Now the likes of a Bernie Sanders and his new side kick lady from NY are picking up the pieces.
2
"In brief, Democrats have stayed away from this narrative because the long hoped-for alliance between oppressed racial minorities and the oppressed white working class has never materialized, and it looks very far from materializing now."
This is called fusion politics. This delivered the North Carolina governorship to th Democrats. See Reverend William Barber's writings.
2
As usual, a right wing writer starts off with a false premise, Brooks says we have a choice between race and class; he's wrong.
What does race have to do with class and what is class anyway? Am I high class if I have billions and low class if I can't afford to eat? If you think you're better than me because you're white and I'm black, that makes you a bigot, it doesn't mean you're higher class than me.
Criticism that relies on labels is fake; you have to articulate the actual issues David. I will vote for:
- Less wealth imbalance which probably means higher taxes implemented progressively as you earn more
- Health care as a right paid for my the government out of tax revenues - private health insurance can continue as a top up such as in medicare advantage plans
- Equal education opportunities for all which are based on merit, not wealth
- Get religion out of government
- Allow voters to pick their politicians, not the opposite
- Protect our planet and listen to the best science there is when deciding how to go about that
13
With all due respect Mr. Brooks, this column reads like an exercise in concern trolling.
You want a simple message? “Make America Work Again”. E pluribus unum.
Two things you did not mention.
The Republican response will be lies, smears, resentment and division. Elections will be rigged, with and without Russian help. Fox News and talk radio will go even more bonkers. Democrats must be prepared for an assault like none they’ve. There are those on the right who are now openly calling for violence to stay in power.
The other thing is Climate Change. It’s real, it’s happening now, and it is going to get much, much worse. The Republican response to that is going to be about as effective as their response to Katrina and Puerto Rico - except millions will be affected in the years to come, and it won’t stop.
So here is another possible message for Democrats: “Do you want to live?”
6
David,
Ah...those elite Democrats have left middle American behind...but the reality is just the opposite. It is the "Bait and Switch Scam of the Republican Party that has actually failed middle America. It is no charade that they very quickly passed legislation to protect the monies of the 1% and big Corporations. Middle America got a fig leaf and the shaft. Of course, they did get the usual dog whistle of racism on top of abortion, guns and religion. The Republicans are systematically destroying the Unions, Education and Healthcare, three items that middle Americans desperately need.
I do concede that the base supporters are enthralled by the circus act of the con man, trump. The masses love the gladiator who slays the lions and yells, "lock "em up". Maybe they will eventually notice that this charade holds nothing good or worthwhile for the survival or betterment of their lives.
2
David, I agree with your thesis that success for the Democratic Party is best achieved by appealing to the future and building community to promote our children’s future. What I do not understand is how removing the impediments to the realization of social justice is not serving the first goal? The institutional racism that serves to keep minority communities in poverty and struggle ironically rebounds against poor white communities as well even as they embrace white ‘privilege’ as the one thing separating them from the hopelessness of their black and brown peers. Ending racism in all its manifestations is the only hope we have of lifting black and white alike out of poverty. Bobby Kennedy knew this when he finally opened his eyes and embraced the message of MLK. Perhaps Ms. Ocasio-Cortez and her message will open our eyes today; and her example will inspire us.
PS: David, thanks for reminding me that I was indeed fortunate to have studied moral philosophy with Alasdair MacIntyre, a giant in the field who single-handedly inspired me to switch my undergraduate major to philosophy, to embrace excellence, and inspired in me, to paraphrase Kant, the wonder that is the starry heaven above and the moral law within.
3
Wisest, saddest, most optimistic column Mr. Brooks has ever written, at least of the ones I've read, and I've been reading for a long time. I'm tired of waking up every morning to read the NYT and be disappointed. Can't we be better than this?
3
The only story that Democrats need to pitch today is one of honesty and competence.
6
Unfortunately, the story the democrats tell can't be too abstract---which, in this piece all talk of race, class, or even Mr. Brooks talk of an optimistic story filled with grand New Deal goals.. No, the story that needs to be told consists of three parts: gilded age corruption--destruction of health care/medicare---and a tax bill leaving corporations and the 1% with the entire economic pie. Each of these pieces is easy to prove, very emotional, and takes the low road, which is the only road you can fight Trump on.
6
Whatever the Democrats have run on, they've been the weaker of the two parties ever since Reagan. Yes, they win the presidency periodically, but they've struggled to control Congress and because of that have lost the Courts too.
Reagan changed everything when he said "In the present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem, it is the problem." Before that time, Americans still believed in the power of government to make things better. FDR had shown what a strong federal government could accomplish, and Americans rallied around the New Deal. With Reagan, skepticism about government replaced optimism about it.
Today we have a new twist. Trump isn't skeptical about government. He's skeptical about democracy. Authoritarianism, government by a strong man, Putinism seems to be his ideal—and many Americans seem content to rally behind this false messiah.
To save the Republic (if it's salvageable) the Democrats somehow need to restore Americans' faith in the power of democratic government to make the lives of Americans better. I'm not sure how they do that, but the stakes are high. If the Democrats fail, Reagan's skepticism about our democratic government may very well be shown to have paved the path not toward small government, but toward authoritarianism.
4
Tell me what you think of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Economic Bill if Rights:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
12
@Len Charlap - Oh dear, sorry. I will be 80 in 8 days so I get confused some times. That was FDR's Economic Bill of Rights proposed in in his State of the Union address Jan 11, 1944.
But then it is easy to get confused in this case.
2
@Len Charlap
All sounds quite wonderful, but I must point out something perhaps inconvenient for Trump-opponents
(of which I am decidedly one):
<<The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad>> is completely incompatible with Free Trade. I don't see how it wouldn't require significant trade barriers including tariffs. "Unfair competition" would of course be taken as synonymous with lower foreign wages.
@Bill Clarke - Nobody except Trump claims to be in favor of absolute "free trade." (and, of course, a claim by Trump is worthless.) There have to be regulations. Experts are upset because Trump is wrecking the existing world order.
And read more carefully. FDR only talked about unfair competition and domination BY MONOPOLIES. There was nothing about lower foreign wages.
As usual, Mr. Brooks goes for the goodthinkful rather than the historically accurate. In the last twenty years, when Democrats pushed for programs in the interest of families, Republicans used the mantra of tax cuts and religious mumbo jumbo to divert attention and favor the most affluent, often with the support of Mr. Brooks and his colleagues. Now, he wants Democrats to play nice with the evangelicals and the Koch Brothers.
7
There are two kinds of Democrats, those who want to win arguments and those who want to win elections. Ocasio-Cortez is right that there is not a single economic issue that does not have a racial component. Why? Brooks mentions it: Because the right has been effective at creating a wedge between working class whites and everyone else.
No one is going to win an election by assembling a coalition of minorities and even if such an election could be won, whatever progress was made by such a government would be overturned in the next election cycle by a Trump like candidate able to stoke white resentment. Affirmative action, things that are perceived as special privileges for one group at the expense of another will simply not work in this country and electoral messages based on it are bound to fail, if not in the short term then certainly in the long one.
Democratic Socialism along the lines of the Canadian or European model could work as an electoral message if the messenger is the right one and talk of race, ethnicity, etc. are left out of the discourse. To sum it up... Yes, Ocasio-Cortez analysis is correct but outside of a few districts in New York City it's not going to win elections. So we have to ask ourselves, do we want to win arguments or do we want to win elections?
3
Trump did not get the story right for the majority of US voters who cast their vote for Mrs. Clinton. The voters who went for Trump find it easier to blame others for what they view as their disadvantaged position. It is certainly easier to blame others than accept personal responsibility for failure to thrive. Trump has blamed and continues to blame others for his mistakes.
3
Your words are too true in our society generally and in the
never-ending political season: "You can get a lot of facts wrong if you get your story right." and "Story is more important than policies." Although I agree and understand the power of storytelling and the value of stories in communication and campaigning, I am working to maintain the attention of my family and myself on the importance of our democratic institutions and the need to employ and elect professionals who understand and honor our institutions and who will draft and pursue good sound policy and who resist tyranny.
3
The economic reality of the New, Improved Oligarchy owning and controlling the vast majority of everything is that the working class (that is, those who depend on their labor and health to keep them solvent from paycheck-to-paycheck) will never catch up to those who derive a majority of their income from rents, investments, and compound interest.
Add to this the constant struggle against class and racial dismissal of human worth, and you have millions of good people bravely trying to get themselves up from the ground and gain a modicum of human, social, and economic dignity.
Why can't we all just get along with the rich being a bit richer than most, the middle class having a reasonably comfortable life, and the working class having the opportunity to work their way up. Why do the mega-rich feel they have to win it all and leave everybody, literally, in their dust of crumbling cities and environments.
Why this dark vision of what life is supposed to be for 90% of the population?
3
@Al Mostonest I agree that the need for the super rich to be even richer does not make sense. Does it make them happier knowing that they are denying a decent quality of life to millions of people? Does greed dominate everything? How many one percenters really care about having more at the expense of the many? I don't know the answers but I see the impact of their disproportionate influence on the Republican party and that has to be stopped for the sake of everyone.
If I could advise my party, the Democrats, I would say stop mimicking the GOP's divide and conquer strategy, and instead talk about why uplifting all boats including the rich, educated, poorly educated, working poor, non working poor, the haves and have nots, the evangelicals and the non believers, etc., is not only important but critical. Stop demonizing the upper class as they are absolutely required as part of the solution. Make the case to working whites why it is beneficial to them to support policies that help minorities and immigration, instead of moralizing to them. Realize that good policy should be supported even if the other side does it, like Medicare Part D passed by Bush and the Republicans, but improved significantly later under Obamacare.
If Democrats could just stop the moralizing (rich and successful people = bad, immigration = good, college graduates = good) and instead appeal to the peoples' economic best interest and sense of economic security and sense of well-being they could be the majority party. For example, explain to lower middle class whites why supporting Affirmative Action is in their and their children's best interest, instead of telling them it is just the right thing to do. Same with immigration, etc.
4
The problem with this article Mr. brooks is that you rely too much on vague and archaic versions of ideologies like socialism. This is often a problem with any arbitrary title. If you listen deeper though, you hear the real story.
That story is multifaceted, but has its roots in the migration back to a class society fostered by conservatives, especially movement conservatives. The so called upper class have managed to secure very sound footing since they started concentrating their influence beginning around the Reagan administration. This has resulted in a very unbalanced system that does not truly embrace democracy.
So please, stop using vague terms like "socialism" to describe something much more nuanced as the movements to end the burgeoning class struggle.
1
@Jim It's also telling that he leaves out the democratic part when invoking socialism. There's a big difference bewteen domeocrtic socialist Sweden and socialist China.
2
I don’t recognize these two stories you speak of, not in my Democratic Party. Instead the story I hear and embrace is the story of becoming — of constantly striving to create that more perfect Union; of coming together regardless of whatever identities we may have or had and partaking in the great group project that’s greater than ourselves to create a better future, for ourselves and our posterity.
5
The Democratic narrative must focus on what unites us. Focusing on the future is too amorphous for the angry voters who are struggling in the present.
The story is of an America who wants the best education for their children and college that is affordable for all. The story of an America in which people don't have to struggle to pay for healthcare and for their lifesaving medications. The story of an America in which there is a living wage so there is no such thing as the working poor. The story of an America that provides jobs to all rebuilding our aging infrastructure, so that it is a gleaming example for the world. The story must focus on the light and not the darkness.
No stories of identity politics, no stories of oppression, no anti-Trump stories, no stories of eliminating ICE, no stories of socialism. Dems will be battling the Republican narrative that Donald the Savior brought unprecedented economic health and a booming stock market. People vote with their pocketbooks. They will ask: Am I better off than I was under Obama and the answer will not be good for Dems. The narrative has to focus on problems that haven't been solved, whose solutions would benefit all.
We are the United States of America - with the focus on what unites us. A house divided against itself can not stand. Period. There is no other story the Dems can tell.
1
Bernie Sanders and Ms. Ocasio-Cortez as paradigms of Democratic thinking these days is off and not fair. Neither Sanders nor Ocasio-Cortez are Democrats but Democratic Socialists. The Democratic Party is not now nor ever has been a socialist Party.
Socialism believes in preempting capitalism with state run solutions. The Democratic Party has always believed in government acting where private markets won't or cannot act, that is, in augmenting capitalism, not replacing it.
Single payer Medicare for all is a socialist idea. Why? It does not augment the private insurance industry by replaces it with a government insurance program.
Medicare and Medicaid, health insurance for old or poor people are areas where the market does not reach. Private carriers do not want old or poor insureds, so the Government can act and the Democratic Party did.
This is where the Party needs to go. Back to its roots of serving the people in areas where the market economy does not go. SBA for folks who need help getting business loans; rural electrification; infrastructure; basic research; job training. All of the economic areas where private capital will not go because it does not want the risk. As with the internet, private capital can use the infrastructure government develops to grow the economy, but government is the seed money for that. This is my Democratic Party, not one that redistributes wealth, but one that plants the seeds that allow for its growth.
11
@Beiruti - Sure, and police and fire protection are government programs and are, by your thinking, socialist.
And public education.
What Beiruti does not understand is that there are some things that the market does best, but others like police and fire protection and health care that government does best.
The data are overwhelming:
All other industrialized countries have some form of universal government run health care, mostly single payor. They get better care as measured by all 16 of the bottom line public health statistics, and they do it at 40% of the cost per person. If our system were as efficient, we would save over $1.5 TRILLION each year.
www.pnhp.org & www.oecd.org & especially https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/data/oecd-h...
Some data:
Here are the per capita figures for health care costs in 2016 in PPP dollars:
US - 9507.2
Austria - 5227.3
Belgium - 4839.8
France - 4500.4
Germany - 5550.6
Luxembourg - 7462.8
The Netherlands - 5385.4
Switzerland - 7919.0
Sweden - 5487.5
Denmark - 5199.3
UK - 4192.5
Canada - 4643.7
OECD Average - 4003
Let's compare some bottom line statistics between the US and the UK which has real socialized medicine.
Life expectancy at birth: UK - 81.1 US - 78.8
Infant Mortality (Deaths per 1,000): UK - 3.8 US - 6.0
Maternal Mortality (WHO): UK - 9 US - 14
As Einstein said,
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
7
@Beiruti: Judging by the way the 2016 primaries were conducted, they weren't even "democratic." BTW, reread your comment and resubmit it after you have eliminated the contradictions, e.g., praise of enterprise and avoidance of risk. Are you saying capitalism is great when the risks are low, but where they exist, risk should be socialized?
@Beiruti
I disagree with your assessment of the Democratic party. In the the past, it has moved far left when the market economy failed to provide for our common welfare as happened during the depression. During that last 30 years, democratic centrism and positivism may have been good for business and innovation but it has allowed a far right-ward drift that makes many of today's centrist positions look like a Republican dream of just a few decades ago. Our version of capitalism is serving fewer and fewer of our population these days so a democratic-socialist shift is needed to put our system back in balance.
Bill Clinton won in 1992 because he talked about how we should focus on hope, not fear.
Donald Trump won because he elevated fear above all else, and Hillary Clinton had no competing narrative to cut through Trump's noisy emotional message.
I usually find David Brooks' commentaries too "one-or-the other," and don't like that he doesn't take a side. Democrats need to ask voters to think not just about themselves today, but about their children and grandchildren, and their whole communities ten or twenty years from now.
2
@ aldomir Hey I believe we need to ask Republicans to think about their children too!
<no sarcasm>
David B. ,
To achieve what you say you want to achieve, you have to start by using more pragmatism, and less ideology. It you are not paying attention to the evidence.
You came up with good stories, but you missed the reality of the stories you criticize. The reality is, by the data, we have a shrinking middle class threatening our economy, by destroying the consumer demand engine we depend on, and the integrity our politics, because the money entering politics is heavily weighted for special interests. See EPI's report.
The other story that you have interpreted oddly as a question of, "identity politics," relates to bringing everyone to sitting at the economic table, not having to crawl under it, and structuring in a fairer meritocracy for ll. If you wish all citizens to be able to prove themselves as thrifty, smart, and industrious workers, you need to make sure that everyone can reach the bottom rungs of the ladder. Right now, the statistics are showing that millions of people, because they are living had to mouth, because they are surrounded by despair circumstance, because their school is not as good as the schools you attended, they can't get to those first rungs. We shouldn't have a society that works against some people, while ferrying an easier ride for others. The racial and cultural factors are just incidental to this larger discussion. Stop following the rabbits.
2
One reason American has a problem developing a unifying story is that we were founded on the principle of the value of the individual. As we are all immigrants, except for Native Americans, we have varied stories coming from different backgrounds and places. The predominate story then becomes, "Me First." So until we can say, "For the Greater Good" we will not be united. As the old adage says, " A house divided against itself will fall."
1
I had proposed to the Clinton Team to use "Fair Play" as their slogan but apparently had not been very persuasive. Fair Play capitalizes on the importance of sports in the American society, it captures the inequality stemming from an unfair distribution of wealth, the lacking social upward mobility, unfair trade practices, the grotesque impact of money/contributions by the rich in all sorts of elections, etc., etc. If everybody practiced fair play we would be a more just society and differences in social status, etc. would be accepted much more readily and broadly.
4
As a Democrat, yes, I am angry about the state of our national politics. But, I want candidates who can not only express righteous anger over what has gone so wrong, I want candidates who can paint a unifying vision of what is and can be right. Dream big Democrats! We need great storytellers who can tell stories that are true and inspiring. In the face of climate destruction, income inequality, and more - what are the stories that move us forward?
8
In my long memories I seem to recall that the Democratic Party's stories in the past have all focused in some part on hope. Hope is an essential part of politics. In some ways the greatest part of the malaise most Americans are experiencing now is the absence of this hope.
If there is any good that can come out of the Trump Administration I think it will be the fact that we have been made aware of the very soft underbelly of our democracy. We have seen what a President with too much authority can do; what a government structure without horizontal oversights can allow; and what a politicized judicial system might compromise. We can hope to change that soon.
I like the story you presented very much. What won't a parent do for its children? We can bring back the hope for them and for us.
2
Democrats continue the be the world's largest "unorganized party." They certainly have failed not only to "get their story straight," but to come up with any story at all that appeals to the majority of voters. And then they got complacent and just rolled with the corporate and social elites...right down the hill to massive defeats.
The oldest and best story of Democrats and progressives was that they really were for "the common people," and they could articulate how and why they would back up their slogans with action. Democrats desperately need to get their story straight, and get it right.
3
Ocasio-Cortez won because she is a charismatic candidate. With a message that a lot pf people can resonate with: young people and (formerly) middle class people, both of whom face a dim future under either party now.
2
@Nancy
I agree and I also think she won because she is authentic.. ..she is not afraid to speak the truth and to lay it out in plain and simple facts....couple that with her charisma and it's a win
I see one way to reconcile the traditional Democratic compassion story and meritocracy story: into an anti-nationalism story. Nationalism contradicts both compassion (because it means the oppression of people who were born into a weaker nationality), *and* meritocracy (because it means people earn positions of profit and power based on their nationality rather than merit). Yet nationalism is the animating force behind the Republican Party, so that should be opposed. Of course, the Democrats do not need to take an extreme position--nationalism is a matter of degree just like everything else. But this article's nationalist frame ("the core long-term fear is American decline"; "we need a series of unifying projects to make national progress") contradicts both of the two traditional Democratic stories, and is therefore exactly the wrong way to go.
1
Most Americans want to elect a President who will further American interests as they see them. Talking about a global meritocracy potentially at the expense of America is a loser, and rightfully so.
Thank you, David. Agreed that Democrats need to put together a coherent story.
I'm a strong believer that in 2020, or 2024, President Trump's predecessor shouldn't adopt an administration aimed at undoing everything done in his time. 1 + -1 is not going to move this country forward.
I feel the same way about strong leftist messaging, i.e. borderline socialist policies. Headed from extreme red to extreme blue is not going to result in an agenda adopted by our nation's leaders.
Surely there must be a centrist message, imploring the economic necessity of immigration, coupled with appropriate tax reform and curbed government spending.
Times are uncertain and, despite the chagrin of many, we need to push forward with what we have (not undo it) if we hope to remain competitive and respected on the global stage.
1
Mr. Brooks, you have a point. Democrats need to generate an uplifting and forward looking message. America's middle class can prosper and raise its standard of living without sacrificing the future of our children or ravaging the environment. Education, science and technology can do much in leading the way. Democrats should also call out Trump. His attacks on our friends and allies will make us less safe, the ballooning deficit to pay a tax cut for the rich will be a burden for our children, his ignorance of science and facts will ruin the prospects for our children, his environmental policies will affect our children more old people like him who will be dead when the damage will become obvious. They also need to call out his lies and attempted suppression of the free press as an attack on our freedom.
1
Brooks is a master of irony, even if the irony in today's column was not intentional. He tells Democrats to avoid a divisive electoral strategy after years of Republican victories achieved through, yes, a divisive strategy! For decades Republicans have pitted white working class voters against blacks and Latinos and waged a culture war pitting evangelical Christians against their more liberal brethren and secularists. They pursued this strategy because it worked, culminating in the election of Donald Trump, who might just be the most divisive president we've ever had.
I sympathize with Brooks's desire for a less angry politics. I, too, long for a politics that heals the nation's wounds and brings us together to work toward common goals. But uniting an electorate as diverse as the American people is a daunting task. Trump and the Republicans have figured out that you can win elections by creating solidarity within a portion of the electorate. And the way they've united their voters behind a common cause is by giving them an enemy to hate and fear.
Brooks overlooks the Republican narrative and its frightening success, perhaps because of its success. Anyone who wants to see the triumph of a story that "pushes people toward reconciliation" should be disturbed by Trump's example, which shows that power can be won by pushing people apart. Countering that narrative will not be easy, because the fault lines in American society, though not insurmountable, are real.
7
@Stephen N
Trump was not the first to push people apart.
The liberals did that.
They did that when they told people like me that we have white privilege.
Everything I have I earned.
Everything I have could have been had by many others which includes black people if they did the right thing.
I worked in a office that had many black people working there.
They had the same income I had.
They spent it and I saved it and invested it.
I now have money in the bank and they don't.
I did not have any privileges but by saying I did. did push me apart.
Telling me I can't pass my money to my children did push me apart.
I didn't like Trump but I did support his travel ban
Calling me a racist did push me apart.
This didn't end with me.
Calling people despicable and uneducated and racist because they live in a red state and are white did push people apart.
The liberals pushed people apart
Trump used that fact to defeat those liberals.
Now the liberals will have to try to undo what they have done.
If they don't then Trump will win again.
I'm not sure we need overarching principles. We need to be tactical. We have to counter the fear tactics used by Trump with rationality and optimism. We have to stop taking the bait and getting our nose out of joint. Campaign on what's popular enough to get you in office. Healthcare, student debt, a return to civility. In that regard, be more like the Republicans. Don't like ICE? Don't make a campaign issue on getting rid of it. That's a losing proposition. Just wait til you're in power and defund it.
1
Whatever future we're walking into isn't going to be pleasant with all the debt we've accumulated. Smug, wealthy hacks like McConnell and Ryan have saddled future generations with financial deficits that will hobble this country for a long, long time. It's already happening. Like whenever this administration schedules an "infrastructure week", nothing happens.
1
Unprecedented because we are in the era of an anger that was there but Trump exacerbated and won the elections. To fight for their children, they have to fight for themselves first.
So we are in a territory where a white "billionaire", with a conservative party support, brings out frustration and sometimes hate to voters in order to the White House (maybe with foreign aid, the jury is still out there).
But when a non-white female wins a candidacy because of her ties to the community and a socialist platform that is risky and does not "play well". What I see is many frustrated and angry people that want access to a decent life and they are young and they vote. By the way, Trump is indeed, the villain.
3
I do not want to lose an election because my Democratic candidate bit into a pussyfooting strategy of boring centrism and the adoption of vanilla issues. Republican Lite? Don't think for a nanosecond this will unseat Trump. Find a candidate with some Bobby Kennedy daring. Excite the masses. Give the majority of Americans a choice, a clear alternative to the nightmare in the Oval Office, embodied in a woman or man who speaks of things like an America we can become. What is so wrong with Medicare for all, racial reconciliation, tuition free college and vocational schools and free trade? All that has an FDR ring to it.
17
@Doc
The country is unprepared for a radical. The country first needs to be united. Then go from there.
What’s wrong with your wish list of policies is that most Americans are happy with their employer provided coverage and don’t want to give it up for a government plan, and the rest of your stuff amounts to free stuff that everyone knows has to be paid for. Sure, you can try to stoke class resentment and claim that the “rich” will be forced to buy it all, but that runs contrary to actual facts, where the middle class will have to foot some of the bill. Throw in some racial animosity and you lose.
It also has a pollyanish quality of pie-in-the-sky -ism. Free college, free health on whose dime? Are we talking socialism,.. or just good American political huxterism?
2
Bernie Sanders ran an effective campaign in 2015-16 trying to unite the country on racial and economic justice, health care for everyone regardless of wealth, protection of the environment and ending senseless wars overseas.
He was better prepared to take on a bully like Trump than all of the Republican and Democratic candidates combined.
3
@JT FLORIDA
He lost.
2
@Rita if Democrats had open primaries he would have won. Independent is now the largest party. Unless we recognize that we are doomed.
Some issues are indeed too toxic to headline a political campaign. Stick to the broad, feel good themes of restoring America and our leadership in the world. Build a better future. Restore the economic future that lifted up the 'average' person. It is the economy, stupid. Lead the global economy. Positive messaging. A President who tells the whole truth and rises above petty personal politics.
Americans are tired of ..... Mr. Trump. But he will fall of his own weight and hubris. Honest Americans will quietly reject the radical right fringe candidates and issues. We don't need to remind them of how divisive, and silly really, it is to jail young children and to act the petulant bully on the international stage.
1
The answer is so simple for the dems. The country longs for a middle of the road uniter. He would win in a landslide.
5
@alan frank
AGREED!!!!
Most Americans are embarrased and disgusted by Trump and are angry that the Republican Senate and Congressional leadership abdicated its responsibility to provide a check on the President. When Democrats (and many Republicans) go to the polls in the midterms, their message will be a very simple and very loud--NO! It will simply be a "no" vote. No other message is necessary.
1
I'm all for solid policy ideas that include some of the ideas of the "further" left. However, there is no actual "trend" toward far-leftism. In fact, of the elections and special elections since 2016 that were won by Democrats (~70% of all such elections), the vast majority were won by centrist Democrats - NOT far-left Democrats, many of whom barely got double-digit percentages. / This is not to say that far-left Democrats do not have good, important ideas that should be included in any Democratic platform. However, all too many of the far-left progressives insist on a form of "purity" test vis-a-vis far-left policies (as a whole). I believe this is dangerous, and, along with what is almost certain to be GOP dirty tricks, voter suppression, and Russian interference, such a "purity" test may end up costing us the House in 2018 - and almost certainly the presidency in 2020. / If progressives are unwilling to find "common ground" with centrist Democrats - and not simply demand allegiance to all of their ideas - we will end up with another 2 years of GOP control of both houses, and the re-election in 2020 of the most dangerous man ever to sit in the White House.
8
Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez is exactly advocating for what your piece closes with, which, ICYMI, are all progressive manifestations of the ideals on which this country was ostensibly founded.
Of course, beneath the veneer of the Declaration of Independence and other founding texts the early American elites offered a proposition that built the world's first multi-class coalition cleaved on race (and gender, religion, sexual preference, etc.). That coalition is splintering- and hence the elites’ handwringing when a brown person’s voice gains traction-, and no thanks to the Dems who abandonned their anti-trust stance borne of the Great Depression: as long as consumer prices are low, all is OK, including losing union jobs to free trade, and banks too big to fail or prosecute. Corporate power soared, government no longer works for people, and thus, as you write, Americans hardly trust the state. Here comes autocracy.
Public policies that would help black and brown people would also help poor whites as well. There *can* be a multi-racial coalition that addresses the needs of the poor and working class, and, these days, the middle class (MLK’s Poor People’s Campaign anyone?).
This needn't be a zero sum game, that whites must give up some for blacks. Instead, the elite can give up some for poor whites and poor blacks. To frame this as a zero sum game between the races is exactly the dilemma that the elites would use to keep us all paralyzed. Don’t push their story, Mr Brooks.
2
Democrats first and over riding concern has to be getting young voters to the polls as if their lives depended upon it because it very well might. Republicans are ok with eliminating any kind of affordable healthcare and younger Americans are much more likely to be part of the gig economy with no employer healthcare. Add in any kind of Pre existing condition protection and there you have the perfect storm of either lifetime alerting debt or death from a brush with cancer or any number of other diseases.
Now how do we get this message into the heads of 20-40 year olds I will leave to that generation of progressives.
3
@Chris - What if the young voters get to the polls and vote for Trump? Think it can't happen? They are young and impressionable.
While Brooks is probably right about this, I really hate "story". My House Representative is a finance guy who is always bringing up his hard life story as if that is the sole reason we should vote for him. It's transparently cynical and I am sick of it. It's about POLICY, about what works best for the most amount of people, about the balancing of policy. Make THAT the story.
1
How about telling the truth for a change? America is unable, among all the OECD nations, to find the political support for universal healthcare, or to find the political will to care for its poor children and maintain basic food and housing security for those who struggle to keep up, or to to find the political will to actually address the human causes of climate change in its domestic policies. Why is that? America has the highest rate of incarceration among all the nations of the world, mostly affecting blacks and hispanics, while it privileges corporations over individuals in invidious ways that make life miserable for much of working class society. Why is that? America's response to the crack epidemic in inner city black populations was a "war against drugs" and stiff jail sentences, while its response to the opioid crisis among rural whites is to focus on root causes and healthcare solutions. Why is that? Just speaking personally, I don't need another story that glosses over the deep challenges we face as a nation. We are racist, sexist, xenophobic and anti-intellectual. We are self-centered to the point of being a nation of narcissists. We are a deeply sick society. Donald Trump is merely a reflection of that sickness. If Americans won't vote for someone who tells them the truth, they deserve another 4 years of Donald Trump.
43
@Jack
That's your version of the truth.
It's not my version.
The purpose of government is not to do those things you assume it should do.
Don't attack me because I believe that.
Do not call me a narcissist or a racist or anything as you do not know me.
Even if it was true I do have the right to have a opinion
and you should respect that just like I think you are wrong
and I respect you.
My greatest fear is that the democrats will do again what they did in the last election and not address the issue of immigration. Eliminating ICE is not a platform that can win and if the democrats lose, I don't think the country can survive four more years of Trump. The democrats need to unite and stop bickering amongst themselves. They couldn't manage it last time and the country ended up with the biggest clown in the crowded clown car. As Trump has proven, no matter what he says or does, his base remains loyal. They don't care about facts and even as he empties the countries pockets, they are unmoved. The democrats need to do some soul searching and come up with a platform that appeals not just to the left, but also to the middle.
9
Mr. Brooks is busy writing about minor differences between left of center and further left of center. He should be writing about the failure of the Republican Congress to obey their Constitutional oath:
“I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
The Republicans in Congress give their undying loyalty to Donald Trump who violates the Constitution daily with his continued subservience to Vladimir Putin at the expense of US sovereignty and honor among nations. Trump is now threatening war with Iran and the destruction of the United States security agencies who have justly criticized him for handing state secrets over to Putin and other moves that strengthen Russia in their efforts to undermine our country.
Why isn't Mr. Brooks writing about the need for Republicans to show even the faintest signs of patriotism by removing mad dog Trump before it is too late. Our nation is in peril Mr. Brooks. Sound the alarm bells first and foremost then worry about the Hillary/Bernie debate again.
3
@jefflz
Trump has not violated the Constitution any more than Obama did.
Charging people money because they didn't want the health insurance he demanded they have was not a tax and was unconstitutional.
Trump has done nothing that has threatened this country and that includes his the statement that he made about Putin.
The state secret he told the Russians did not threaten the USA.
It could have threatened Israel.
Since they don't care then neither should we.
This mad dog won the election
He should not be removed.
That is why Brooks does not mention it.
Brooks is telling you how to defeat him in the next election.
You can listen to him and have a good chance that you will defeat Trump in the next election or ignore his advice and lose to Trump.
As a Dem and liberal, I firmly believe in progressive ideals and for fighting for working people and people in unfortunate circumstances and, indeed, for intelligent immigration reform and nationalized health care. No one can accuse me of being "unpatriotic" or misguided.
Unfortunately, those with the loudest voices today are featured in the NYT article today titled "Tariffs Trim a Factory's Profit, but Loyalty to Trump Endures." I find it hard to believe in the "other side" when they themselves, in spite of facts, vote against their own self interests. Why should we accept their worldview?
1
I'll take Mr Brooks' recent turn to telling Democrats how to think and act as decisive proof that he has given up on mainstream political conservatism. While I congratulate him on the latter, I am unsure he is in a good position to carry out the former in good faith. Rather than joining the chorus of old white guys pleading with Democratic strategists to stop "pandering" to "minority" votes, he could consider encouraging them to go to the people and find out what they actually want. This is the real reason for Ocasio-Cortez's popularity - her ability to organize and communicate - not some delicious, exotic cocktail of civil rights and socialism.
1
Part of the Democrats' problem under Obama is that they refused to tell their story. Providing health care for millions who could never afford it before is a great story line. But where was Obama when he needed to be promoting that story to the world? Same with guns. Democrats should be proud of what they stand for, not ashamed of it.
1
I see both the Democratic and Republican story way differently from this. He is not being disingenuous when he says this was written hopping for middle ground today, but he still flowers with his normal blindness’s. He is blind to the vast increase in income inequality in the donor class in the past 40 years. Why this blindness is so deeply rooted and intractable escapes me. Why can’t he read a few good macroeconomic books?
He thinks he is trying, but he does have to lean on his socialist’s denigration crutch. Don’t use that gimmick and the democratic economic message remains clear, they continue as ever to offer a helping hand, they continue to believe in Yankee ingenuity and technology, and continues to believe capitalism must be regulated to penalize cheating. With years of Republican abuse that last part is more important than ever. He claims Americans support business more than government. If true that is only because the hundreds of millions of dollars of propaganda the alt right. By far the least trustworthy are the billionaire right donors.
As for his Republican messaging it would be great to rebuild our communities after the wreckages of decent pay, of living wages, for decades by Republican trickle economic schemes. It might be a good con line, would appeal to many honest good Republican voter, but would never get the ok from the Republican donor class and hence would never receive a vote.
5
Good commentary! Thanks David. On the other hand the Republican party {of and before Trump} has uniquely blended race and class arguments together: The race argument was lazy "takers" at home and foreign, perhaps dangerous, interlopers from abroad were using up our good and leaving only the bad; this was orchestrated by superior elites of the "deep state." I'm not sure that a hopeful "story" can stand up against reactionary fact-adverse paranoia. But the mid-term elections will be decided locally. It will be more important for the 2020 election for the Democrats to come up with a national story. I think it will need to be a blend of anger and hope.
1
Never-Trump conservatives advising Democrats is a new cottage industry these days. Comey warns us “Lordy, don’t go too far left.” Brooks reminds us that business/jobs resonates better than racial/social justice messaging. Facing the stomach churning possibility of six more years of Trump, we had all better triage our hopes and dreams and come up with a practical game plan. This is the electoral emergency of our lifetime.
I have two responses for Brooks, Comey and friends:
1) Thanks for thinking of us. Wish you might have had the lightbulb turn on a little sooner, say BEFORE you sent that letter to Congress right before the election. But let’s let bygones be bygones and face the future. We will do our best to think through the conservative advice pouring in, and the message that we need a good message is duly noted. It is hard, though, to be told that the inequity and injustice we have always fought against might need to be put on the back burner for a while. Would you volunteer, in your new spirit of Dem cheerleaders, to deliver that message to the families with no health insurance or the child in a cage whose mom has somehow been lost track of? If you guys would do the heavy lifting, that would free us up for the philosophical part of the job.
2) Can you please do something about Fox News? My 84 year old mother was so relieved that the release of the FISA warrant “vindicated” Devin Nunes and Trump. Apparently that full page footnote didn’t get much airtime there.
2
Failing our future is apropos; look at the deficit we are saddling our children with....and thus depriving them of the opportunity, not to move forward, but to even remain stationary. Schools, health care, infrastructure.....all are tossed away to give corporations and the already wealthy more money. Adding to the present narrative is Trump's own blend of cruelty, racism and striving for personal gain regardless who you mow down in the process. Can any American actually accept as policy the present one of separating children and putting them into prison environments....with not even the rudimentary thought of recording their parents and with no thought to their future other than separation/incarceration? Any government that does this can also deprive our own children just as callously.
4
Why is Mr. Brooks discussing the pros and cons of various positions within the Democratic party when for the upcoming election at least, the overwhelming reason to vote Democratic is to put some sort of check on the power on the corrupt and incompetent Republican President currently in office. Policy discussions are only worthwhile if both sides are interested in improving Americans' quality of life. When one of the parties' leaders is a corrupt foolish bigot, the only initiative worth discussing is the need to remove him from office and only the Democratic party is currently offering that possibility.
1
Mr. Brooks who should be defending the equality and voting rights, health coverage for all, progressive tax code which does not reward the wealthiest 5% among us, selection of judges who are owned by corporations and people like Koch Brothers, promote laws and regulations to protect the Environment, stand up to gerrymandering and oppose the bully who occupies the White House? I do not believe you would do that or Democrat who supported predominantly by corporation will do that. I am hoping the majority of American people will not be deterred and frightened by so called moderates or centre right columnists and pundits like you.
@Hoshiar - The wealthiest 5% are those with a household AGI greater than $188,996. They filed 6,978,102 returns. They had 35.96% of the total AGI, and paid 59.97% of all taxes. Their average tax rate was 23.61%, which is higher than the groups below them - the bottom 50%, for example, paid 3.45%.
1