Mr. Brooks,
I object to you using the initials "MBS" for a handy version of the full name: Crown Prince Mohamed bin Salam. Sure it is shorter and requires less time, but we in America have reserved the popularization of a person's name with merely their initials to a very few Americans: FDR, JFK, JBJ, MLK, and lately RBG. Indeed it is the Saudi Prince himself through a public relations efforts who seeks to be referred to in this familiar way. We certainly do not want to acquiesce in such a public relations scam.
This was the subject of Frank Bruni's blog on 10-24-18, in which he mentioned a position taken by editors of your paper consistent with this view: spell out his full name please. He is no American icon. Indeed our State Department has placed the blame of the assassination of a journalist at his door step.
Take the time and make the effort to spell out his name please. He is not a folk hero and should not be made into one just because it is easier to type. I trust you agree.
48
Thank you David. This is a perfect way to summarize the year, share worthwhile journalism and least I forget to atone for the sins of your political affiliation. There still is hope, Mr. Brooks. Happy 2019.
4
I could not understand how 'repressed memories' discredited as unreliable by their discoverer Freud, over 100 years ago, could be declared "credible" and "plausible" by the media as part of the democratic party's assault on Kavanaugh (that made this nation into the world's laughing stock) until I read the quote from the first essay that "... nearly a fifth of Americans aged 18 to 29 believe that a man inviting a woman out for a drink 'always' or 'usually' constitutes sexual harassment." The book "The coddling of the American mind" explains some of this in a very timid way. But what the authors left out to keep from getting burned at the stake by the Left is the obvious fact that the democratic party, extreme Left and our greedy business owner nobility have simply given American women a reverse discrimination 'license to kill' any working-middle class man in exchange for their women's vote and customer loyalty. Thought there is of course nothing 'personal' about this, its just business. Since most of out nation's 1% and propaganda/opinion engineers are still rich white men who would kill most of the nation's other white men, or any other group for that matter, in order to make just a few more dollars or get just a little bit more power.
4
@winthrop staples
Your first sentence is in error. Repressed memory refers to a phenomenon of repressing an event, thus not remembering the event for some amount of time, then of a sudden remembering it. Ford NEVER SAID SHE FORGOT THE EVENT, she just didn't tell everyone about it.
So, since your comment is based on your error, you might want to revise and resubmit.
41
Conor's newsletter isn't weekly.
Rauch would have done well to make more mention of the way the left has abused science and facts (e.g., climate change, vaccinations, net neutrality, etc.) I wish Brooks had, but instead Brooks fell into the familiar "blame Trump for lying" without noticing the pervasiveness of the (largely leftist originated) air that produced Trump.
3
@davedix2006, just wow. Trump gets blamed incessantly for lying because he, well, lies incessantly. And, to blame the Left for Trump is akin to blaming the sunshine for the rain.
33
"Most fringe information used to get ignored. But today, it can’t be ignored because a lot of it is spewed by the president of the United States."
So because you disagree with it, it is somehow "fringe"? The border is not secure. The Chinese are ripping us off. Europe is freeloading on defense. All true. Fringe?
3
@c smith
you mean those 3 things are the only things Trump has stated? He has been fact-checked ad nauseam and shown to be substantially wrong thousands of times. Do you think it is a vast conspiracy that leaves you out?
24
According to Merriam-Webster,the definition of "fringe" does not include mendacity.
9
Based on your recommendation, I went and read The Constitution of Knowledge. Great read...for three quarters of it. Then at the end, he veered off into a shrill screed about how academia is biased against conservatives. That was neither the time nor the place to bring that up, and it enormously weakened an otherwise brilliant essay.
9
Dear Mr. Brooks,
Thank you for your Sidney Awards columns. But for your Part I column, I would have missed Andrew Sullivan's extraordinary article on religion. I am grateful to you!
3
I believe you're right, there was, to some extent, an honor code in the past. It was possible because there was less. With hundreds of messages, one–in–a–million was a rare event indeed! With more, that is, with trillions, it is nothing; which, of course, makes the web a useless entity for the dissemination of anything remotely resembling truth, credentials or an “honor code,” implicit or explicit as that may be.
3
Johnny Carson once said, « My giving advice on marriage is like the captain of the Titanic giving lessons on navigation ».
Are you expressing doubts that today’s youth are doing something wrong, that they could be doing better, as far as romantic relationships ?
If they are happy with their lives, great. If not, let them figure out some other plan.
5
Would the "haphazard, random process" involve year-end cleaning out of the bathroom magazine rack?
I will say something nice to end the year, David, you certainly are a great advocate of recycling.
8
Probably the only tract on tigers that pays due homage to Jim Corbett's life. This is extremely well written, a joy to stop in the frenetic pursuit of news only for it to be suffused with Trump's urgent need to to be in a spotlight.
An essay of huge integrity, compelling beauty, and truth.
2
I took your advice; just finished "Man-Eater", by Brian Phillips. Excellent!
1
"...a man inviting a woman out for a drink “always” or “usually” constitutes sexual harassment." I am so glad that I am not under 40.
14
The following paragraph from this article states all that any American needs to know about Mohammed bin Salman, the new ruling crown prince of Saudi Arabia.
It’s all built around a profile of Mohammed bin Salman, the young Saudi leader. Years ago, M.B.S. asked a Saudi bureaucrat to help him appropriate a property. When the official said no, he received an envelope with a single bullet inside. Last year, M.B.S. replaced Mohammed bin Nayef as crown prince. Bin Nayef had been summoned to the palace and surrounded by guards. His cellphone was taken away and he was forced to stand for hours — in excruciating pain because of an old injury. Just before dawn, bin Nayef agreed to surrender his position.
11
@David Lockmiller, the article tells us more about Saudi Arabia as a country than any one individual. Be careful whom you befriend is a discernment I was taught by my mom. Seems like the USA political machine has repeatedly missed that memo. The bushes well-documented business alliances, Secretary Clinton's willingness to don a headscarf, Obama's bowing. Trump and his gang are just more overt.
6
@karen
It's because of the oil reserves that they have so many friends willing to look the other way. And big oil buys billions of dollars of modern military weapons, but with one major caveat. Israel always gets the best weapons and they pay for it with the money Congress gives to them every year to pay for it. In return, the members of Congress that legislate this massive benefit are able to keep their jobs. And, all of the Presidents, including Trump, have gone along with the program.
7
It may be that fewer teenaged girls are having sex (or boyfriends) because they have plans for their future and don't want to ruin them. For example, they get stellar grades in high school so they can go to good colleges. Then, possibly, graduate school. Or they want to find meaningful work before settling down with someone. I know. I have one of these girls. She and her friends are ambitious, and they don't want the distractions that romantic relationships bring.
25
It's amazing how these conservative authors avoid the pertinent issues of the day. They are too gutless to take on the criminality of Trump and the cowardice of the Republicans in Congress. AND the ignorance of the 35% of Americans who still support them.
22
I enjoyed the bit on tigers, but puzzled over the title, "Man-eaters."
It seems sensational and at odds with the tone of the piece. The encroachment of "civilization" on habitat has not turned tigers into man-eaters, it has turned humans into meat. And slow-moving meat at that. Why hang a terrifying moniker on a tiger just because it's doing what tigers do?
It's like calling certain areas of the sea "shark-infested." The sharks belong there; it's not an infestation. Save that term for when the cockroaches converge on last night's pizza, left on the kitchen counter.
23
I always enjoy reading your end of the year Sidney Award articles, Mr. Brooks, but think you should have included the editorial spearheaded by the Boston Globe this summer, "Journalists are not the enemy."
https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/editorials/2018/08/15/editorial/Kt0NFFonrxqBI6NqqennvL/story.html
The continual sustained attacks on your very profession by President Trump have bothered me for some time, but the blasé attitude of Trump towards the brutal murder of Jamal Khashoggi, a journalist and columnist for the Washington Post, arranged by the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, speaks to something truly amoral.
In 2019 I hope there is a concerted effort by the gatekeepers on the Right, including you, Mr. Brooks, to hold a certain someone accountable because I fear the worst is yet to come.
We need you to use your pen as a weapon to counter the thuggery currently in the White House, and enabled by certain members of our government.
Will you, Mr. Brooks?
44
@V Again and again I read that "Trump is amoral." My dictionary says "being neither moral nor immoral; specifically, lying outside the sphere to which moral judgments apply."
That is not Trump. His acts are immoral.... they can be judged against a moral standard and generally are found to be immoral. Get it right, folks. Don't use "amoral" about Trump.
18
@vermontague Why not? He is amoral, and he is immoral, and he is well outside of what constitutes human detritus. How about that, voila!
12
@Philip Currier Why not? because I would like to be able to say that a given behavior is or is not in the sphere of morality. "Amoral" is a useful word, and I would hate for it to fade into a fog. My point is that many people already think it means immoral... and that's the battle I'm fighting. "Voila!" doesn't work in this case.
5
This is a comment about Sydney I and Andrew Sullivan of New York magazine. I found his essay on the poison we seek to be brilliant and thought provoking. I found the essay on religion rather lame. Why? Because when writing about the opioid epidemic he was reasoned and factual, writing about religion seemed emotional to me with assumptions that fit his personal truth. Equating social justice as separate from religion is a faulty notion. I attending a liberal Christian church and social justice plays a big part in how we worship and relate to one another. The abolitionists were religious people. I was also offended by his statement about parking old people in nursing homes because we don't want to face our own death. It was a cruel statement. Modern medicine has extended our life span but it also has brought about unfortunate consequences. Dementia, chronic debilitating diseases making caring for some aged impossible for the average person who must work and also knows little about caring for the severely ill. I hope in the future Mr. Sullivan will stick with subjects where he hasn't an ingrained opinion that needs no research.
11
The Sidney Awards parts I and II have some real gems. Thanks to Brooks' lists, I read "Two Roads to the New French Right" (Mark Lilla, NY Review of Books) that had some fascinating ideas. This thought-provoking article should be required reading for politicians, and voters, of all stripes.
6
To my mind, the most important article of the year was “The 9.9 percent Is the New American Aristocracy” in The Atlantic. I would also like to highlight that I think The Atlantic has had a superb year and has published numerous outstanding articles. The UK Spectator has provided an interesting alternative all year, and I agree that Andrew Sullivan has written some excellent columns this year. I also think Der Spiegel’s self-immolation is important to note as the true lowlight of the year in media.
22
It is chilling to realize that Trump defends MSB. After reading Filkin’s essay I am expecting Trump to start delivering “bullets in an envelope” to his critics. I put nothing past Trump.
37
Are we really at the point where the only thing that matters in a caption for a painting reproduced in the NYT is the owner of the painting and the owner of the copyrighted image? No artist name? No title? No date? Really?
18
Why shame on dull me...
Not even public shame – since the “post” office seems to be closed for extended holiday...
Profuse apologies for missing the metaphorical meaning of your lead-in pic...
With my deplorable views on things, should’ve caught on immediately...
In my defense, the brow wasn’t demonically furrowed, and the coat wasn’t thoroughly wrinkled...
Once clueful, sent your stuff through Google translate a couple of times – now crystal clear:
“...mentioned in my last column that there were several excellent essays this year on Trump. My favorite is “Man-eaters” in The Ringer, in which Brian Phillips explains: “The arrival of Trump, it’s true, is often preceded by moments of rising tension, because Trump’s presence changes the jungle around it, and those changes are easier to detect. Birdcalls darken. Small deer call and text softly to each other. Herds do not run but drift into a deep shape that suggest some emerging group consciousness of an escape route...
Can you ever forgive me – or do I now have less hope for a future Sidney than Hope did for a future Oscar???
PS
One man’s funnel is another man’s thinking cap...
5
Please let me comment on some essays from Awards Set I and II combined. I made two pairs: 1) “The Poison We Pick” and “True Story”; 2) “Shame Storm” and “The Constitution of Knowledge”. To me, “Poison..” is a far and very close, at the same time, side of what wonderfully is discussed in “True..”. I personally want to reject all predictable and plausible connections between those two essays, because mysteries exist. “Shame..” can be read as a prelude for “The Constitution of K...” in a way that readers will be able to gain an extensive and guided knowledge of what has been going on by the shift from one to the other through the reading process. “The Constitution of K..” is a particularly excellent essay - analytical, persuasive (with cannon and honor codes), and very empathically warm (underneath - maybe hidden). In the essay, there also shock-value-high (for me) expressions and excerpts, such as ‘troll as sociopathic’, ‘disinformation as parasitic” (I changed the wordings), and quotations from Frederic Filloux, who crisply describes the initial stage and two subsequential phases as follows; i) the distribution of platform; ii) customarizing contents for particular individuals, and, clickbait economy. In short and in one light summary, as said in “Shame..”, joining mob creates the power of a new code. “Arguing back is no use” is revealing too. Back to the columns (I and II), thank you, Brooks, for your end of the year presents to subscribers.
1
In Part 1 of this piece your cite "Shame Storm" which has this quote: "Matthew Yglesias once claimed that the reason he mocked David Brooks for his divorce was because Brooks had written columns about the social value of marriage, but I do not believe him. He did it because it’s fun to humiliate your political opponents." So is this your way of getting back at Matthew? David, it's underhanded to channel your unsuspecting readers to articles that put your critics in a negative light, without warning us of your ax to grind.
7
@Bob G. - you can't swing a stick around a columnist without hitting 5 other columnists and public intellectuals who have criticized them. I'm assuming everyone in the public sphere has bigger axes to grind than the example you mention.
2
Sidney Hook or Algernon Sydney?
David, kudos on inspiring a prize so airy and exclusive, only one person anywhere could ever win...
Why you, of course – and it may simply not be awarded some years...
The neoneuronet – that’s neo-neuro-net, not neon-euronet – award, in the shape of a brain that’s nominal average of seven billion adult (by chronological age, not intellectual erudition) brains on this orb...
There’ll always be glitches – open-mike moments – in the Matrix...What makes for keepers is the talker’s realization the mike is on, but they just keep talking...
This one for eight years, across several relationships and continents...
“...Everyone comes up with a principled-sounding pretext that serves as a barrier against admitting to themselves that, in fact, all they have really done is joined a mob. Once that barrier is erected, all rules of decency go out the window...
This one also special – viewed in a mirror...
“...the funnel is no more. Internet trolls simply overwhelm the system with swarms of falsehood. There used to be an implicit honor code — truth exists, credentials matter, what hasn’t been tested isn’t knowledge — but the honor code has been swept away. Most fringe information used to get ignored...
Actually, it’s the Internet that overwhelms the trolls...AI folks realized a while ago that tagging things as T or F impeded progress...
With that, dogma exists, crowd sizes matter, and – as McLuhan might’ve said:
“The Testing is the Knowledge”
See - Regression can have virtue...
I find it interesting that Helen Andrews' "Shame Storm" was on David's list of Sidney Awards. Helen Andrews has always been a Brooks supporter and in fact she very publicly took up his cause when this was written. https://slate.com/business/2013/12/david-brooks-scant-self-awareness-divorced-pundit-suddenly-not-so-worried-about-family-breakdown.html
1
Another good thing about going to church: It teaches kids how to cope with boredom.
7
"There used to be an implicit honor code — truth exists, credentials matter, what hasn’t been tested isn’t knowledge — but the honor code has been swept away. Most fringe information used to get ignored. But today, it can’t be ignored..."
Alas! That Golden Age fast fades, no matter how fictive it always was. News is now gossip, where once it was, as always, gossip. We must restore the credentialed (U of Chicago, Harvard, etc. arbiters of what is and ever has been Truth with a capital T.
David, let me tell you from a lifetime of hanging out in bars, rotary clubs, the docks etc., "fringe information" has never, ever, been ignored, except by those in a credentialed bubble. Look more carefully.
9
@stuart, I agree, the point was not well expressed. It might be better said like this: fringe information now spreads more quickly than vetted facts. That's why we've all heard about alleged pedophiles operating out of Washington pizza parlours.
8
@stuart
Brooks referenced article, "The Constitution of Knowledge" by Rauch. He allows for fringe information placed in the large end of a metaphoric funnel. However, because of societal safeguards those fringe ideas never made it to the short end of the funnel where the true and the good were culled.
Hoi polloi in bars and on the docks never went through the process of finding the truth in the analog age. Now they are empowered in a fatuous way by social media. Because they are poorly educated and not very literate, they cannot discern the truth nor determine a credible source.
Every Tom, Dick, and Sally can now put out a falsehood or half-baked hypothesis as the truth. In previous times, the truth or the good required passage through the human chromatograph of the scientific community or the court system. It was a slow, arduous process, and the antithesis of instant gratification we have with the internet.
A healthy society has a chromatograph which separates the true from the false and the good from the bad. In this process there is the University, but without standards there are everyday questions on what is real. When reality is in question, there is societal chaos and gross economic inefficiency.
In analog times one needed an education and publication to promulgate a hypothesis. Now barriers to entry to the marketplace of ideas are nil. The smart phone itself is part of the problem. "The Media is the Message" is more true today than ever.
5
The arrival of David's Sydney awards, it’s true, is often preceded by moments of rising anticipation, because their presence affects the minds around it.
1
Re “Two Roads for the New French Right," The Sidney Awards, Part I:
The major factor in the social conservatism of the young French people Brooks praises is old-fashioned misogyny.
The article says, “These young conservatives’ views on family and sexuality are traditionalist Catholic.” They “see Europe as a single Christian civilization composed of different nations with distinct languages and customs. These nations are composed of families, which are organisms with differing but complementary roles and duties for mothers, fathers, and children.”
The key phrase here is “differing but complementary roles.” The Catholic church insists that males and females must conform to rigid gender stereotypes, stifling any talents and inclinations that don’t fit the traditional mold. To do otherwise constitutes selfish “radical individualism.” Women’s natural place is in the home, bearing and raising children, submissive to the leadership of husbands on whom they are economically dependent.
Among the social “problems” the young French conservatives decry is delayed child-bearing, which is indisputably a good thing. They aren’t admirable. They’re ignorant.
It’s no surprise that these people "are all fans of Bernie Sanders.” They believe in economic justice, but with one glaring exception.
Sanders doesn’t treat women’s rights as a top priority. He fails to see that reproductive autonomy is an economic issue—the most essential one—for the female half of humanity.
11
@Carson Drew
If we've learned anything from the rise of Trump, and right wing parties in Europe in the past few years, is that mocking or demonizing half of the electorate as "beyond the pale" doesn't make them dry up and blow away. Or have we?
Misogynist? "Aren't admirable?" "Ignorant?"
Could it possibly be that these French social conservatives are thoughtful, intelligent, well-informed, decent people who have values which differ from yours? Perhaps their choice to live traditionally is a response to the undeniable societal and familial havoc the brave new post-modern world has given us? Maybe you and they simply disagree on the cost/benefit of hyper-individualism?
As for Sanders, he proposed an economic policy which would have helped to restore the middle class, thereby empowering the great majority of women in ways that no amount of rhetorical feminist showboating would.
But he was rejected by economically comfortable liberals for not being woke enough. Instead they went on to choose a member of the oligarchy simply because she was a woman who played girl power anthems at her events, a woman who is as responsible for the vast chasm between the haves and have-nots as any Republican.
5
@Livonian: Thanks for confirming that Bernie Bros are anti-feminist. Maybe he should run as a Republican.
1
Many thanks. This collection of searching and truthful essays (I assume as I am on my way to reading same) is a refreshing course correction from the swill that is our politicians' daily output. Like a freshly aired room in spring!
A few years ago, after becoming increasingly annoyed at what I perceived as Mr Brooks' clueless and lofty disregard for the burdens that most of humanity must bear, I called him a pig. Whatever porcine qualities he may (or may not) have had, I now find his humanity a refreshing voice. It seems to me that his time in Africa may have reset his outlook. I don't know. But it wouldn't be the first time that exposure to other peoples have had that effect.
The end of an awful year seems a good time to offer an apology and an appreciation. Thank you, Mr Brooks.
9
+1 for David's choice of "The Constitution of Knowledge". Whenever in history public epistemology has been gutted by brazen ideology, mischief and worse have resulted. It is no sin to be wrong. It is a sin not to care.
1
I read the New Yorker essay on a flight to New York . The writing is admirable (I mean it IS the New Yorker), but, in retrospect , ie. post Kashoggi murder, a pure puff piece.
The stakes in Saudi Arabia are enormously high. 1/3 of the country are Wahhabists who would love to displace the royal family. Russia, Turkey and Iran are aligned to displace the Kingdom as the central force of power in the ME.The oil is getting too expensive to drill, given the collapse in prices and softening of demand. From what I have seen, and read, MBS is immature and incapable of steering his country through these threats.
3
Commentators enjoy these two end-of-the-year annual pieces David does, perhaps showing some things worth considering for other times of the year. He's innovating, breaking conventional wisdom, deliberately seeking to go outside his comfort zone. The very choice to bring attention to what's worthwhile which would otherwise be mostly missed by most of us--and all long form pieces, which break the "keep it short" mantra, is too important to keep so limited, or not to replicate by other columnists. A few quibbles, however, with some of the premises of even the assumption-questioning shown in the stories chosen. Some of us didn't need the modern era of smart phone addiction to be ignorant of social skills. We "earned" them the old-fashion way. Also, while it's certainly worse now, I don't know how well "the funnel" which traditionally screened for what was "useful or true" ever really functioned. How do we know it didn't miss important things? It's just a big assumption. We don't usually know what we don't know...unless we make the effort, ironically as shown in these two columns, to find out. (Similar, in that way, to the new NYT historical obits their then-bias missed.) And if tigers are worth featuring, which is nice, than so too are the state of ecosystems they function in too, including reconsidering their importance--and loss--the next time David is inclined to write about "the progress" we're missing. Nathaniel Popkin has a scary piece on "ecological losses" in today's NYT.
2
Thanks for these comments Mr. Brooks, and i look forward to reading some of these!!
And, thanks to Mr. Brooks,this is why many of us in this generation still go to church:
"Each Sunday during communion, when the members of my church come to the table, I watch their faces. Many tired. Some sad. Some lit up with joy. One kid who has special needs approaches me like he’s won the lottery. His voice rises, ‘Oh boy! Oh boy!’”
That's Jesus he's talking about here, folks. Sure, you can pray to God anywhere. But the Eucharist is the only way there is to be hugged by Jesus both inside and out.
2
Regarding the remarks about Kate Julian's essay, the statement in the second paragraph: " . . . nearly a fifth of Americans aged 18 to 29 believe that a man inviting a woman out for a drink “always” or “usually” constitutes sexual harassment." is frightening. More to the point, is it really true?
Tish Warren speaks to the Anglican (Episcopal) Church that I love and respect.
And finally, when I read, "'“The arrival of a tiger, it’s true, is often preceded by moments of rising tension, because a tiger’s presence changes the jungle around it, and those changes are easier to detect.'" I can only think of Trump, our country eater.
4
Mr. Brooks highlights Jonathan Rauch's thoughts regarding the internet; it's trolls etc. and all the changes wrought. May I attribute much of the diffusion and obfuscation of social media--and the chaos caused-- by the anonymity the internet provides? What a wonderful platform when our darkest thoughts, lies, character assassinations etc., can be expressed when hidden behind an avatar or cloaked identity. Remove the anonymity, require a real name, and the trolls, the internet "mob," like roaches exposed to the light, will scuttle back into their holes...Hmm; of course I write this behind my cloaked identity, which I'll remove as soon as I figure out how to amend the profile.....
7
Oh boy, oh boy. Would that I could understand what he writes. I just love reading his words.
Erudite jumps to mind but rationality is his bread and butter
To me Sidney disappointed this year.
2
The political bile unleashed in recent years can be traced to the growth of social media. It is not easy to spew hate face to face but go to some comment sections(not this one) or social media and its easy. Social media and unregulated comment sections are simply a place to hate with impunity. Or lie with impunity. It is anti-social media. For example, no one around Mr. Trump has the courage to tell him that social media, like the hate it foments, is self-destructive.
3
Comments on two of Brooks's choices. I haven't read either of them; I'm commenting on Brooks's description of them:
"Why are young people having so little sex?" Says who? And, is Brooks suggesting that 16-17 year-old girls should be having sex?
"The constitution of knowledge" sounds like an argument in favor of the intellectual 'gatekeepers' of yore, those who decided for us what topics were worthy of being taken seriously. It's unsurprising that Brooks would mourn their passing considering that the NYT's editorial page was one of those gatekeepers. Now that the elite no longer control the 'marketplace of ideas', ideas like gay marriage, democratic socialism, sexual harassment by wealthy & powerful men, the failure of neoliberal economics, and the corruption of the corporate/financial/political classes - all things the gatekeepers didn't want us talking about - have burst out of the narrow end of the funnel.
The 'honor code' he describes was just a mechanism for limiting the discussion.
1
Reading David certainly makes one wonder how farmers, small business owners, young people, old people, middle aged people, professionals and let's be honest for a full minute - every human being on the face of this planet today - how in the world will we make it through another year?
Fortunately for the world's inhabitants nearly every one of us won't be here in 2118. Adios!
1
I want the list of all the tiger stories!
1
The in depth subjects the article talks about are enlighting.
My attic is still full of old copies of Commentary Magazine and Partisan Review, making it possible for me to occasionally go up there and find essays by Sidney Hook (1902-1999), the political philosopher, after whom David’s annual recommendations of essays are named.
Regarded by some as the original neoconservative -- a description of himself he vehemently rejected -- he was a brilliant man, a great writer, a staunch anti-communist, a passionate defender of freedom against all of its enemies and a man you would never want to get into a political argument with.
Here is his Times obituary.
https://www.nytimes.com/1989/07/14/obituaries/sidney-hook-political-philosopher-is-dead-at-86.html
Were he still here, he would be tearing Trump’s shabby life and political ideas to shreds.
His books and essays are still very much worth reading,
9
@A. Stanton
Dear @A. Stanton- thank you for writing such a wonderful comment. It has initiated a spark of reminiscence about Marshall McLuhan and his intellectual contributions to this century and culture.
1
The best of your columns, Mr. Brooks. I look forward to them every year. Thank you for shining a light on journalism that gets very little media attention. And thanks for leading us to new sources of information. We need all the truth we can find in the coming year. The rough beast in the White House will not go quietly.
4
Your coverage and cogent description of these excellent essays is much appreciated, as it gives me an opportunity to sample enlightening work I otherwise would not have been aware of or partaken of.
2
I add my thanks to the others. These two columns are a year-end treat, much anticipated and appreciated.
5
I've read many of these pieces, and David Brooks's choices are all excellent. Serious journalists should comb not only stories about their subjects in the Times, The Atlantic other responsible mainstream outlets, but also those in enlightened corners of the Internet. And to help their beleaguered calling, they should supply links to those sources in their own coverage. There may be more brilliant curious minds than ever in our vast media landscape, but many are toiling away in obscurity and they deserve to be much better known. Thanks, David.
6
Mr Brooks, all I can say is thank you for sharing these thought-provoking and well-crafted essays!
10
I was deeply touched by Tish Harrison Warren's "True Story", referenced by Mr. Brooks. She makes clear that the story of Christianity is not primarily the story of the Church's hierarchy. It is the story of ordinary Christians empowered by Faith to give and forgive; a Faith rooted in God's absolute love for each person. Thank you Mr. Brooks-and Ms. Warren!
12
I look forward to these two columns every year and enjoy all of the linked essays.
1
Thank you once again for some wonderful and inspiring recommended readings.
1
Thank you David Brooks and staff. Reading your list of annual Hook awards makes me more optimistic and hopeful for America.
In college I did a project on "The Structure of Scientific Revolution" based on a book by Princeton professor Thomas Kuhn. It was essentially about how knowledge was proven and disseminated, and as an example I used Galileo's persecution for his theory that the Earth revolved around the sun, not vice versa as the Church taught.
Though I was once a fan a David Brooks, over the last couple of years I feel that he's often drifted into reflexive and improbable defenses of American conservatism that's fine awry. On the other hand, I do believe that he's intelligent and well read.
I read his recommendation of Jonathan Rauch's "The Constitution of Knowledge." It's a fascinating look at the flip side of my paper, examining not only how society normal vets information as being "objectively true" but how disinformation has become sophisticated in its attempts to undercut objectively accepted truth. It floods our media not only with "alternative facts" but, in essence, doesn't care about facts at all so long as it gets us to distrust ANY source as being factual.
So, thank you, Mr Brooks, for setting aside your own occasional seeming disregard for observable facts and introducing us to this very cogent analysis of the war on facts, as currently being practiced by Trump and his supporters.
5
I look forward to David’s yearly, literally scatterbrained (!) array of what he lovingly calls long form journalism. It’s great fun reading these and knowing I won’t feel my time Ill spent. I like the depth. I like the breadth.
Thanks, David.
29
"By 2014, only 46 percent of 17-year-olds had ever had a romantic relationship of any kind.
Having lived much of their social life online, many young people expressed concern that they hadn’t developed the skills they needed to read possible partners in live, face-to-face situations."
God, I'm so glad I am olde.
55
@Sandi
Amen. That was far from the norm in 1950s high school in Connecticut. Not that a romantic relationship automatically led to sex, quite the contrary in the pre-pill 50s. In fact any type of birth control was actually illegal in CT at that time. The SCOTUS case (Griswold v Conn., I think) that ended that came later. But part of the fun (and angst) of high school society was the boy/girl relationships. I have trouble relating to a situation where almost half of 17 year olds had no experience with that at all. It's an important learning process.
8
@Sandi It seems to me (as one who hasn't read the article yet) that kids are so saturated with sex and romance via tv, film, and social media that it no longer is such an enticing avenue for personal exploration. The dangers are so frightening, so much seems so tawdry, the endings so doomed, I can see why they'd rather do something else. Maybe this is all to the good, who knows? They'll get around to it eventually, and if it means they're thinking things out more than previous generations, fine.
11
@Sandi
When I hear statistics like this I think about the rates of seriously overweight and obese teens...could it be that they (1/2 the population--guess) don't feel worthy of being "liked" in a romantic way. That would be very sad. This health epidemic is hurting our society (and the world) in ways we probably haven't imagined.
5
David remains lost in some theoretical universe. The past must be unbearable for him, having laid the groundwork for the election of Donald Trump.
"Responsibility," the great mantra of the conservative movement, is in tatters. So why not celebrate tigers?
48
@David Henry
That's a mean spirited comment.
I, and many others apparently, appreciate David pointing out interesting pieces of writing we may have missed over the year.
Can we at least appreciate areas where we share a common interest - good writing - without attacking each other?
64
@philsmom
No. Too many have been hurt for no reason.
9
@philsmom Actions have consequences. Where have I heard that before?
6
It is all happening too fast and finding the essay of the year when choosing the essay of the day is an almost impossible task.
Maybe that is why America is roiling the only ones not overwhelmed with information are those in charge who don't understand the problems and are not interested in solving the problems.
15
Very glad to see Mark Lilla's piece about the new voices on the French right receiving a Sidney nod. As someone committed to the principles of liberal (not neoliberal) democracy, and who believes that problems of global scale require a global, internationalist perspective, the article makes for uncomfortable reading. It does so not because the French new right propounds an outlandish, delusional politics, but precisely because those new voices are articulating a coherent (or potentially coherent) set of values that are not easily to be dismissed. Writing, like Lilla's, that forces one out of one's favored, comfortable worldview is of tremendous value.
13
Re "Man-Eaters," following numerous trips to India I finally got to see a real live tiger in that nation's Kanha game reserve. It simply sauntered down a side-road in full view of our jeep, completely indifferent to those of us who were awe-struck by its sudden appearance. As we shoved each other to take photos of this magnificent beast, fearing that it would scamper away as quickly as it had materialized, the tiger halted in its tracks and proceeded to sit down and then to recline, having apparently made a conscious decision to give the spectators exactly what they wanted before rising up to continue on its way. Thank you, Shere Khan, for spending a few precious minutes with some of your most devoted, if merely human, admirers.
25
Thank you Mr. Brooks. The nominations you provided in both installments are very enlightening and worth the time to read. I am very grateful for nominating Andrew Sullivan's essays, both are very edifying. In addition, every liberal in America should read them because he provides an opportunity to learn how to engage conservatives. I believe that taking his points to heart can lead to the return of civil discourse between conservative and liberals, something that has been absent since 2008 or so and that our nation is in dire need of.
19
@Peter M Blankfield
I agree 100%. I think Andrew Sullivan is a real treasure.
1
"The best long-form essays on a brutal year"
Or, to slightly modify that loveliest of early-90s bands The Sundays,
♫ Each a little souvenir
Of a terrible year
Which made our eyes feel sore ♫
And since the song in question is called "Here's Where the Story Ends" and involves a well-deserved trip to "the shed", we can only hope that for the villains within the awarded stories, 2019 will, in seeing life imitate pop art, prove, however marginally, a rather less "terrible year."
9
@Scott Lahti
Thanks for the reminder of The Sundays and my long-ago youth!
3
Thank you. I look forward to the list each year - always pleased that I had actually read one or two and delighted by the ones I read for the first time.
27
There are some great reads in this and Part I. Andrew Sullivan's two articles were particularly impressive. I remember the Dexter Filkins piece and agree wholeheartedly with its inclusion. Looking forward to the others.
Perfect way to wrap up 2018. Thank you, David Brooks.
53
I look forward to the Sidneys each year now - another holiday gift! They isn't about David Brooks' politics - They are about vetting and sharing complex ideas that are well-written. In the flood of simple and vastly viral news clips or posts, I am refreshed to have the light shone on these pieces so I can broaden my knowledge and expand my thinking. Thank you to David Brooks and his collaborators for providing this and to the NYT for making them all available to us.
7
@Nancy
Absolutely Nancy. I rarely agree with Brooks' politics but I never doubt his good intentions. To be wrong is not the same as being evil and we can all learn from each other. I am exhausted by the vituperative slurs hurled this way and that. Let's all just read and try to be better people.
5