Decent piece but why no mention of immigration or multiculturalism?
5
I'm sharpening my pitchfork and fueling my torch.
I have seven decades and can't wait to get into the streets with my fellow Americans to excise the malignant cancer on the presidency.
18
Thank you for this article !
3
How did he get away with that picture?
4
A major centrifugal development over the last 40 years has been the splintering of the liberal Jewish-black coalition, which had successfully led the campaign for civil rights in the 1960s. With Israel facing intractable hostility and anti-Semitism here at home waning, many Jews shifted their attention to the Middle East. Black activists lost a key ally, and their struggle for greater equality lost energy and momentum.
8
“Many students find it thrilling; it floods them with a sense of meaning and purpose.”
Like youth gang violence this tendency is dangerous and infectious.
At least explaining the why of it might help demystify the problem and be start toward progress.
5
The pushing of identity politics on US campuses is quite frightening, partially because those doing the pushing are as rigid and frozen and irrational in their thinking as those on the extreme Right. In example: the other day, a white, female colleague confided in me that she thought the reason she'd received fewer offers to deliver her "white privilege" workshops on campuses is because in the Age of Trump "white liberals no longer have to hide their racism through sponsoring such workshops." This same professor also shared her belief that the reason an African-American colleague did not get hired as a chair in a social work department is because a group of "white, Jewish women" were against it. In her ignorance she did not even recognize the anti-Semitic nature of her comment. Why did she feel the need to identify these women as Jewish? Their reasons for not promoting this person were no doubt vast and varied, but it is highly unlikely that they were motivated by their ethnicity as secular Jews. Sadly, this professor is so lost within the identity politics narrative that she cannot even see the error in her thinking. Of course there is real racism and racists in this country and without question Trump as emboldened many that may have previously been hiding. But to see everything through the lens of "white privilege" or racism is taking us to a very, very bad place.
24
If Mr. Brooks has any great ideas on how the left should "disarm" from naked tribalism unilaterally, without consistently getting beat by the conservative alt-right, who have proven a willingness to break any rule, ignore any moral outrage, tolerate and encourage lying from their leader, and turn a blind eye to treason within their own party, I am all ears.
Until then, the sensible thing for the left to do is retaliate with naked tribalism of its own. It's a sad statement, but otherwise, the majority left will be beat by the minority right time and again.
18
David Brooks is a wonderful writer, but whenever I finish reading his writings I always feel like I just had a diet coke. All flavor but no substance. First, although I know he does not control this, why is a young woman of color protesting Donald Trump, the picture of tribalism? Trump, who denigrated people from our southern border, retweeted Klan lies, and has many times gone over the line in support of White supremacy. The question is why were these people alone?
Now, to identify politics, is this a new thing, really? What is new is that peoples who for hundreds of years had no identity in the US, now have a voice.
For years and still, the White ruling class used identity politics to form bonds with poor and working-class Whites. They had nothing in common but Whiteness and they have used it and it continues to pay dividends. The first reconstruction (after the civil war), the second reconstruction (after the civil rights and voting rights acts) and now the third reconstruction (Trump and the alt-right).
So please don’t tell me about identify politics, like it is a new thing.
18
What rubbish!
I wonder if it ever occurs to anyone on either the right or the left that perhaps the reason why our differences are so much more toxic now is simply because there are more of us now than ever before.
When my parents were growing up in the 30s, there were 100 million Americans; when I was growing up in the 70s, there were 200 million of us; and now there are over 300 million Americans and climbing.
Everyone knows that the more people there are, the harder it is to come to any sort of agreement. It's just simple basic common sense. When we try to overexplain everything, we tend to demonize, which only adds to our bitterness and divisiveness.
Occam's Razor: the simplest explanation that covers all the facts is the explanation that's most likely to be true.
6
Occupy had the right idea before it gave in to elevating intersectional dogma above their simpler, more unified message of class inequality. True, separating the 99% from the 1% still carried an "us vs the enemy" sentiment, but the 99% us was such a large grouping, a veritable cross-section of Americans, that it was not necessary to demonize the wealthy, but rather see them as an obstinate power block to be pressed for substantial economic redress. By no means am I saying that so-called identity grievances should be ignored, but that an overarching economic message creates an environment of common ground and sense of inclusion, such that acceptance of other critically important but more factional changes is easier to effect.
4
This is a well thought out piece, and it nicely puts into perspective a lot of our evolutionary baggage and how that fits into modern day politics. Human history clearly demonstrates the biological imperative of "us versus them." We survived and prospered by being an "us."
Unfortunately, now one line of thinking puts governments, both local and national, as a "them" to fight against instead of being the "us" that they really are. People, the IRS exists to collect the money due "US," allowing us to do the things that are in the collective good.
But, if you don't believe in an "us" then "WE" are doomed.
7
I would argue that if the media had fragmented the Republican party would not have fragmented. Once the outlier political extremist became large enough to form their own gravity pool there was a secondary force to pull planet GOP out of its orbit and into an eccentric orbit around a binary system.
That system being the extreme elements that gave rise to the tea party and Trump and the group we now call moderate republicans.
The seed for that secondary star is the foundations and think tanks created by a small group of elite extremists like Adelson and the Koch brothers. over the years they gained mass until they began to pull on the orbit creating the likes of Newt Gingrich. Eventually, they reached critical mass and ignited, forming the Tea Party. The rest is now history, and the present.
4
Unfortunately, it may be that the only way for the tribes to come together is by being faced with some single form of pan-oppression. Remember the national mood in the aftermath of 9/11 for at least several weeks to months when even someone as reviled as Rudy Giuliani on the eve became a broadly cheered hero in his response to the WTC coming down.
Until we perceive all of ourselves as being virtuous victims of the same privileged oppressor it may be difficult to feel united. One does not want to imagine the severity of the events that could lead to that.
2
Our beginnings put tribalism (state's rights, religious purity, slavery) against our common American heritage and values. This tension has continued for all of American history. Sometimes one or the other is in ascendance, primarily due to the circumstances of the nation (e.g. WW II brought out the solidarity of the nation). It is not surprising that this conflict continues to this day, or that "tribalism" seems to be the most prevalent today. Unfortunately, what David Brooks doesn't do in this op-ed is to emphasize this issue as a conflict, with many millions still on the side of larger American principles such as found in the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, and prevalent values throughout America - tolerance, diversity, equal opportunity and the like. Also, Brooks doesn't focus enough on the narrowing perspective of the barons of industry and the wealthy, who now tend to support extreme individualism over community and shared wealth. They have used their wealth to break the bonds of common humanity among all Americans, and insist on their own rigid perspective of individual responsibility, even in the face of great disparities in opportunity, education, and wealth. They use their wealth to foist their own view on all Americans, in the guise of objective reports and advertising. But I am optimistic that one day soon most Americans will see through this charade and come to their senses. Probably not realistic, but one can only hope...
3
I am struck that David presents the increasing number of Democrats and Republicans who view the other party "very unfavorably" as something that has just happened, inexplicably. There is no role in this presentation for the shrill voices of the right-wing media that inflames one segment of the population against another (note that the change on the Republican side is much larger than that on the Democratic side).
Honestly, I now view the Republican party "very unfavorably," but it's not because I'm bound to my tribe -- it's because Republicans like Dan Evans, like Rockefeller, like Eisenhower, who are willing to work in the center no longer appear to exist on the political stage. It's because as the 90s and the 2000s have progressed, that side has moved farther and farther into social "solutions" that help no one but the rich, into denying basic scientific facts, into overt racism and greed. I do not view them very unfavorably because I am a well-educated woman; I view them unfavorably because of the face they have chosen to put forward to the world.
24
Mr. Brooks: The statement "over the past two generations, however, excessive individualism and bad schooling have corroded both of those sources of cohesion" is astoundingly simplistic. Brooks should know that the "excessive individualism" he speaks of has been institutionalized by decades of Reaganesque/libertarian/neo-liberal political policy, supported by the corporate donor class that benefits from such policies. And the "bad schooling" is another example of school-bashing when the REAL source are the economic forces--the financialization of the global economy--that have immiserated communities and destabilized families.
6
The problem of tribalism seems to originate from a lack of shared experiences and social interaction. The vast majority of people in our country have no common bonding to build relationships and understanding. There is no personal involvement with our country's government (as illustrated by low voter turnout) and they have no "skin in the game". I believe that a required 2 years of service from all citizens after high school, whether military, social, or environmental, would form the basis of a stronger society.
7
No religion needed for a cohesive, sane society. What makes the U.S. an outlier and numerous European countries better places to live is the community as priority and the individual as secondary. Take care of the greater good and all individuals prosper while having personal freedom. The U.S. conservative is far more obtuse than conservatives in these other countries. The ones here don't have any interest in the greater good, preferring selfishness of the individual.
Those in this country who have felt not included in the modern America of the last four plus decades voted for idiot Trump not because he's a good person but because he isn't. That's the actual problem we have now thanks to spineless conservatives who have given up all moral/ethical values. Now they are tribalists, the bottom of the intellectual barrel.
Eclectic Pragmatism — http://eclectic-pragmatist.tumblr.com/
Eclectic Pragmatist — https://medium.com/eclectic-pragmatism
10
I find this an ironic offering from a man whose columns frequently rely on the device of exploring his chosen dichotomy du jour for characterizing his fellow citizens/humans.
I've been known to call him 'binary-man'...
3
How can words like dishonest, immoral, lazy and unintelligent apply to Democrats when you have a President who is dishonest, immoral, lazy and unintelligent and was voted in by Republicans, So those words really identify a Republican, they connect between them.
9
David, I thought that perhaps you got over all your "both sides do it" nonsense. Please! The hatred on the right for everything left of the middle has no quantitative parallel on the left, not even close. And the pseudo-right-wing president feeds entirely off the tribalism on the right as he fuels this. Where's the corresponding force on the left? Barack Obama was arguably TOO polite and kind as he reached across the aisle repeatedly only to have his hand bitten.
24
Yes, tribalism/identify politics rises and falls with societal externalities and institutions, and those civilizing forces are weaker than they have been in the past.
But the article confuses cause and symptom. It drips with false equivalence. He writes on campus extremism on the left as if powerless students are a comparable social concern to a powerful President and Republican Congress that are dismantling and giving away the government.
He writes about student extremism on the left but ignores extremism on the right where neo-Nazis and others continue to organize with little notice or hindrance.
He argues that the problem is that "we’ve regressed from a sophisticated moral ethos to a primitive one," which insults most Democrats and some Republicans and conservatives who do place country above party and tribe.
Today's Retreat to Tribalism no accident. It was not the result of a broken economy, failed social networks, mass failure of individual humanity, or even the generational rerun of fear-based politics.
It's clearly asymmetrical. It's the intentional, cumulative, and yugely successful result of GOP extremist programs over the past 30 years to weaponize politics and media and redefine reality. The rise of tribalism is a necessary ingredient to voting against one's own interests and transfer ever more power to the rich and their corporate proxies.
http://freedamerica.com/is-the-gop-toxic/
15
" ... Modern individualism releases each person from social obligation, but “being guided only by the lantern of his own understanding, the individual loses all assurance of a place, an order, a definition. He may have gained freedom, but he has lost security.”
Thus we find a basis for the libertarian mindset of self-absorption at the expense of the environment and of our fellow citizens. This was brought to the bookshelves by Ayn Rand who, as an expat from the Soviet Union, told her soft-minded readers that personal freedom is everything; that the poor, the sick, the homeless, and the elderly, are all products of their own sloth and stupidity, which was/is nothing more than the Calvinist attitudes of 300+ years ago. Kick'em when they're down; then, keep a boot on their necks until they suffocate or drown.
Then came conservative media gas bags like Limbaugh, Fox and others of that ilk.
Tribalism also gave us trickle-down economics rammed into law by Paul Ryan and his fellow acolytes of this thrice-disproven theory by Chicago libertarian economist, Arthur Laffer. The Republicans' third attempt to keep tribalism moving forward brought us The Great Recession.
But, you have to hand it to the maritally versatile, and warped, mind of Newt Gingrich who, with GOP strategist, Frank Luntz, turned tribal hatred into the poison that has infected Congress and American politics for 25 years, funded for the most part by the Koch brothers and other key conservative billionaires.
7
We've "regressed from a sophisticated moral ethos to a primitive one?" As a black man in America, I must ask: when was this glorious era of moral sophistication? Martin Luther King Jr., whom the author is so fond of quoting, was getting his head cracked right up to the time LBJ signed the Voting Rights Act, and -- not to put too fine a point on the matter --
was viciously murdered 50 years ago. Brooks is lamenting the loss of an America that never existed, as a sort of rhetorical camouflage for his support of the very forces that have landed America in this quagmire.
21
Here’s a historical fact: The “sophisticated moral ethos we share” is a delicate construct
2
Rupert Murdock the Koch Brothers, Sheldon Adelson, and Trump are all old rich white
yesterday’s men who have made their fortunes by not doing the right thing. In America, lawyered up, you can get rich dabbling in fake news, polluting the environment, enabling gambling addicts, and stiffing employees
and Wall Street banks. Good riddance!
I worry more about the next generation intent on carrying on with the family tradition. Lachlan Murdock, only 46, learned the art of spewing hatred on his father’s knee and will now be running Fox News. The rest of the family empire is being sold off to Disney. American myths are crumbling faster than the infrastructure if a Murdock gets on board with Disney.
3
Your not an individual if you are tribalistic or in a tribe. Your also not an individual if you are member of a religious or political cult. Most people are not individuals. They only say that they are. It's one of the myths in the media. Like fiscally responsible republicans. Or, moral republicans or democrats. If you think our problems are with tribalism and not the morally bankrupt leadership your blaming the victims.
3
"Over the past two generations, however, excessive individualism and bad schooling have corroded both of those sources of cohesion."
Perhaps not coincidentally, primary and secondary school curricula over these past two generations have favored science, technology, engineering, and mathematics almost to the exclusion of humanities and the arts, which often serve as the primary foundations of national culture and individual identity.
Why should anyone be surprised by this outcome?
10
Brother Dave, I thought your essay was spot-on until it ran through the gauntlet of commenters. Man, these critics shredded your statements leaving nothing left but a smoking ruin. You have an impossible job: trying to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in a thousand words or less.
No good deed, apparently, goes unpunished; for instance, we crucified Christ for daring to imply that we weren't wonderful human beings. It's a hard-knock life. A thankless one, too, for the most part. But I do thank you for writing this piece; it definitely generated some thoughtful responses, which, by and large, forced you into the corner with a dunce cap on. (I'm over here in the other corner of the room. It ain't so bad. It's restful. Quiet.)
2
'WE" didn't crucify christ. and he certainly wasn't crucified for " daring to imply that we weren't wonderful human beings." he was crucified by an occupation army for standing up to the government. in other words, he was crucified for doing exactly what brooks' article is attacking people for doing today.
1
I posted a comment about 9 hours ago that received over 300 recommend that advocated bringing back the military draft. I did so not because I am a war monger, far from it. I served in one foolish war, Vietnam, and my son served in a more stupid war, Iraq. I advocated the draft because it is an effective way for people to become more acquainted with our vast, varied country, and also when we do go to war, we should all have skin in the game. War should always be the last alternative, since there are no “good” wars.
11
Have you bothered to even glance at the data? There is overwhelming evidence that authoritarianism, tribalism and intolerance are characteristics concentrated within the GOP - not the young, the college educated, and the liberal side of the aisle, which tend to be more socially tolerant and pluralist. We have decades of evidence that education leads to greater tolerance, by breaking down black and white thinking. Really you do need to read before commenting.
10
Why don't we hear about the 24-7 right-wing hate radio on AM radio---that started with Rush Limbaugh in the 1980's, and metastasized to include Alex Jones, Michael Savage, and dozens of others? Hasn't that been the primary driver of rightist extremism? Reagan's repeal of the fairness doctrine needs to be acknowledged as the primary driver of tribalism over the last 30 years. Why is this ignored?
11
The last time I checked it wasn't college kids who were in charge of running this country in the past couple of decades. If identity politics is fighting against xenophobia,white supremacism, and homophobia rising in this country, you can count me in.
8
“What is moral order today? Not so much the reign of right-thinking people as that of right-suffering, the cult of everyday despair,” Bruckner continued. “I suffer, therefore I am worthy. … Suffering is analogous to baptism, a dubbing that inducts us into the order of a higher humanity, hoisting us above our peers.”
I've been puzzled in recent years why so many affluent, generally white folks who--relatively speaking--have it made are so grumpy, aggrieved, and miserable. Bruckner seems to have nailed it.
3
The Framers warned about factionalism and created a Constitution to manage it, and most Americans still respect their work, and some even worship it. As Shirley Chisolm said in the days of Watergate, we believe in the Constitution. The president and his enablers have offended against that belief, and will shortly pay the price, and life will go on.
1
It’s amazing to me that these “conservatives” can live with the hypocrisy involved in calling themselves Christians.
All those years of Catholic School and I still never found the part of the Bible where the Lord said, “And let they who suffer just keep their mouths shut because it causes social discomfort for the wealthy.”
At what point are people like Brooks going to realize that it’s the conditions of suffering that create divisions - and that ignoring it won’t fix it?
5
January 20th there will be Women's Marches all over the country. I can't wait to be a visible part of the Resistance again and I am bringing four people who have never attended a political rally in their lives. The five of us will be carrying signs and taking photos to fill Twitter, FaceBook. We'll be bringing back enthusiasm and commitment to our towns and counties.
The force that is building is coming from us and it is NOT blowing the country away. It's blowing away the greed, racism, bigotry and fear that your party has been trading in for decades.
The only chains breaking are the ones that bind the weak minds of Trump voters. 2018 will be one for the record books.
4
I see two political parties and three constituencies. These constituencies are
(1) People and companies increasingly succeeding in the emerging economy
(2) Currently successful but declining companies out of step with the emerging economy (think big oil, and factory livestock farming) and those who prosper through harming us (think tobacco and opioid suppliers)
(3) People who have been left behind by the economy or harmed by industry in the last thirty years.
Currently Democrats do well with #1, Republicans, dependent on their donations, serve #2, and dependent on their votes, use cultural wedge issues and alternate facts to appeal to #3.
The only silver linings I see in the Trump presidency is that it is making group #1 more aware of the plights of their brothers and sisters in group #3, and making group #3 more aware of the true constituency of the Republican party. The alliance of #1 and enough of #3 can't come soon enough, especially as artificial intelligence enabled automation is coming to pluck more and more of us out of group #1 and into group #3.
6
So. Mr. Brooks reads something by a lecturer that will let Mr. Brooks moralize about liberals and individualism. He decries the idea that there is any oppression of a moneyed elite, or the crushing of working people into near-poverty. There's not oppression based on social, racial, economic or other grounds, not really. People just imagine those things instead of thinking noble thoughts about how we are obliged to realize that we don't really suffer, and how any problems we have are simply in our heads. Mr. Brooks doesn't have those problems because his head is in the right place, thanks to his superior understanding of suffering and oppression. And his reading of lecturers who support that understanding. One comfortable man, a fuzzy bit of reading, an easy out for a troubled people--take, mix, and call it Mr. Brook's latest round on the feedback loop of his mind.
6
Tolstoy believed that liberalism and conservatism each have inherent and unique problems that accumulate the longer one remains in power. Eventually the problems become so pronounced that the people (or in Russia, the royals) decided that they had to change to prevent social disorder. The opposite regime comes in, fixes the problems caused by the previous, and starts accumulating it's own problems. Rinse, repeat.
When the pendulum swings too far one way or the other, the system is in danger. It looks like that is happening now.
4
While I agree with Brooks, I think he misses the obvious point:
Republicans are The Empire.
Democrats are The Rebellion.
9
Henry Adams: "Politics has always been an organized hatred." He wrote it, it seems, in 1908. Did workers not feel victimized at the time? Class was much more of a tribe back then than anything we face today, with the exception of race, which has always been the greatest. But I agree on Ayn Rand-type of individualism: that's a real curse. However, it dwells on the right, not left. Consequently, there is no symmetry between Reps and Dems.
3
Yes....except one major political party has embraced the tribalism of the Right. As the Republicans continue to tear the Right wing right off the bird, we can't expect it to fly...
8
As the level of vitriol increases. As rhetoric like "take our country back" escalates and number of military style weapons in homes I can't help but look at recent lessons on the extremes of tribalism - Yugoslavia and Rwanda. We all thought a Trump couldn't happen but there he is. We all hope that we won't go the route of Yugoslavia and Rwanda but all the elements for that are present and the rhetoric is escalating. The rise of hate radio (and Mr. Brooks the liberal/progressive side has nothing to compare to), the alternate fact based universe of rightwing evangelicals, the NRA - Dana Loesch's incredibly inflammatory diatribes, the incredibly eager way that Republican politicians look to ignore the Constitution are symptoms of a profound illness in this nation. The core of this modern tribalism started in earnest with the passage of two laws - the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act and the way that the migrated Dixiecrats and Republicans used the predjudices that were already there to start a slow burning fire. Well, that fire has burst out and it's really very likely to take our house with it.
7
Deeply entrenches and very powerful forces in the US have long promoted dog-eat-dog thinking.
Take social security, the concept and the program. Where's the allegiance to our common humanity in a government whose officials divert money, which its citizens have contributed as a hedge against poverty when they're too old to work, to other things? Where's the allegiance to our common humanity in the fact that said officials feel okay about proposing to curtail, rather than promote, social security, the concept and the program?
3
Sorry, Mr. Brooks, but wishing that this country and its politics could pull together is pretty tribal in itself. Ever since Vietnam (I was an adolescent then), when I thought hard about what it would take to kill someone for my country, I have felt much more at ease thinking of all humans as my tribe. It is almost as hard for me to understand a Trump voter as it is to understand an Uzbek, but I can and should be willing to join hands with either for the sake of our common humanity. During the Vietnam war, both patriotism and my Catholic faith lost their luster, but I never did lose my sense of small-c catholic hope that we could all do better together. I love how much the arc of history has bent toward justice in my lifetime, in terms of race and gender and disability and orientation and a lot of other dimensions, and I wouldn't worry too much about this one country on its own.
3
Good for you and your personal journey. I wish everyone could come to the same conclusions as you.
I used to think that society was on an ever upward arc, increasing justice and logic, moving to a better world. But, that was because I grew up in the 1960s when tremendous strides were made, by Republicans and Democrats alike (even Nixon!), to affirm civil rights, to protect our air, water, and endangered wildlife, and to generally make the world a better place.
I am much more pessimistic now. Ronald Reagan destroyed the pubic's belief that the collective will of the people (the government) was a force for good. Now it's a scramble for "I'll get mine" before you get yours. :^(
5
Thanks for this column. I read the transcript of Prof. Haidt's lecture, and then, I watched the recording of him delivering them. His remarks rang true for me. If I feel despair, it's because I think there are so many people who aren't open to engaging with one another. Their tribalism has hardened to such a degree that they will not try to understand the other person's point of view. They can, but they will not. We do seem to have lost common principles, and worse, many people don't want to do the work necessary to restore them. It starts with respect.
2
"Martin Luther King described segregation and injustice as forces tearing us apart. He appealed to universal principles and our common humanity as ways to heal prejudice and unite the nation."
I believe that a majority of Americans still believe in our common humanity and common moral principles. Brooks's essay reduces us to categories based on our worst impulses and ignores the fact that people can and do rally around our responsibility to ensure the welfare of each other.
1
For a start, show me any diverse nation where the majority has not oppressed minorities. If you can find it, that would be a good model going forward.
It appears that we're trying something new here, and to make it work, we have to make it work for everyone. That includes those of lesser skill, or who don't look like everyone else, and who's cultural values are not the same. It doesn't mean that everybody has to do as well as everyone else, but being a person of ordinary means has to lead to a reasonable outcome. Most people will struggle to take more than their share if they think that an 'ordinary' share is not enough.
You can eat tacos or kimchee, dance around a maypole, or wear a hijab, and if I feel safe, I'm far more likely to accept you as you are.
4
Like many of Mr. Brook's articles, this one reads like a 19th century Chinese Mandarin bemoaning the masses' loss of filial piety and loyalty to the imperial regime. The "Sacred Edicts" of the Qing Dynasty tended to ignore the fact that the standard of living of ordinary Chinese was declining and some people even did not have enough food to eat. In much the same way, Brooks blames "identity politics" for tearing America apart, ignoring the underlying cause of this polarization: growing economic inequality. I am now 72. When I was 22, or 32, America had many more opportunities for working and middle class people to achieve their dreams than is true today.
Mr. Brooks. Wake up and smell the inequality brewing! We will soon be a caste society if we aren't one already.
14
"The problem is that tribal common-enemy thinking tears a diverse nation apart."
Mr. Brooks, the problem is that for the first time in our nation's history we have a president who is dividing the people of our country instead of bringing them together. Our president isn't trying to ensure the "domestic tranquility" called for in the preamble of the Constitution. As a narcissist, he cares only about his own political base because they stroke his massive ego.
18
The issue I take with attacking Identity Politics on University campsus is just that, they are issues on University campsus.
While you do get stupidity along the lines of self segregation the fact remains that this is an issue effecting a small portion of Liberal Arts graduates.
The more harmful Identity Politics being pushed is the kitchen and increasingly embraced by Republicans.
White evangelicals have effectively become a tribe, viewing tribal supremacy as the most important goal. When Republicans announced the burden off their cuts would be squarely aimed at blue states there was open celebration of an attack on large parts of the country.
15
Unfortunately, the 14 picks by the NYT seem to represent the same tribalism that David Brooks talks about. I think he, and the speakers he mentions are right and many responses are proof of that point. My only comment on the column itself, is regarding Haidt's listing of the radicalization of the Republican party as a factor in creating tribalism. True, but the Democratic party as also gone far to the left over the last decade or so. Having grown up in Chicago in a very liberal Democratic family, but having lived in Iowa and North Dakota for a total of 28 years, I can see that the gap is growing in both directions.
6
Really thoughtful, nuanced piece. We need more love across "cultural" lines; not less.
6
Nuance is a bad word, at least after a candidate for President calls you a "deplorable".
I'm waiting for the Democrats to apologize. I don't want nuance.
I want a clear "we were wrong" from the Democrats and leftists. I want them to say "we apologize to white males for calling them deplorable, and officially and in writing discriminating against them".
Until that happens there will be no meeting of the minds.
Not nuance. Clarity.
The fate of all countries is ultimately driven by the survival of of the fittest. Sports are set up similarly. However, can you imagine next week's national championship game between the Bulldogs and the Crimson Tide being played without referees? Do you think the game would end without controversy? without violence? Even though both teams would know the result would be meaningless unless the win was accomplished by the rules do you think this would be enough to keep both teams from deflating a football or two?
Trump and his Republican buddies seem to think that such a game can be played without referees. The economy will run itself. And it will- for a while. Long enough for the strongest to increase their wealth even more. The 8 richest men in the world have as much net worth as half of the world's population combined. Oops! What happened to the game without an adequate number of fair referees? Can we count on these 8 men and the ones just below on the food chain to efficiently and equitably use their bounty for the good of all?
Marx was not correct that a socialist state would be the utopia we need (sorry Bernie). But he was correct that capitalism will implode on itself. Trump has craftily positioned himself as one of the 'oppressed' leading his base against the 'enemy'. The base will soon find Trump to be a Trojan Horse. The true enemy lies within.
There will be no last tribe standing. Only the NEXT women and men capturing the fruits of the masses.
3
What a nothing burger!
All of this "tribalism" is just comfortable people in the middle to upper middle class occupying their boredom-inducing luxury and free time with a little verbal combat. That and a desire to virtue signal. Macho men go for Trump, and those trying to seem cool or compassionate line up for the Resistance. It's all a pose!
But believe me, as soon as a real issue comes along and these armchair warriors are faced with a real hit to their security or paycheck, we always drop the play-fighting and coalesce. Cases in point - post 9/11, we were ready to water board, surveil, and literally invade any country or potential terrorist that maybe had something to do with it. And as a result, the GOP swept both houses and Bush got a second term. Even the Times was beating the drum. Now fast forward - the economy is in the tank and the war isn't going well. Result? A bunch of future Trump macho men in the upper Midwest lined up to vote for an unknown junior black Senator, with a pretty exotic name, to be their President.
When things get real, we drop the "tribalism." And with blue state liberals about to face the prospect of actually having to pay for their public largesse instead of deducting it, I suspect many upper income blue state progressives are about to get a lot less tribal, and more GOP-curious in the years immediately ahead. See how Trump brings us together?
Our response to 9/11 was unity, for a moment, but in what if not a play fight for armchair warriors? While young men actually died, Dick Cheney was in his eighth heart, back in DC with Donald Rumsfeld, plotting a war that we can’t find any seeming way to “win.” We tortures errand boys for nothing and we’re holding people at Guantanamo because we can’t actually prove any wrongdoing.
And progressive blue states have been paying for their own largesse and for what meager state benefits red states will allow their citizens for years.
1
The tribalism transcends national borders. Tribes are urban, rural , suburban and cosmopolitan. Tribal members can be in Tehran, Paris, NYC, Tel Aviv and Sydney.
Mr Brooks your society is international and your tribe in the USA is in a pan of water on the stove and the temperature is slowly increasing. People who belong to your tribe throughout the world know your political party and your government as the greatest danger the world has ever known.
If you were back in the city of your birth on New Years Eve and turned on CBC you might have understood why people who see the world as you were trained and educated to see it are very frightened.
It is 2018 and your country, the mightiest, richest and most powerful nation to ever exist no longer works and there are no competent people in charge.Your executive, legislative and judicial branches are run by people who cannot deal with change.
8
Though Brooks and by reference Haidt are largely correct in what they have concluded, the main points have been commented on for years, often in these comments.
America is losing its way as a collective enterprise, a country uniquely founded and tied together by a set of beliefs laid out in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, (regardless of their original and ongoing imperfections.) America is, always has been, and always will be a work in progress, but no matter how far we are from full achievement of those goals, they remain what has bound us together, First Nations people and slave descendants, as well as immigrants from vastly different cultures and histories seeking what those born here often take for granted.
Civics used to be a required subject in schools. Yes, our society was often idealized in the process, but the mechanisms for making it better were taught by the process itself, by the emphases on "we the people" and "consent of the governed", legitimating our right to fight for a better society. Sadly, that process, which can bind together people with vastly different beliefs and histories, is on the wane, substituted by the narratives embraced by hyphenated Americans (which we all are), who now primarily identify with the adjective preceding the hyphen, not the noun, American.
Left and Right we now identify as tribalized adjectives,refusing to grant the legitimacy of the proper noun, American, to other adjectives who might disagree with us.
1
The GOP recognized the power of tribalism many years ago. It found a proponent in Reagan (the "moral majority"), and was advanced by the likes of Tom Delay, House Republican of Texas, who pursued a methodical approach to gerrymandering congressional districts in the form of the K Street Project. It is now enshrined in most parts of this country. It has its evangelist in the form of Fox News. The net result of this very successful yet inevitably destructive strategy is that only by appealing to a divisive tribalist mentality can one ever hope to be elected to office. If you doubt this, you need look no further than our Divider in Chief, a natural born tribalist.
2
I came to the USA long time ago, in my late twenties, not speaking English and was able with several adjustments to fit right in .
Learned English, had an interesting profession , family, friends , a good life .
I don’t know what tribalism is , to me it depends on the individual to tear down barriers or not be bothers by them and carry on .
I was at times discriminated but I couldn’t care less , I just went on with my life without recriminations.
One has to find an inner balance to cope with life incongruities, one has to develope a discerning sense not to let obstile situations run over and destroy life expectations.
I am now old and enjoying life both in Florida and Europe.
I have tremendous faith in young people, full of energy ,hope,perseverance, openness and common sense .
They will change the direction of this Country, they will unite, they will fight for the future of this delicate planet. I am for them. I don’t know what tribalism is.
2
The people who are the most powerless in american society are working people who can be tracked through a W-2 form. Unions used to offer some balance between the working people and the corporations and
government was able to step in
to level the playing field in many
areas. Government provided a protective sheild through regulations found in the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Obamacare, FCC, EPA, Education, Commerce, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security , the FBI, the Judiciary, etc. Now the Republican Tribe, having destroyed the Unions on behalf of the corporations is systematically finishing off the W-2ers, our ‘potato eaters’ if you recall Van Gogh’s early works, by dismantling any protections
they had left.
9
I think David Brooks recalls Dr. King's struggles differently than I do. I do not recall that King was cheered on because of his appeal to common humanity. Rather, he he had to endure many years of brutal, deadly struggle including his assassination. Throughout those years, I was often told that King's efforts were dangerous to the unity of our country; that they exerted a centrifugal force. Sometimes, insisting on what is right means being disruptive.
9
Brooks’s history also leaves out how much more progress MLK was able to make when the alternative to nonviolent civil disobedience, equality “by any means necessary” was presented by Malcolm X.
1
I think there is one truth: we are, all of us, good and evil. Of course, this doesn't say anything about the degree to which we apply our separate parts. Even Hitler did some good things. Even Gandhi did some bad things. History remembers each according to its own interpretation.
Trumpism, like Hitler's Nazism, strives to strip away reason. Only acceptance is tolerated. Obedience to a central figure is held as an ideal. Thankfully, Trump is not Hitler --- he's not that well organized. Trump can't put a million thugs on the street to murder the opposition. If he could, I and other progressives would be at war today. That may come. Perhaps someone will take over Trumpism, as Hitler and his merry band of cutthroats did in the 1920's. Perhaps Trumpism will fade away as fascists did in England, France and America. The Tea Party certainly did.
We, the independent-minded Americans will be watching. If it comes to blows, I expect the progressives to give a good accounting. We won't walk into the gas chambers like sheep.
2
As Noam Chomsky, no binary thinker if ever there was not one, has said many times lately: the republican party is the most dangerous organization in the history of the world. You imagine the world how you wish it to be, and then you wish it to be so. Stay open to the fact that the anti-republican tribe is simply correct.
8
Republican evangelical conservatism and racism has caused the country to fracture. Go out and see for yourself the real US Brooks instead of quoting others ideas.
10
Guess what, the GOP excels at this. They are the party that has pushed rugged individualism, carried on about not wanting to help certain people, played on everyone's fears of losing out (while they were busy divvying up the pie so that their rich donors got most of it and we got next to nothing), making unreasonable and bigoted statements, etc. And the GOP was the party that said right after Obama was elected in 2008 that they would not work with him; they'd work to make him a one term president.
How did you think we'd feel about such a divisive set of statements and actions? How do you think it feels to be told that you are unpatriotic because you disagree with something your country is doing? How do you think some of us feel as part of the LGBTQ community, or as Muslims, or as Jews, women, or just plain average Americans when we see the benefits flow solely to the rich? And when we see the GOP refuse to behave responsibly for 8 years, how are we supposed to deal with it? The party you have worshipped has failed most Americans and continues to do the same. It's not tribalism any longer: it's the certain knowledge that our elected officials have an agenda that does not include working on our behalf. Why should we support them or the people who enable them?
12
I have spent much time thinking about this issue and how we become a cesspool of greed and self serving people who think only of themselves. As the election went on and it became apparent that the back lash "hate", from the Obama presidency was going to thrust us into chaos, I feared for us. I blame the leadership of our country for taking advantage of the peoples ignorance and driving wedges between us. I blame HC for her grandiosity that blinded her. I supported her for only one reason. Stability. The alternative was sickening. She did not hear or talk to all of us. She failed to unite us. The press failed us for $$. The FBI failed us. The SCOTUS failed us for $$. The Russians were the only ones who were actually in tune with the people and pushed DT over the finish line via Social media who sold us out.$$. The Republicans have lied to divide us and are lapdogs to the Koch types. $$. The Democrats are just as guilty in that regard. If they weren't, they would be aggressively fighting for us. Instead they protect thier power and talk only to stay in power, waiting. $$ I want leadership that knows who and what it serves so people will unite behind them, not a crisis. The R's continue to lie and enable the rape of our Republic. $$ They have lost any moral compass and use thier power for themselves and thier moneyed masters e.g. deregulation, gerrymandering...$$. I will forgive my fellow countrymen for thier ignorance amd thier hatred, not our "leaders". They need to go. VOTE.
9
The problem with "an identity politics that emphasizes our common humanity" as Dr. King wished is that it didn't work. Racial segregation was removed from our laws, but not from our people. Forcing the integration of public schools simply made many white families leave the public schools, or move to places where there were no minorities to integrate, for example. Conservative politicians continued to make racial appeals to win votes, and we now have a president who does so more openly than any since Dr. King was alive. Brooks wants to blame liberals for this, but the evidence is undeniable that even during the Obama years racism among white people persisted, often with deadly consequences for minorities. It would make sense to blame liberals for adopting an identity politics based on casting white racists as the enemy if white racism had been defeated, but the fact is that it was not and is still very much with us.
2
If tribalism means speaking out loudly and persistently about the moral bankruptcy of the Republican party and Donald Trump, then so be it. They chose this fight, not me, and I'm not inclined to be nice about it.
9
Many if not most of the Republicans acted against the interests of their own country during the 8 years of President Obama. Somehow many people managed to excuse them, many swallowing the "birther" Kool-Aide, watching as their elected representatives vowed to oppose any policy Obama championed.
Now under Trump we see the Republicans' true colors: a tribe of obsequious toadies, focused on how they can please their wealthy donors, and to heck with the deficit and who cares what happens to the U.S. Never has their true nature been more obvious, more sickening. Time for a change.
13
I for one choose to believe that there's a strong foundation (one the big bad wolf can't blow down) that's hidden below our vast differences. It's the foundation that spontaneously emerged following 9/11. The one that unified us and had us waving flags and caring about one another. And although we might be bruised; we're not broken. And never will be. No one, not even a wayward president can do that.
2
flag-waving after 9/11 is another example of failed tribalism.. try harder
3
I am not proud of what emerged in this country after 9/11. We immediately evacuated the elites at the source of the hatred back to Saudi Arabia, killed thousands of inocents in a country that had nothing to do with the terror, and waterboarded the captives to the world’s great horror. It was America’s moment of completely
irrational thinking, and it was the same Republican Tribe in power
then, that we are talking about today. Think about that and never forget.
4
As always, David Brooks provides cogent, well-written articles. Unfortunately, however, his articles often tend to identify a minor player as a primary cause of a major issue. I fully agree that tribalism is a huge factor in the ongoing disintegration of a chaotic and diverse, yet truly American society. Some college campuses may well contribute to tribalistic leanings, but many don't, and students do tend to grow up and out of a specific mind-set as they progress through college and after they graduate.
If you're looking for a source and a stimulus for much of the us-vs.-them dichotomy that now pervades our society, look for the entities that profit by creating and exploiting tribalism. I think that source is spelled "FOX," with other news venues following in belated and less blatant efforts to carve out a financial self-sustaining niches for themselves.
9
"From an identity politics that emphasized our common humanity . . . " Really? I didn't notice that our political status quo was rooted in secular humanism. If that's truly the case then I agree - Let's Make America Great Again!!
2
I disagree with the attempt at moral equivalency in this article. Granted there are two extremes, but they are not on the same fitting. Tribalism on University campuses is fueled by the need to protect disadvantaged groups, whereas tribalism on the extreme right is fueled by eradicating those protections.
To legitimize the perceived suffering of the alt-right is to legitimize their ultimate message, that if you are not a straight, white, christian, you do not belong in this country. When faced with that, how do you expect minorities to react?
12
Can we retreat from, eliminate, the words "tribes" and "tribalism" in this context. Tribes are good, supportive social units. Factions and factionalism are the words that are more appropriate and were the ones used by founding fathers to describe the same concerns as Mr Brooks. stephenadairvernon.blogspot.com
4
Had you ever lived in a tribal society you would never consider tribes as 'good supportive social units'. Tribes depend of their cohesion on hatred of and constant conflict with other tribes; see sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East as today's most obvious examples.
The right has never sincerely championed anyone except the wealthy, but the left used to stand for everyone else. Today's left, however, depends entirely on fracturing society into mutually intolerant tribes, whose only common enemy is straight white men. Trump and his corporate and Russian beneficiaries were smart enough to capitalize on our social disintegration. As the US tears itself apart, it could take the rest of the world with it.
"Extremism is the defense of liberty is no vice, moderation in the defense of Justice is no virtue." These words were uttered by the conservative Barry Goldwater. However, they may have more meaning for the left nowadays. Let's suppose our time is analogous to Germany in the 1920s. Let's suppose that as a nation culturally steeped in freedom and equality, there are at least some of us who can percieve a potential rise of Fascism and authoritarianism. Perhaps then the metaphor Mr. Brooks should use is not that of the physics of motion, but of medicine and physiology. Perhaps the chaos we see is the devotees to freedom and equality unleashing the antibodies of free speech to destroy the early onset of Fascism. It may look like discord, but what we are seeing is the low level fever of a free society trying to rid itself of sickness. The excesses of campus free speech or intolerance on the left, is just the fever spiking.
3
At 82 I understand why the country is divided. I see it as the result of Policies by bother Democratic and Republican Presidents who sat around and failed to enforce our immigration laws and turned a blind eye to illegal immigrants in the US. That was wrong and breached the presidential oath to faithfully enforce our laws.
The Tribalism Brooks moans about is the fault of the failure to enforce our immigration laws and failing to manage Refugee Resettlement. No thought was ever given as to how refugees from alien cultures in the Middle and Far East and Africa would fit in with the current American culture developed over centuries.
The threat of terrorism has only heightened tribalism as people more and more see outsiders and aliens as the cause of terrorism. The attitude towards Muslims, not only in the US but Europe too, was sealed when 9/11 happened. Had we enforced our immigration laws maybe 9/11 could have been prevented - after all the hijackers were present on expired visitor visas and they certainly would not have been allowed in the US today. And we still have no way to track people who overstay their visitor visas.
Unplanned cultural changed to the US have created this tribalism and the sooner we deal with this problem the better we will be. Europe is facing the same problem - look at the election results throughout the EU and you will see the same cultural problems causing chaos there.
4
judyweller, at a mere 80, I don't think you have learned much in your 82 years. Arguments like "people more and more see outsiders and aliens as the cause of terrorism (or crime)" were made about previous generations, by people who didn't like the influx of, Italians, Irish, Chinese, Catholics, Jews.....
Alien cultures? Yours is more of a misfit than most incomers, and willfully so,
9
"No thought was ever given as to how refugees from alien cultures in the Middle and Far East and Africa would fit in with the current American culture developed over centuries. "
or
"No thought was ever given as to how refugees from alien cultures in Great Britain and Western Europe would fit in with the current American Indian Culture developed over centuries."
1
This is a disappointing essay from someone who I had thought had deeper insight into the present moment. All societies struggle with the kinds of division that can become "tribalism" if political leaders stoke those differences to gain political advantage. Think Shia/Sunni, which wasn't such a thing in Iraq until successive Shia leaders oriented all politics around that antinomy, or the Muslim/Christian differences exploited by Milosevic in Bosnia. Struggles against pretty obvious discrimination hardly counts as tribalism, since the main objective of the protesters is that they want "in," they want to be able fully to participate in the commonweal. The moral stain of the Trump presidency is the exploitation of tribal impulses, indeed, to generate "fake news" that will exacerbate them. Brooks' column does not help at all.
5
Mr. Brooks describes our nation's hyper partisanship as a "retreat to tribalism."
Yes; or, to put it another way, our current divide is a consequence wholly of counteracting forces: Ignorance vs. Enlightenment.
3
What is false?
Mr. Brooks is entitled to his beliefs but LeMonde (France’s leading intellectual newspaper) this month offered a much simpler explanation
http://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2017/12/15/la-democratie-sapee-par-l...
Democracy weakened by illegalities.
"The globalization of trade has resulted in a vast redistribution of cards, with winners and losers.
In the latter category, we find mainly Western middle classes. They are today the main losers of the last forty years. More and more competing with people on the other end of the planet better trained and able to perform the same job for less. “
Tribalism is the defence of those whom the political system failed.
1
i may be an old, conservative (well, libertarian), white guy in the south, but everyone who reads the nyt is part of my tribe.
5
I find it remarkable that at a time when tribalism has gone so far that a fascist, "white-supremacy" president defends the neo-Nazis who murdered a woman, after a time when racist Republicans blocked and mocked every potential achievement of a non-white president, Brooks is only criticizing the youth who happen to be upset that they were left with a raped and wounded planet and nation and we are all coming to terms with just how much privileged white men have ruined many women's lives through their oppressive power.
9
"He listed some of the reasons centrifugal forces may now exceed centripetal: the loss of the common enemies we had in World War II and the Cold War, an increasingly fragmented media, the radicalization of the Republican Party, and a new form of identity politics, especially on campus."
Read Twain for a better idea of what essential "American values" are, and to which we are returning in the post WWII/Cold War era. The need to deify the "Founding Fathers" and recognize our holy tome, "the Constitution" have been undone.
Without something to hold people together, they fragment. "Individualism" is the essence of Americanism, and it is not harmonious with communitarianism or even the concept of "family."
2
During my lifetime, when new presidents were elected, they have always recognized that they were now the leaders of ALL Americans, not just their base, and made a 180-degree turn to reach out and represent the the WHOLE country.
I am sure that "it-takes-a-village" Hillary Clinton would have similarly done what her husband did in this respect.
But, Mr. Brooks, what did our new GOP president do?
Who is responsible for the polarization of America today?
No false equivalents here, Mr. Brooks.
Who STILL holds rallies tribe-baiting his base?
Look in the mirror, Mr. GOP.
10
"In societies like ours, individuals are responsible for their own identity, happiness and success." Unless you're born into extreme poverty, are the children of illegal immigrants, or are born with leukemia. David, read up again on the "just world" hypothesis. We only believe ourselves to be the architects of our success and/or happiness, and that is a positive illusion that helps to sustain us during the times when reality rears its ugly head. But it becomes a delusion when we attempt to create public policy based on it.
3
David, you are once again cogently call out the loud ideologues amongst us on both wings and hold up their "accomplishments" in our society for examination. Once the Soviet Union fell and certain norms of inter-personal conduct were weakened slowly at first and, under duress, later fell apart, we were on our way to excessive individualism and its awful consequences.
Now all that hate and division is here. It is not yet so murderous as the Balkans circa 1994, or the endless Israeli-Arab contest. But then under the Donald, we have Charlottesville, and a ball field outside Washington where mass murder of Congressmen was narrowly averted. But we are on our way to something truly terrifying if present trends are not reversed.
Blame is applied not just to the usual suspects of the party of the late Lee Atwater and Nixonian southern strategy and its current spawn, but also cosseted professors with life tenure on the activist left pushing their own brand of grievance and tribalism on steroids a/k/a identity politics. If you doubt me read some of these academic's writings condemning "universalism" and racial coalitions, in favor of victimhood rampant, and the white "tribe" as guilty until proven otherwise and maybe not even then. Heaven help us if we can't remember how people of both races marched and died in the 1960's to achieve civil rights.
4
Brooks writes: "In 1994, only 16 percent of Democrats had a “very unfavorable” view of the G.O.P. Now, 38 percent do. Then, only 17 percent of Republicans had a “very unfavorable” view of Democrats. Now, 43 percent do."
Gee, David, maybe the Democrats are retreating into tribalism OR maybe the G.O.P. is adopting more unacceptable, extreme political positions and abandoning their moral principles. Ya think maybe huh?
3
Tribalism is good for business. If you're Rupert Murdoch, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity or anyone else in the business of selling division. Or running a political campaign based on hate and fear.
Rupert Murdoch saw a market. A business opportunity. Selling division. He started FOX News to fan the flames of tribalism, increase market share by exploiting the disgruntled, formed a coalition with the GOP and then capitalized off of our division.
No Fascists to fear? No Communists? There's always terrorists. And your neighbor. Tribalism is good for business. Tune in for more breaking news, coming right up after this commercial break..
6
This article provides valuable information on young humans and minds full of binary dimensions. It points to these young humans and college campuses and suggests that therein lies the cause of centripetal explosion. It fails to mention
Fox News
Newt Gingrich
Pat Robertson
Rupert Murdoch
Ronald Reagan
Sinclair Broadcasting
The Koch Brothers
Citizens United
The Tea Party
6
Tribalism: We've been there, done that . . . not the way home.
1
The bellicose stale repressive narcissistic micro-identitarian resentment- and victim-filled political tribalism of pseudo liberals (and actual neoliberals) resembles a gaslight operation whose main purposes are to 1) baffle its own adherents and fellow travelers while 2) confirming that the self-serving dreams and suspicions of the super wealthy were not too far off the mark.
And yet it's YOU talking this way. Enjoying being a superfluous extra in your favorite Ayn Rand novel.
1
One possible remedy for tribal splintering is authoritarian socialism. Think of Yugoslavia under Tito. Everyone had to play nice or else. But once the regime collapsed, people went back to lunging at each other's throats again.
1
MLK was called a "race hustler" (among other things) in the 1960s by David Brook's former employer, The National Review.
The revisionism performed by conservatives on MLK these days is amazing. This is a man they absolutely despised when he was alive but now that he's safely dead, they constantly use him as a kumbaya figure of racial neutrality.
20 years from now, don't be surprised when conservatives start claiming that they never had a problem with gay marriage.
I guess revisionism is their way of dealing with being on the wrong side of history.
10
I was with you, Mr. Brooks, until your line: "Once you’ve identified your herd’s oppressor — the neoliberal order, the media elite, white males, whatever — "
I think you forgot a couple "oppressors" from the right's version of "oppressors":
I'll fix it for you:
"Once you’ve identified your herd’s oppressor — the neoliberal order, minorities, immigrants, non-Christians, gay people, religious freedom, whatever —"
4
Ugh. Missing the point. Tribalism is not a bad thing when we are faced with the danger and threat of the GOP and their ongoing propaganda wars and well orchestrated attacks on voting. I'm sorry to say that you are not seeing the GOP for what they are, an organized mob to destroy anything and everything that has not been their idea. AND they have no current or workable ideas, so it's been an ongoing attack from them for decades and nothing else. The GOP is a vacuous mess of outdated ideology with no basis in reality. What is happening right now in this country is a revolution on the left, whether you can see it or not. Guys like you really need to get out on the ground more often and actually see and hear what is going on.
4
You've just proved his point.
3
A lot of this is to blame on the political consultants, starting with Lee Atwater, continuing with Susan Estrich, and now a litany of win-at-all-costs political hit men and women, who make their reputation by winning in a scorched Earth environment. And they are unfortunately assisted by our Supreme Court, who proved in the Citizens United case that they are so buried in the Constitution that sometimes cannot see beyond their noses.
1
in the one philosophy class i took in college the moral code put forth by the professor teaching the course was that need placed a moral imperative on those able to satisfy the need. placing those with needs in the morally superior position to those who have created the wealth that is able to satisfy them is a form of slavery that has become the battle cry of the left. in that class i needed an A in order to lift my grade point average. when asked about the expected length of the term paper the instructor indicated that in the past some had been 10 pages others 100. my paper was one paragraph in which i told the instructor i needed an A in the class and he was obligated by his moral code to give me an A. he gave me the grade i needed.
2
“What is moral order today?..."
A compelling question. I argue that Truth is moral, and that what Trump and friends parade is neither truth nor morality. Hence, currently there is no collective moral order. And the chief culprit for its absence is the Republican Party, culminating in Trump. Democrats have mostly just stood by, so let's not engage false equivalency.
3
Unfortunately, the Dem party plays the same game...
1
Excellent article. However, judging from the comments, it’s amazing how many people seem to react to it without bothering to understand it: “tribalism is fine, if it’s a good tribe, and since I’m in it, of course it’s a good one”.
It’s also really funny to see the most pampered generation in American history talking endlessly about “suffering”.
5
What is notably absent from Mr. Brooks commentary is the abandonment of the individual and certain groups by those in control of our political and economic power structures. Congress, at the behest of billionaires, enacts a tax overhaul that transfers wealth from the poor and middle class to the wealthiest. Gerrymandering and voter suppression laws undermine voters' rights, especially those of minorities. The President refuses to repudiate white supremacists, describes Hispanics as rapists, and seeks to restrict immigration based on religion. I believe that these actions tell us that there is no "us." There seems to be little concern on the part of our leaders for the common good, and little evidence of attention to traditional common values to guide their actions. If people don't feel that they belong to society as a whole, they they'll retreat to their ethnic or political tribe for protection. This is probably doomed to fail over the long run, but, as Mr. Brooks points out, we're hard wired for tribalism. Unfortunately, many of those in positions of power are happy to exploit this.
8
Sorry Mr. Brooks. Through your columns and beliefs, you were a conscript for the centrifugal forces that have ripped our country apart. You ideologically chose to be a loyal foot soldier for conservatism's bigotry, whiteness, nationalism, and rise to authoritarian rule - judicially, legally, culturally, socially, and educationally. As a member of the fourth estate, you were an accessory to the rise of a movement to destroy freedom of speech through your own profession. You cannot escape what you allowed to grow and fester into a national malignancy - Republican evangelical conservatism.
5
It is truly puzzling when Brooks is labelled as some sort of arch-conservative... He is no Roosevelt, or McGovern, but
1
It is truly puzzling when Brooks is labelled as some sort of arch-conservative... He is no Roosevelt, or McGovern, but he is no McCarthy.
1
I believe it is unwise to comment on this piece without listening carefully to Johnathan Haidt's lecture at the Manhattan Institute. It is hyperlinked in the David Brooks "The Retreat to Tribalism." I intended to be a Jefersonion "Clock Mechanic" (Listen to the lecture). I intend to advocate to all my friends, (right and left) 3 things for fixing.
1. Suggest to your congressman that he hang around DC on the weekend to socialize with a member holding contrary views.
2. Promote unsupervised play over organized sports for your kids, grandkids, and great grandkids.
3. Let your Alma Mater know that you support effort to allow all speakers invited to campus to speak to come, speak freely and be guaranteed safety. That you support expulsion of students who use physical intimidation to prevent this from happening.
Thanks again David Brooks for your opinion piece
4
The president of the United States avers that neo-Nazis are the moral equal of those who protest against them, that Mexicans are rapists & murderers that all Haitans have AIDS, and that the residents of Puerto Rico are ungrateful for his presence. A presidential appointee at Health & Human Services physically prevents pregnant refugees from getting abortions. Another presidential appointee eliminates federal oversight of rogue police departments. Another presidential appointee ecourages the demonizing of immigrants, illegal & legal alike. Another presidential appointee works tirelessly to deprive women of access to birth control.
And here, in the New York Times, yet another conservative writes a ruminative essay on American tribalism, making sure that most of the blame falls on those teachers & students who don't welcome the Richard Spencers & Michael Cernoviches of this country.
In which alternate universe does David Brooks live? Please send directions--I'd like to live there, too.
6
Did David Brooks honestly just pen this entire column about Tribalism and fail to mention Rush Limbaugh's incessant hammering of a, let's face, fairly ineffective Center-Center-Left Democratic Party dating back to the 1980's? Did he really leave out Fox News and its 24 Hour bashing of all things liberal - in this, possibly the furthest Right developed country on Earth? Who does he think he's kidding with these outrageous oversights on the root causes of our current political situation? Have their been divisive voices on the Left? Of course. Have they been from the very top of the Party apparatus including the President himself? Not even once. Obama, for all his shortcomings, painstakingly tried to reach out to the other side and got mocked, tricked and swatted away every single time. Get your own house in order Mr. Brooks. Or better yet, we will for you.
15
A tribal oppressor is quite interesting a term. Perhaps it is useful too as I read sometimes in this comments board, including today, "a tribal oppressor" told people with critical opinions not to read NYT if they don't like it. It would be so funny if it were not really sad!
It is not very hard to find contributions in the NYT comments section complaining "THEY do this and THEY do that"; it as if though the contributor is somehow separated and and different from the terrible THEY. Somehow the wisdom of Pogo has been lost - "We have met the enemy; and THEY are us".
4
Mr. Brooks, first deal with the extreme lack of “virtue” in your own house. Your house that controls all 3 branches of government, most of the state houses, all of talk radio and has its own television network as a political organ; all actively live on the toxic fuel of creating false narratives to consciously create divisiveness.
After you address that, then we can talk about tribal campus leftists
15
I just love how Mr. 'republican apologist' Brooks always manages to bring the democrats into his analyses as if the two parties are equally at fault for the sordid amoral mess our country is in. The republican party of the rich and corporations, owned by the NRA, Koch brothers, and Sheldon Adelson and worshiped by the mentally handicapped does nothing but sow descent, and show utter hatred for the country they wish to rule either as a plutocracy or theocracy.
10
David Brooks and many of those he refers to have a mistaken conception of tribalism. They focus on the negative dimensions of the we/they dichotomy and fail to understand the extent to which the social and cultural institutions of most tribes display a comprehensive and sophisticated balance between centripetal and centrifugal forces. My conclusion, one based on a life of anthropological research and participation in development projects among tribal societies in South America and Africa, is that the so-called developed world can learn a great deal about how to raise well-mannered children and how to resolve conflicts within and between families, villages and nations.
5
Yes, tribes do all those good things for their members. Who enthusiastically wage war on their neighbors belonging to different tribes.
1
And btw, the tribalism is a part of the anomie that lessens us, divides us, unnecessarily, and falls prey to popular and not serious divisions.
While I understand the point about the corrosive effect of us/them thinking in the US, it's disturbing that there's no acknowledgement of the fact that the same thinking is used to justify adversarial relations with other countries or peoples. Old enough to have lived through much of the Cold War, it's hard for me to explain to my children why we spent 50 years and billions of dollars opposing the Soviet Union and Maoist China, with the entire Northern hemisphere in continual terror of nuclear war, while doing nothing to liberate Eastern Europe.
Similarly, the War on Terror is fueled by somewhat overblown fear of radical Islam. Israel has the right to call it an existential threat; the United States does not. I'm not suggesting that we should ignore real threats nor that we should not retaliate after an attack (as we did in Afghanistan and in hunting down Bin Laden) but that this thinking is what brought us the Iraq war and its needless aftermath.
I have great respect for our military, but let's admit that it uses the same ideas Haidt deplores by training young people whose brains evolved for tribal warfare to be prepared for warfare against our national enemies. Of course, the enemies are defined by our civilian political leaders.
I raised my millenial children to be individuals first AND to treat others as individuals first. Also, that we are all members of the HUMAN race.
7
Implying or stating as Mr. Brooks does in this article that MLK JR would have supported empty political conciliation over emancipatory struggle is a lie, pure and simple. MLK was fighting for the emancipation of the black and working classes and against the imperialist policies of the United States in Vietnam and South America. Why do we insist on drowning out the political realities we are living in with empty platitudes about "common humanity"? This is a perfect reflection of how mainstream media misrepresents political struggles by drawing up straw men arguments about the left movement in this country, and the constant effort of liberal elites to delegitimize political movements and free thought that threaten their hegemony.
1
Does Mr Brooks believe that their is a problem with the tribalism of the religious right and the identity politics that kept and still tries to keep LGBT people from being able to commonly access things like marriages, stores, and, yes, bathrooms?
Does that include the tribalism of the Israeli state which puts tribalism as central to its existence?
It would be important to note that the identity politics on the left actually has been a driving force for inclusion. Where the identity politics of RNC supported Roy Moore- a man who didn’t like any amendment after the tenth and didn’t think women belonged in public office, let alone vote.
Mr Brooks wishes to go back to days where only one identity mattered- his and white men like him. I would note he probably wouldn’t like the anti-semitism of the country club.
I appreciate that Mr Brooks claims to want inclusion it is depressing that this does not include the very identities of “those people”.
I wish he understood the difference between identity politics of the left which is about enfranchisement, opportunity, and a fair shake. And the Identity politics of the right which is all about denial of that for anyone else. It is a base difference between better selves and bigotry.
I think Mr Brooks should learn the difference, because in people as in politics what you think is the same might be a mask for something horribly different.
7
I am of the view that only one thing will save the United States and that is a return of the draft, but for everyone, without exception, and for much more than military purposes. We need to send our young Southerners North or West and our Northeasterners to the South and West etc etc......They need to help rebuild our infrastructure, provide legal services to the poor and to the middle class if they are lawyers, etc etc etc. We need national service and we need to show the next generations that there is more to the US than the town they grew up in.
11
The Dems' motto "stronger together" and the reiteration of "e pluribus unum" are not cries of tribalism. They are appeals to the strengths of diversity and respect for a range of opinion.
All these things are an anathema to the present GOP.
Although the appeal to dignity for all is laudable, the Dems do make a mistake when they focus upon this laudable goal to the point of distracting from the more important problems of restoring government by and for the people: restoring the middle class, the fixing of major public issues . For example, infrastrucutrue, rehabilitation, environmental protection, affordable housing, child & elder care, etc... all things the bottom-line me-me-me corporate backers of Congress and their toadies in the GOP cannot deal with.
2
"The Dems' motto "stronger together" and the reiteration of "e pluribus unum" are not cries of tribalism. "
That's the problem. No, that's not what they are.
They are LIES.
When Clinton called the winning voters "deplorables" she crossed
a bridge that will be very very hard to return across. The Democrats are still
playing the tribalism card.
Brooks -- do you really believe that Magna Charta and the US Constitution were intended to be some sort of check on tribalism?
That confusion probably crept into our law with the Civil War, but let's not get start imputing egalitarianism -- which is essential to any democracy -- with American history and culture.
The maypole that Brooks is using to illustrate his argument is fraught with White Privilege. Black people, women, Native American Nations, were all excluded from the maypole dance for most of America's history.
The centralizing forces at play in the Constitution and its White's Only maypole actually worked against Black, Native American, and women's interests. It empowered and fortified White men's privileged positions at other's expense. By the time there was some semblance of equal rights, White Men such as Trump and his ilk have already solidified an insurmountable economic advantage.
5
Maybe it's my tribalism speaking, but I have been watching the Republican Party since they used racism to flip the South for Goldwater in 1964. They have used bigotry and fear to enlist the simple minded for decades and then used the votes of those people to represent the interests of the economic elite. I'm old fashioned: I think there is a reality out there, and it is possible to figure out what it is--maybe never perfectly, maybe never unbiased--but something really happened and is happening. The basic reality is that the Republican Party does not represent the interests of the country, only of its rich elite. I'm not rich and I'm not stupid; that's my tribe.
9
I have to wonder if Brooks reads these reactions to his thoughts. I bet he doesn't. If so, one would think the insights he introduces/interprets would be more honest and less blind to the implied consequences to the arguments of his own tribe. One could then expect his writings to be more honest. If not, he's just another apologist for the right, blindly excusing the inexcusable while bemoaning it's outrages. And not worth further reading. if you refuse to acknowledge the elephant in the room, Brooks, you have nothing useful help reverse the destruction wrought by that pinnacle of nihilistic tribalism, Donald Trump. Deflection is not honest dialogue, and your genteel manner doesn't make it so.
7
Tribal mantras only protect the 1%, beware of the day when the tribes unite.
1.No doubt Trump stokes tribal impulse and did so quite evidently when Neo-Nazi's swarmed a peaceful college town in Virginia, yelling "Jews will not replace us," and beating up black church people. One man drove his car into a crowd, killing a young woman.
2. Men uniformly in khakis and white shirts filed in line through the streets with Nazi symbols on shields and carrying guns---in a college town!!!
People of color were being attacked downtown. There were screams of Africa is for black people, America for white.
3. But Trump wouldn't condemn them. He equivocated on it. It was singularly one of his worst moments. This was domestic terrorism. And he wouldn't call it what it was. Fully incapable of rising to the moment in the interest of unity of this nation. He is the wrong president for this moment. For these times.
Here are some first hand accounts of that day:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/13/opinion/university-virginia-uva-prote...
8
Hilarious. Identity politics is fine as long as the identity is white Christian male. As soon as another group stands up or gets what looks like a smidgen of power- Holy cow! Look at the tribalism! Can’t we all just get along? Such a farce. Really look at how people are treated in the country and how white males are sounding the dog whistle. You can’t put baby in a corner any more.
17
Tribalism? How about real policies that separate us, from race to economics to yes, yankee or southern, foreign-born or native, rancher or farmer? Public transportation? Not in Texas. Gates going up for neighborhoods where formerly, income levels determined as much as anything. Or coded leases, red-lining, etc. The common weal, or good, is less than it was, in my older point of view. I was the "other" with parents from another country and region. But I was white and went to good schools. I took the bus as a young bride in Dallas. White men going one way, domestic servants the other. I find Brooks' column unclear. My tribe is not clearly marked. I could pass for a Trump person but I despise the man. I am for the discerning, conscientious person. I am for rail, not driverless cars. I am for regulation of dangerous chemicals and industries. I dislike church in huge steel buildings for tv. I have benefitted from the patriarchy and been lessened b/c of it. We in this country overvalue individuality. I admire the views of the children in Japan who are respectful to their teachers, clean their classrooms, work together on their assignments. I know the dangers of this type of thinking, but believe the USA could appropriate more of this behavior for all of us rather than the ME FIRST attitude we have. Trump has pushed this too far, using the superlative words of best, and win, and any manner of childish phrases that appeal to: ? Who?False morality.
16
I'd agree that we are witnessing a period of identity politicalization, yet it may be that "tribalism" has always been part of the human condition. Tribalism may be an innate group or individual feeling that resides deeply in all of us. What brings it out are things like fear, worry, or exclusion.
We are in a period where our lower- and lower-middle classes are in trouble. These groups are now constant losers in our booming economy; they're experiencing -- among other negatives -- decreasing job opportunities and flat or decreasing wages.
If the people in this group -- many college students, as well -- are feeling hopelessness about their futures, we can see how their frustration would lead to an "us/them" view of the country or even the world.
During the period of 1960's radicalization, the working class still held secure union jobs. Students' outlooks for employment looked promising (and putting self-expression ahead of graduation was an option due to cheap tuition). Compared to today's helpless workers, these student's reasons for extreme anger and protest -- Vietnam, feminism, civil rights -- were more "high profile" than our problems today.
Today, the disenfranchised's fear and anger have no pragmatic movement to support them. So these elements of the population turn to what appears to be a newly born kind of tribalism. Their potential for foment has always been there; only now have the "right" economic conditions arrived for them to erupt.
5
Was the emotion derived from America's fracture any different during McCarthy's witch hunts or 1968 Vietnam? Was not "us vs. them" a long stingy stint that cut across dinner tables? I wasn’t around during the communist crack down but pretty much everything else.
The issue David is that there are ripples and then there are waves. And every generation or so, there comes a typhoon. We survived McCarthy because people finally had enough.
We survived Vietnam because as a nation, with freedom of expression and speech, as the mangled and dead came home, our grieving wasn’t suffocated by the state. Unlike Soviets who suffered the loss of young men in their own Vietnam, Afghanistan, the dead came home to a nation extremely familiar with mourning but but a state no longer elastic. Here I believe Afghanistan was the USSR's internal time bomb.
And we will survive Trump and his insistence to drive the Republican Party and FOX wedge of division even further and deeper into our nations wound. Today when we yell at the moon though The NY Times online while our civil war opposites do the same on right wing talk radio, we are mostly venting. We aren’t really changing the world. That will be done through protest and vote, just like it’s always been done.
David, sometimes you overthink the simple or fail to use human nature and history as a guide.
4
Pure tribalism and pure globalism are both as flawed and incomplete as liberalism and conservatism are by themselves.
Trump was elected because we have had so much success as a result of a more globalized society, that we have simply continued down that path in ignorance of the concept of diminishing returns.
The thinking goes, "If this much globalism has been so good at elevating third world countries, securing peace, and increasing awareness of other cultures, it proves that tribalism is antiquated and useless, and should be destroyed".
The result is that we have alienated an entire class of rural Americans who are happy with their own culture, and dislike having the value judgements of other forced on their own subculture through the force of a federal mandate. We have pushed the moral imperative to understand other cultures so hard, that we have forgotten the need to respect and understand the culture of those who we see as intolerant.
The whole point of the tenth amendment was to protect the rights of different subcultures to live in accordance with their own values and principles as much as possible, not only to protect new ideas and allow them to spread on their merits, but to protect old ideas and allow them to stand on theirs.
The worst ideas such as slavery have been aboloshed, and ideas about abandoning tribalism based on race, religion and other externalities have gained ground.
But just because new ideas are valid, does not mean the old are not.
4
OK. I'll risk an unpopular opinion here.
But first the good part: as an independent, I voted for Hillary and then later for the democrats that defeated so many Republicans in our last Virginia election.
Now the unpopular part: as an independent, I have to say Brooks is pretty much on point here. The outrage from the left in these comments helps prove his point that tribalism is a problem for all sides.
12
The attitude and environment Mr. Books described may be a motivating factor for mass shooters and those inspired by ISIS to commit acts of violence.
1
The elephant in the room remains our growing extreme economic inequality and how it undermines our society. Without a large thriving middle class and healthy upward class mobility all our noble sounding laws and institutions will not protect us from where we seem headed now, an angry, uneducated mob easily aligned into groups according to propaganda, susceptible to tyrants.
7
It's easy to blame identity politics for what ails us. And while I think some of the antics and arguments of the most vocal identity politics activists have reached idiocracy-levels of absurdity, I think the cause of our problems lies elsewhere.
Mainly that our society has been consumed by the most destructive aspects of capitalism. We're now at a point where virtually every human interaction is mediated by the market, which prizes individualism above all else. This leads to isolation and an atomization of society. People become little more than commercial units. We are encouraged to see everything from our friendships to our social status to our jobs as little more than market-based transactions (interestingly, Marx predicted this would be the end-result of capitalism; alas his solutions to the problem were tragic, to say the least).
Is it any wonder under such circumstances that people retreat to their tribal groups?
5
Tribalism is currently an acute problem but I don’t believe that it is chronic. It currently degrades American Democracy because it is a central tool for oligarchic control of our public functions. Significant portions of our economic community believe one of 2 things: the overall wellbeing of society is not a significant concern in commercial success or that wellbeing can somehow be achieved as a “ride-along” on inexorable corporate profit rise. Extreme forms of ideology or class dystopia are offered as “solutions” but actually accentuate the problems. I simply have more faith in the long-range intelligence of the American public. Economic and social disruptions understandably produce some initially unwise reactions. But polls that are taken on specific issues (not overall partisanship) like healthcare usually reveal a significant portion of the public holding very sensible views.
We need leaders that can reverse the current misuse of tribalism or its relatives partisanship and extreme ideology. FDR was a great unifier but only within the existential threats of the Depression and WWII. TR had some element of this “unifying spirit” – welcoming economic success but also demanding respect for the average man. He just didn’t have the time. You have to go back to Lincoln who never denigrated any portion of the population but also welcomed economic success. The Morrill Act not only heralded the rise of American technology it democratized education. Any modern “Lincolns” around?
2
hmmm, the franz kafka story, "a report to an academy" was the story that freed me from anti-pyschotics. the german pyschiatrist told me to read the story. learn to put away "my ape nature", like kafka put forth, allow the enigma of my being to exist in my private life, but play by the rules and adopt convention. almost 20 years later i can say that it hasn't worked out all that well. So, i return to the theme, that freedom must be earned every day. The ape in the story put forth this idea after seeing a circus act. What is freedom. I love that story.
As for politics, i can carry a transition radio and work as a carpenter, and tune into rush limbaugh. I can laugh at his carnival barker approach, and how he interacts with his callers. i think the left should get on radio. There is still nothing better than rush limbaugh. Howard stern is off the air, for the little folk.
It's just something to pass the time. i can always put on music on fm. same as calling trump a racist or bigot. it's just like saying green is my favorite color. it's abitrary. i am merely making a report to the academy
2
Great comment... Truth is Rush Limbaugh does have a compelling act… Almost a punk mentality… Anyone might be swayed by his opinions… His influence on US politics must be enormous...I've often wondered why a charismatic progressive voice hasn't emerged...
1
Because the right has the deep pockets to fund myriad ring wing commentators and an enormous will to do so. Now that Senator Franken has sadly been drummed out of his good work skewering the right wingers in the Senate, I would be overjoyed if someone on the left would fund Al Franken to speak on the airwaves all day, every day....
You write, "On campus these days, current events are often presented as pure power struggles--oppressors acting..." etc. Well, I guess overt racism, political barbarism and the outcry over misogynistic oppression might affect impressionable young minds today. Shouldn't they?
Don't conflate the exasperated identification of tribal vestiges of your own, oh conservatives,with binary thinking; or the losing of our religion with some spiritual crisis. Honestly, if you actually get out of a couple of bubbles and into the world of our country today, you'll find that the great unifying forces--tolerance, diversity, environmentalism, opposition to greed and science denial, for example--have gained a mass that has led to the temporary, spasmodic effort of conservatives, through Trump, to go back to something that is gone.
There is a vast tribe in this country and they failed to turn out in sufficient numbers, that's all.
3
(Socioeconomic/political)Tribes??
I prefer a much wider explanation to such fractious formations: The Biological Imperative (read survival instincts) of the human species stoked by "genetic memory and the collective unconscious".
And those things that stifle "free will" and "critical thinking" only abet instinctive reactionary behaviors.
David, it may surprise you to learn that there is almost universal scientific acceptance that tribalism is part of human nature. Your “biblical metaphysic” can’t make it disappear. The irony you fail to perceive is that there is no greater example of tribalism than religion itself. Instead of religion being the magical social glue you claim, it is a social wedge. Look around the globe - religion is not the answer, but a major part of the problem.
Social science refers to tribalism as group theory. All great issues of life – religion, nationality, gender roles, etc. – are taught to us by our “group” e.g. family and culture. Group behavior is at the mercy of group psychology, a powerful emotional force. It creates the “us-them” dynamic. Group psychology is irrational and, as we have seen in the ascension of Trump, can be self-defeating. Group affiliation is a stronger drug than well-being.
The point is not to deny our tribal instinct, and to compound it with more tribalism like religion, but to acknowledge it and to deal with it in a practical way that can benefit all tribes and thus the collective. For example, if we had less income inequality, would it not have soothed the savage tribal reaction we had in the 2016 election?
Fitzgerald was right: “The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.” We must reconcile the reality of the tribal and the need for the collective.
6
Brooks was quite clear that humans are biologically wired to be tribal. He is saying that in the past we've used other commonalities - including, once upon a time, shared Judeo-Christian ethos - to organize around.
The only amazing thing is that it has taken so long to recognize and acknowledge our fundamental tribalism. Crack open a sociology book, flip to the index and I guarantee you will not find entries for "tribe" or "clan", which is like a physics book omitting electromagnetism and gravity.
Despite what anybody thinks, tribalism in our society is nothing new, rather it was just subsumed by class, religious affiliation, or race. This was fine until we started trying to abolish difference, or require the breakup of these tribes. Abolishing organized religion leads to the growth of cults. Flattening out society just leaves people grasping for any kind of group to belong to.
2
I like Bruckner, and Bruckner may have argued that excessive individualism leads to tribalism, but the idea originated in Tocqueville's Democracy in America. One of its main points concerns the consequences of the democratic prejudice that all political problems are caused by too little democracy and all political solutions are to be found in increasing democracy. On the contrary, nothing is needed more by democracy than institutions that constrain democracy – for the right reasons.
Really? The problems of Today in the U.S.A. are due to campus politics and "excessive individualism"?
How about: huge profits are being made in propaganda, creating a self-reinforcing loop which ramps up absurd lies about the danger of "the other side" to capture the emotions, minds, and ultimately wallets of a small-but-significant portion of our society. Obviously I'm speaking of Fox "News" here.
Your focus on the campus is, frankly, bizarre but I suppose not unexpected.
3
Aristotle and Plato understood tha Man is a social-political animal. Society’s greatest sanction on individual behavior was ostracism. To violate the integrity of the state was to be cast into a universe of one.
The Founders appreciated that in their new Republic The cohesive force of a new nationality drawing disparate citizens together was weak in comparrison to the lytic force of loyalty to region, class, immigrant’s culture, language, and ethnic history. For two centuries the nation’s people quarreled over who belonged to the social group of American citizens. Loyalty and love of what principle allowed each new citizen to affirm, “I am an American”.
Today does being An American rank higher than being a loyal member of any other social, religious, ethnic or political group? Every citizen must answer for herself.
1
Ok, Brooks. You’re trying to pine for the good ole days here. Facts are the republicans, your party, decided not to bi partisan things several years ago, and thus we have parliamentary government in the legislatures. So if you are disappointed with things, which you do not clarify, the only thing to do is to get rid of them, by any legal means necessary.
3
This is the central question of our time. Its answer is the difference between renewed prosperity and a potential descent into chaos (that a strong man will claim to be able to prevent). Divisive forces predominate at the moment, but we must find - at all cost - the means to fight division and restore unity of purpose.
Brooks makes some great points that, unfortunately, get submerged.
Most people when they hear yet another diatribe against "victim logic" rightly roll their eyes and, well, shut their ears.
But there is a core truth in this column that these closed ears will miss: being a victim does not entail being virtuous, the remedy for victims is not to celebrate them (it is to make them whole again).
What has happened with the current identity politics is that victimized groups respond by asserting the opposite. The result is V-pride (black pride, gay pride, trans pride etc.). But without any rational basis for that pride. And using the very kind of characteristics that would be objectionable if appealed to by non-victims.
Consider how offensive white pride, hetero pride, born-gender pride are as concepts to rally around as identities. Consider that the offensiveness is due to using a non-relevant basis of pride as if it were something to rally around, as something to form an identity around.
Although it is quite natural, after being oppressed, to want to hear praise to compensate for an overabundance of blame, what one needs are one's just deserts. And just deserts, requires, well, deservingness. And just like whiteness is no basis of deservingness, neither is blackness, nor gayness, nor trans-ness, nor...
The core point? We need other bases of identity to rally behind, not those that made us victims. And not, more broadly, the comparatively trivial bases of "tribes".
3
You make some great points. A really interesting comment.
People say things have changed. I can't figure out what has changed so much. In 1966 when I was young and single and still living with my parents in our middle-class white segregated suburban neighborhood I was being politely courted by a very tall and handsome black man. A well-meaning but bigoted neighbor thought to warn my father about my friend. My father's response was, "Oh it is all right. Johnny is a fine young man and he's a Democrat!" Was my father just ahead of the times, or have we really changed so much?
Relationship requires that people like each other, they are in good communication with each other and they have a shared reality. Isn't it obvious?
1
“Excessive individualism and poor schooling”are not the only reason we are failing morally. How about two parents having to work to make ends meet thereby having less time to guide their children. How about world leaders who are corrupt. How about Corporations who demand employees to be available 24/7. How about religious leaders who try to divide us from each other preaching that their’s is the only true religion. And then there are the Congress and Senate who are using their power to no good end. And forget about the Trump Administration which is about as morally corrupt as you can get. The final blow to our country is the rabid materialism that is pursued by most citizens leaving no time for thinking about their fellow citizens. Keeping up with the “Jones’ has become a national past time.
We have learned very little lately about how we each deserve to treat others with respect
When Trump denigrates anyone of us because of our disabilities, the color of our skin, our gender, our economic status or our cultural background he shows incredible disrespect. And gives permission to his supporters to do the same. This what is wrong with the Country now. We need better examples for us too follow.
2
We Americans are the only ones dumb enough to not realize who we are, even though to everyone else outside the US, it's pretty clear.
Here, I'm the Italian kid from Brooklyn. Ask anyone from Italy though and they'll say I'm an American from NYC who can't speak Italian anyway.
That's the completely unnecessary wedge that identity politics and tribalism have driven into our country but well, we did it to ourselves.
Loss of common enemies? That makes a lot of sense. The only time we seem to bond together as Americans is when tragedy strikes, which is said.
To quote The Onion, maybe we need a "good old fashioned alien invasion" to get people back together again.
3
Mr. Brooks, until you admit that *your* side -- the politicians and media empires of the right wing -- are responsible for this drive to tribalism, your words won't have much meaning. The left has no equivalent of Rush Limbaugh, of Rupert Murdoch, of Karl Rove: people who ignore truth to focus on "winning" through divisiveness, and who have built empires based on that approach. (Please don't tell me that misguided college students are the equivalent.) The rise of tribalism is the doing of the right wing, and ending tribalism will require people like you to admit your role in it and take action against it. Tut-tutting doesn't count.
10
“Parties, too, are no longer bound together by creeds but by enemies”
No, this is not true. Equating Republican behavior to Democratic Partly’s behavior is an implicit form of support for that venal behavior
3
Individualism is the mantra of the Republican Party and conservatism. Now you posit that increasing individualism is fueling tribalism and is tearing the country apart.
Maybe the mantra should change to "I am my brother's keeper."
2
Me thinks, Mr. Brooks. like many white men, (including myself) looks back fondly on a time when we were not so "tribal". A brief tour of that history includes: genocidal campaigns waged against the natives of the new world, chattel slavery, an ugly and vicious civil war as a result of failing to come to terms with slavery, continued genocidal campaigns in the American West against Native Americans, the denial of full civil rights to the freed slaves, anti-immigrant bigotry against the Chinese and other ethnic groups, opposition to women's suffrage. It wasn't until the modern civil rights campaigns that we started getting over "tribalism". What Mr. Brooks describes as "Tribalism" is the excluded and dispossessed simply demanding the same rights and privileges that had always been granted to Mr. Brooks "tribe" of WASPs since European settlement of the new world. What upsets many people, is that they are finally being forced to reckon with this previous injustice, and that whiteness alone is no longer the guarantor of "100% Americanism". What is currently going on is that decent people, of good hearts, are demanding that this country actually live up to its ideals, for EVERYONE, men, women, all races and sexual preferences. America is a better place because of it, in spite of the backlash.
4
Tribalism may be in our DNA, but what has made America great and unique is that most always identified as Americans first, putting national identity before our religion, Ethnic origin or politics. In the past several decades, poltical groups have used wedge issues to erode this unity to promote their individual agendas. With the rise of attacks on objective truth in reporting, many folks are stuck in the eddy of believing falsehoods propagated for political and financial gain. Lip service is paid to what were formerly American values of service and sacrifice. We have sought to monetize every human transaction and worship those who successfully and shamelessly exploit and bully for personal gain—just look at those in top positions in this Administration. Divide and conquer and exploit and bully should not be American values.
We all need to wake up and think about what principles and values we support and vote for the candidates at all levels of government who represent our values. Vote for the big issues that matter. Vote to restore the America our forefathers dreamed of.
Vote.
3
Many years ago, William F. Buckley encouraged the Conservative movement to purge itself of their 'crazies', at that time the John Birch Society. They did. Conservatism rose and flourished. Then, beginning with Newt Gingrich and later, the Tea Party, the crazies came back. Conservatism became more shrill, dogmatic, unworkable, and it leaned into demonizing 'the impure'. Now the crazies own the Republican Party, and they have powerful media outlets as propaganda mills. The last step in our descent into tribal hatred came last year, with the election of Donald Trump as president. The best way out of this pit is for the majority of Americans to do at the ballot box what Buckley advised 60 years ago: send the crazies back under a rock before we do, as David says, fly apart irreparably.
2
As when the Great White Father in Dustin Hoffman's movie character's telling advised the betrayed native Americans to 'endeavor to persevere' the tribes thought it over for a night and then...declared war; so Brooks manages to infuriate. Totally ignoring the rank appeals to tribally simplistic quasi-morality on the part of the entire GOP-supporting edifice since l980, he calls out the 'young' for their 'identity politics' denunciation of oppressors. If bad education is the problem, I cal out Princeton in this case. Nothing could be so rankly 'tribal' as this pompous posturing from lifelong comfort against the pain of the not-yet-making-it. And somehow their solidary in critique of conscienceless traditionalist conservatism amounts to the 'excessive individualism' espoused nowhere as much as by their bete noire Reagan and his camp followers, and it is such unchurched ignorance rather than threats to the entire fabric of their future, wrought by GOP=supporting powers, which makes them 'insecure'. We heard this argument from John C Calhoun, Brooks. In the library at Yale. Back to Firestone, turkey.
2
I truly enjoyed your piece. The juxtaposition of Haidt and Bucker was creative while your use of the crooked timber image was fresh and appropriate. Isaah Berlin would be pleased.
1
This is from a recent article in the NY Times about the city of Jakarta, which is self destructing:
“Nobody here believes in the greater good, because there is so much corruption, so much posturing about serving the public when what gets done only serves private interests,” as Sidney Jones, the director of the local Institute for Policy Analysis of Conflict, put it. “There is no trust.”
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/21/world/asia/jakarta-sinkin...
This can very well be applied to the current state of the United States.
If you ask me, we are entering a new Dark Ages, where education is an alien concept (actively suppressed by the Republican Party) and Big Money has replaced the Church as the seat of power.
Will we have to, like the alcoholic, end up in the gutter before we wake up to reality, whatever that is?
We invented a country based on the concept of individuality, now what do we do? I'd say crack open some history books and get over our fear of education; there are answers, if we only had the courage to face them. Individuality? It ain't working because it turned from a positive idea and morphed into selfishness and greed.
In my opinion, right now we are entering a new Dark Age, where big money has replaced the church as the seat of power and the exploiters of the huddled uneducated masses.
2
I think just about everything about this article is flawed. Holding up religion as a lost virtue for example. Religion is hierarchical . And it is individual based via the carrot used in the form of eternal life. So, if I properly follow religions rules ( with god at the top of course) then I will live forever . It's a system based on doing things now that I will be rewarded for after I die not now . It's been a very convenient manipulation tool used and abused by those that would . The irony is that people that truly follow their own individuality by learning about themselves and accepting themselves for who they are then tend to have something very special to share with a group . How good has religion been at respecting the individual ? How good has it been at teaching individuals to love themselves? The individual gets vastly disrespected in my view. Gay and bi people get hated for simply wanting to be themselves for example . And the individual is not listened to . That is what people crave in my view - to be heard and appreciated for who they are without being compared to anyone else . It is this kind of internal desperation that is leading to fear and hate and this kind of violent acting out that we see. Why would a happy self loving individual join a hate group or kill multiple people ? Instead such a person tries to find ways to share the love
3
Maybe the myth of Babel is true. Communication is getting more and more impossible when people are locked in to their ego. In this case, their collective ego.
Of course, when I pointed out OWS is the extreme left counterpart of the Tea Party, some retorted that they are far more ethical than regressive opponents. That may be true but they missed my point. There is a communication problem leaving both sides to refuse compromises. They share the same operational manifest even if they have differing ethos: my way or hi-way. They want revolution, not evolution.
So what happened? Opportunists and amoralists rush in where angels fear to tread. Trump, Ryan and McConnell et al call the shot while Pelosi et al cling to power, happy to be the opposition leaders.
In a way, Americans are no different from the Middle Eastern folks. While the ultra conservative Israelis politicians dominate the direction of the state, the militant Palestinians are happy to have a foil, leaving the peace loving folks of both sides being the victims of their respective leaders' ambition.
The same with the intra-religious (sectarian) warfares between the Shiites & Sunnis
Imagine if humanity turns its collective energy to explore the stars and feed all beings, there is nothing it cannot accomplish. Perhaps that is the proof there is a jealous god willing to turn humanity against itself
1
"Imagine if humanity turns its collective energy to explore the stars and feed all beings, there is nothing it cannot accomplish. Perhaps that is the proof there is a jealous god willing to turn humanity against itself"
Yes.
With stunning consistency Brooks identifies a real problem but lacks the ability to identify the cause. He is right to challenge our addiction to the individual. But does he know why the world of identity politics arose? He thinks it has something to do with human nature and our relationship to God.
He is wrong. He lacks the historical perspective that is needed to understand the dysfunctional aspect of American cosmology. Our exceptionalism is not because we were chosen by his God. We are exceptional because we are willing to judge ourselves fairly. We are loved because we will admit that we are trying to fix those assumptions that our founding fathers mistakenly accepted. Owning other people is wrong. Fools think victory frees one from responsibility. Brooks wants us to believe his victory is costless. But it isn’t. Never has been. Awake yourself Mr. Brooks.
1
Here is the nub of the issue:
"When the Pew Research Center asked Democrats and Republicans to talk about each other, they tended to use the same words: closed-minded, dishonest, immoral, lazy, unintelligent."
Let's compare our last two presidents to see how they fare on this checklist.
Can any honest person say describe President Obama as "closed-minded, dishonest, immoral, lazy, unintelligent". David--what do you think?
Can any honest person describe President Trump any other way? David--your views, please.
The difference between the two leaders is quite striking. The Republicans overwhelmingly picked a leader who is obviously close minded, dishonest, immoral, lazy and unintelligent. They selected a leader who reflects their own qualities. Why do they then they ascribe their own faults to Democrats? It is deflection, pure and simple.
7
Or it's projection...
In either case, that's a Bingo.
If we want to unify our country, we need to confront the deliberate exploitation of people’s worst inclinations by the Republican Party. It began with Goldwater’s and nNixon’s Southern Strategy to attract racially prejudiced white Democrats into the Republican Party. It turned into an attempt to strip democratic institutions of funding to enfeebled them.
1
What can we do?
I find what is happening in this country to be very frightening.
I don't disagree with your conclusions and feel, though I'm a Democrat, that BOTH parties are to blame for the mess we're in. Decency, honor, honesty...are not characteristics reserved for one party or another.
No one is holding leadership accountable...in anything - not business or politics or religion...
Where do we begin?
How do we begin?
1
Yes, two tribes - one based on ignorance and fear, the other on science and hope. There's not much middle ground here.
Mr. Brooks is again stating false equivalence as he always does in apology for his Republican friends.
4
"The problem is that tribal common-enemy thinking tears a diverse nation apart." Didn't you just get done decrying the loss of our centripetal World War II cohesiveness?
1
Too many of these comments miss the point of Brooks' column and assign blame to someone else (government, the Republicans, SJWs, etc.). To me, the point that Brooks and Haidt make is that we all are obliged to be wary of tribalism and to act in our lives to avoid it.
"We have met the enemy, and he is us"
-Pogo
Moral indignation is the fastest path to power.
Identity politics is the term used by straight white Republican men to denigrate civil rights and social justice movements. It is a problem for them because as disenfranchised peoples demand equality and social justice they challenge traditional power structures in this nation. It's not ok anymore for white policemen to kill black or brown people. It's not ok anymore for men who hold power to abuse that power by treating women as their sexual objects. It's not ok anymore for straight people to treat LGBT people as anything other than respectful. People are free to hate others or disregard their humanity because they are different but now there are consequences and the haters don't like that, hence the term identity politics, as a way to keep bigotry enshrined in our nation like it always had been.
4
Absolutely correct.
Fox news is about as tribal as it gets.
Young men and women running around and yelling 'patriarchy' and 'victim' is the flip-side of the same coin.
1
Mr. Brooks' tribalism shows with each article he writes in the Times. In spite of everything the Republican party has done and the inward-looking, greed-supporting mess it has become, he still attempts to tar the Democrats with half of the blame for the current situation. It is the right that has worked to polarize US politics by welcoming into its folds the greediest and most hateful people, so naturally, rest are turning away in disgust and (hopefully) organizing to be ready to vote them out. Period.
6
Do you want to see one of the enablers of this situation, David? Look in the mirror. This didn't happen over night. And it took so called "respectable" conservatives such as yourself to give cover to the evolution of the GOP that finally gave us Trump.
10
It’s like Maslow’s pyramid of needs but with critical thinking ability and integrity levels:
Highest level = critical thinking that allows for different opinions, cultures and religions; recognizes benefits of a just society with rules, welcomes diverse community and is self sacrificing. Values and acts with principle and integrity.
Middle level = tribal thinking that mixes victim mentality; permits moral flexibility over honor and integrity; scared of diversity, actively seeks out like-minded leaders and community members to affirm biases.
Lowest level = lizard brain thinking. Fight or flight response easily triggered; zero sum game (“if you gain something, I lose something”); self-indulgent with no impulse control, leaves everything in ruins with no guilt or shame. It’s always all about ME!
Obviously our POTUS and his followers are not operating at highest level. One could easily argue that Trump is stuck at lizard level.
8
It may seem contradictory, but our current iterations of both tribalism and individualism can be partly laid at the feet of the '60s. The rhetoric of that era preached collectivity, yet it was a voluntary collectivity, each of us choosing to involve ourselves in groups of mutual responsibility and accountability, with "choosing" being the operative concept.
Meanwhile, the politics of the Left shifted from a focus on class-based economics and power to a focus on identity and anti-imperialism. Both contributed to an emphasis that minimized the positive nature, even the very identification, of being an American.
Subsequently, the Right latched on to much of what I've referenced about the '60s and made it their own. Most of the Right really is for taking care of people, but only as a voluntary act, meaning, in the current environment, only of their own "tribe", be that church, dittoheads, or whatever.
America has gone from being a visionary society of people that collectively and proudly looked outward to the moon landing even as we struggled around Nam and Civil Rights to being an inward looking society immersed in little screens that provide us with perpetual reinforcement of what we already believe, a replacement of imagination by confirmation, of the uniting by the dividing.
Our current polarized politics is merely -- even if consequentially serious -- a continuance of the half century trend away from an extroverted American narrative to an introverted tribal narrative.
2
Ah yes - it's the high school and college students that are disrupting the American dream. "Kids these days... no respect!"
Mr. Brooks, how about an article on all the downstream effects of Saint Ronald of Reagan throwing the Fairness Doctrine of broadcasting into the dustbin of history? You know, at the behest of Roger Ailes - yeah, that Roger Ailes who went on to found Fox "news". Funny coincidence, huh?
That allowed for the radio takeover by Rush Limbaugh and his hundreds of clones, and 24/7 right-wing generated innuendo, if not outright lies, being poured into the brains of voters who listen to, let alone read, nothing else.
I know, Radio Limbaugh is too crude for Brooks to really want to deal with. Might get his hands dirty. Much better to cloak his innuendo if not outright lies - week after week - as philosophical analyses and book reports.
4
This is the best comment on the article. Bingo...you hit the nail on the head.
3
Pretty ironic that a rightist would call out identity politics as the culprit behind our unraveling culture since it is identity politics along with neo-liberalism that has effectively neutered the democratic party.
Somehow I stumbled upon David Brooks' article on Tribalism, published January 1 in the New York Times. I have some working knowledge of this subject which may offer some of you who have commented a slightly deeper perspective on this subject, although many of you are certainly headed in the right direction, no pun intended.
In my novel, 'Between the Walls of Time' to be released April 1,2018 by Alto Pass Publishing, my main character, Dr. Cyrus Kohler, himself a Professor of Philosophy, starts an organization which he calls 'The Front' which get to the heart of Tribalism. He gives a series of lectures which go viral and are televised nationally. In these lectures, Cyrus introduces the concept of 'Social Congruence' which simply means the co joined efforts of the political and religious tribes. These tribes are predominantly social in nature and, as such, are ineffective at solving social issues, which our society has in abundance. Tribes will, as Robert Audrey pointed out in his brilliant work 'The Territorial Imperative', written in 1966, do almost anything to protect the territories they inhabit ferociously. This is tribalism at its worst and it kickstarted in 1962 with what Cyrus calls 'The Age of Violence'. Tribes continued to pull apart, i.e. polarize, as the population increase brought new members. Science has roared passed sociality. It has been a long, steady centrifugal retreat.
David: condemn the sinners, your conservative Republican cohorts, for committing the very sins – “excessive individualism” and “bad schooling” - you warn against.
A hallmark of conservatism has always been self-reliance and rugged individualism. It is the backbone of the Protestant work ethic and capitalism. And by “bad schooling” Brooks means promoting tribalism. But what could be more tribal than conservative school districts that resist teaching collective critical thinking in favor of a lockstep DeVosian orientation of creationism and anti-science?
Brooks has consistently demonstrated a distorted, romanticized vision of American history where, apparently, kumbaya reigned and we all gushed with brotherly love. In his vision we are all animated by the heavenly grace of Christianity, bound together by a “ biblical metaphysic” and “an American civil religion that had been refined over 300 years.” But it is that very Christianity that too often preaches individual salvation, not collective. And it allows believers to “have virtue without obligation,” where “nothing is your fault” because a supreme being, whose ways we can’t understand, is in control. Thus, in a democracy, it provides a convenient excuse to be victims, to not take our fate into our own human hands.
So David, if you want to restore “universal principles and our common humanity,” then drop the phony religious trappings that serve only to distract and deceive. Call it what it is: democratic socialism.
2
Always remember, if a minority student at a university argues that they are being disadvantaged this is the dreaded "identity politics" that is protected by the nefarious "political correctness" . And this is really quite scary for it is academics and humanities students who run this country. On the other hand if the billionaire who is running this country like a dictator stands in front of an all white crowd in Alabama while Confederate battle flags are hung from the rafters this is the patriotism of the "forgotten man" that we must try to not only tolerate but appreciate.
4
There are valid points in the essay regarding the risks associated with extreme individualism. This concern is inherently linked to the rogue capitalism we are experiencing.
On the other hand, once again I sense an undertow of false equivalence from Mr. Brooks. The backbone of misguided identity politics on the left is still moral. The republican identity reeks of greed, lies, corruption, misogyny and racism, all perfectly embodied by their leader currently occupying the white house.
1
First and foremost, thank you Mr. Brooks for continuing to pursue this line in your columns; these conversations matter. Your binary reference was important. Our two party system serves us poorly in a complex world. What issues are black and white?
I feel that part of the loss of cohesion in society and government is a result of the continued demonization of our government over the last 30 years. ACA was an effort to help our fellow citizens, and by extension ourselves. Who has relentlessly sought to tear us apart and promulgate the ethos of the individual? I think we all know the answer.
1
I gather Brooks never learned that centrifugal force is an illusion, a myth dispelled by Newton's laws. More to the point, the birther is the one serving as the lightning rod for the tribalism these days. And, now that the allusion has been made to Ben Franklin, Brooks should recognize that those of us in the resistance aren't tribal. We're just trying to keep the republic that Franklin, Hamilton, Madison and others bequeathed to us.
3
We are so much befuddled at the moment what is going on in America and as well as the world.
Let's stop one second and consider that these events are all triggered by 2008 Economical crises. It passed 10 years.
We knew it was a very big event and effects would be too. But when times pass and original tremor fades but many thinks shaken from its foundation and some entirely dislodged, that brought us today.
I cannot exactly confirm people retreat to tribalism but one thing is clear 2008 crisis devastated their firm belief in society. Fundamental common rules and mutual agreements were violated ( well depicted in the Big short movie).
Then people started to feel like Are we living in a society or this is African savanna, Coyotes, Hyenas and all kind of predators feasting on us. This was the strongest feeling who lost homes and jobs during this period, Rest also felt that way too.
For example, Does anybody feel that Financial sector has any moral backbone, has any concern about 90% of America or in that respect world?
Retreat inevitably is a correct word, but tribalism I do not know but one thing is sure people felt that previously what was for them is not anymore. So Government all private institutions everything needs to build up their credibility and trustworthiness, so far I never saw a single evidence they are doing anything.
What I found most thoughtful about this column is the remark that Dr. King used a language that we no longer use or are aware of. It is hard to think about whether, for this reason, Dr. King is “out-of-date” or no longer actually “speaks to us.” Is our language now much more politically and religiously doctrinal and dualistic? Have we lost the public language of inspiration and intention in favor of the divisive language of doctrine? If we had better language would we have better societal justice? Did we go astray somewhere in how we seek societal justice?
1
I wish Dr Haidt and Mr Brooks would consider a different perspective that includes consideration Dr. Kannemann's "Thinking Fast and Slow". If we continue to respond as Sense One individuals, we allow ourselves to be governed by the smallest tweaks to our behaviors. We are not tribes. We are fodder molded by our selected media service to their wishes. I noted today in the Times that Mr Murdock's move to sell 20th Century Fox will allow him to buy media to make his Fox News empire comparable to Sinclair and to direct influence in purple states for profit and purpose. Thanks for the article on Murdock and his plans.
1
As a progressive I try to keep my focus on class not race. I believe that the ruling class wants to divide us by race so that we don't unite for more economic equality.
4
You may be right but the "ruling class" these days must include academics with tenure and their own "institutes" pushing a very race based agenda and worldview. Professors who sneer at Dr. King's "universalism", and speeches as old hat and hopelessly inadequate. Activists who think in strictly binary terms. The latter do not have trust accounts or yachts, but they do have an abundance of self-righteousness.
I'm not so sure we are shut of "the common enemies we had in World War II and the Cold War." When government operates against the public will in favor of the moneyed donor class in support of perennial campaigning, it's conceivable that we are well on the road to losing our republic.
When we can name ten constitutional violations in the last year that have gone unaddressed, we can wonder who's government this is.
And when individual groups are targeted for abuse and attack, it's only natural that they cling together with those who are of like mind.
When we were attacked in World War II, we did come together as an American tribe and an Allied tribe.
David, you are harping to the evils of identity politics, yet again. The truth is, they have always been with us, it's just that now minority identities are gaining larger voices. There was never any unilateral "high social trust." If you want to see the anger of the 50s, watch "The Power of Song," a biography of Pete Seeger. Watch as a mob of angry white people attack a car with Seeger and Paul Robison inside. The only difference between then and now is that there are finally fewer of those angry white voices to override decency and compassion for others.
1
Brooks seems to imply that "identify politics" is just an illusion-based movement and that those of us engaged in it are doing so based on a "primitive" moral ethos. Worse, he states those of us practicing identify politics believe "nothing is your fault." On what basis is he making these claims? Is there any factual substance on which to argue such points? I built a successful career despite recurring sexism and harassment. I fought like heck and surmounted odds that would have broken lesser people. I'm also an ardent feminist -- largely because of these experiences. Am I to believe from Brook's Op-Ed that as a believer of identify politics I'm less morally sophisticated than someone who hasn't had these experiences and the gumption to, well, take a side against them?
1
The point most are missing here, (and the author does not miss), is that tribalism is in our bones. We will retreat, devolve, digress, and/or sink to it whenever we let ourselves take the easy path of victim rather than seeing the crookedness in each man, and thus in each man's answer to man's problems. Which means listening to each reasonable man's answer is a duty of a reasonable man, no matter his viewpoint.
Which also means, as the author makes clear, to weaponize this generation of college students is to violate the very social contract the school has agreed to, and is merely indulging children in childish and primitive behavior!
David, great piece to start the year!
1
Tribalism will be the fatal evolutionary flaw that will cause human extinction . Early human tribalism was needed for survival but has now become an existential threat with the proliferation of modern weapons that assure global annihilation .If the us & them does not become WE it will be over for humanity .
2
Mr. Brooks -
I find reading your columns increasingly frustrating.
While your reflections on current American culture are philosophically intriguing, your reasoned explanations for cultural attitudes generally only seek to describe current symptoms and contextualize their origin.
Why not take the bolder step and attempt to provide possible actionable solutions to resolve the cultural dilemmas you describe?
How can one critique a lack of coherent social vision, on either side of the aisle, without presenting a practical, realizable alternative?
As a teenager in NVA, I remember my parent’s hosting cocktail parties that included friendly and civil debates between Democrats and Republicans. We lived in a D.C. suburb of mostly transient government employees. The Republican Party changed with the ouster of liberal/moderate Rockefeller types during the Goldwater campaign. After that and during the Nixon years it became more and more clear that to a growing cadre of Republicans, being a Democrat was to be Godless and, if not Red, certainly Pink. And so, for them the truth of those libels, justified any political tactic if it was successful. The Nixon period ushered in the concept of “benign neglect” and not just in reference to civil rights. I remember my Dad complaining about the political appointees in his agency deciding what laws and regulations not to enforce.
The period also witnessed the growth of lobbyist firms and “Beltway bandit” consulting firms populated by cynical nihilists and ideologues committed to forcing Procrustean and absolutist solutions on the rest of us.
While the Democrats (since the departure of the Dixiecrats) have mostly stood behind their commitment to “jobs, justice, etc...”, the Republicans have abandoned nearly every historical pledge and are now just a hodgepodge of rival power blocs united only in their support for nativist nationalism and their belief that America has too many undeserving useless mouths.
The descent into tribalism is a natural consequence.
2
I think this essay simplifies things too much. Victim status is not a tribe. It's people fighting for justice. A living wage, better schools, equity in our legal system, affordable healthcare -- these problems do not change without relentless pressure and push back. People getting cheated with a low wage are not sitting all alone in their victim status, all proud, clinging to their superior moral code; they simply want what is right. I think trying to shame those fighting for equity is a mistake. And couching it as tribalism enables the oligarchs to take advantage. There is too much inequality in our society. Shaking one's head at the "victims" is an age old GOP tactic. It's a big part of the problem. Let's not shame anybody, but, instead, come up with concrete plans that make this fair. Obama tried to come up with concrete plans with the ACA. We need more efforts at equitable legislation that makes people's lives better.
4
I posted late last night to note that the responses to this op-ed were overwhelmingly proving Brooks' point that we have become a tribal society. This morning, hundreds of more comments, and thousands of "Recommends" later, Brooks' point is now fully supported by the empirical data. For most people engaged in the public dialog, it seems all that is left is tribalism.
A confused, aggrieved, and angry bunch of people, we Americans are becoming.
7
The 'comparing ourselves to others & coming up short' in the American sense of the malady, seems largely a product of the predatory nature of consumerism & the pernicious, insidious villainy of the American marketing machine.
Marketers have designed campaigns to manufacture internal self-doubt, exploiting powerful evolutionary psychological dynamics that cut to the heart of our biology, such as perceived sex-appeal & scientifically constructed false narratives aimed at generating a profound insecurity that only the purchase of a product can remedy.
The 'bandwagon' approach is one way advertisers exploit tribal instincts, the 'cool kids' are all buying it, so must you. But marketers seem more focused on tweaking one's individual insecurities.
Tribalism, nationalism, even social power constructs of domininanc & control are evolutionary baggages destined to destroy us, as we saw in the ww1/2 global nationalistic catastrophe.
There isn't a reductive 'good' vs. 'evil' Manichean duality, rather competing, incompatible evolutionary psychological adaptations.
Perhaps a solution is found in the genomic revelation that ranking ethnicities & nationalities was a fallacy.
But ultimately we are individuals, we can be 'lone wolves' before pawns in the pack. We can choose to try again to redefine liberty & rights as fundamentally egalitarian, respectful of every individual, refuse the false comfort of social power constructs, dismiss marketers' attempts to step on our insecurities.
4
Excellent comment. There does certainly seem to be a constant and growing background hum in American life of paranoia, and the feeling that life in general is a huge Darwinian contest of individuals and biological groups (gender, racial, ethnic, etc.) who hate each other. This can play-out in either economic warfare or actual warfare.
best comment ever.
The right's favorite false equivalency. People who fight for tolerance and people who fight for intolerance are both equal, just two groups fighting for what they believe in.
David would have us believe that oppressors and oppressed are figments of some sophomore's imagination. Stunning.
2
You have a President and a party that has been driving tribalism for power and profit for a long time. Birtherism, demonization of the other will tend to divide a country. Sorry but I see the tribalism many for times on the right then I do on the center and left. Every issue has been made tribal whether climate, health care, immigration, birth control, guns. While 60 to 70 percent of us want compromise the right makes a political game of denial and just lying.
1
A clear common enemy has emerged, Mr. Brooks, billionaires and corporations. Maybe that chain has weakened a bit, but it's gaining strength every time fat cats work to dismantle our democracy for their own self interest.
2
"A house divided against itself cannot stand."Abraham Lincoln
Are we there yet? Is our foundation so cracked and crumbly that the house is shaking and falling into he Earth? I see our Constitution as our foundation. Yes, I see that document crumbling. Even if we look to the Preamble, we see the rot. The clause where we the people promise to promote for the general welfare... has no meaning to Americans where we have the highest rate of maternal post pregnancy death rates of all of the Economically advantaged countries. We turn our eyes away from providing for children's medical needs. The elderly and veterans pensions are easy targets to destroy. Our crops are being doused with insecticides that are seriously considered to harm us all. Our fellow citizens take 300% raises while their workers get a five cent raise. Our politicians gerrymander our voting districts for the purpose of power and not the common good. Sorry to point out to you Mr. Brooks, the house has been divided for about 50 years. It is only now that the rot and destruction of our foundation can no longer support this nation.
1
Unless Republicans do a mea culpa first, we will continue on this path.
Yes, yes, liberal have their things, and they should do their part. AFTER Republicans start apologizing for breaking up the country. The "silent majorities", "welfare queens" and "Billy Thorton" are Republican items. Show me anything as divisive from Democrats at around or before that time. I didn't think so... So they owe the first apology.
2
fascinating essay.
I suppose the question for millennials, their children and grandchildren is whether a diverse nation can survive absent an external enemy. If history is our guide, the answer is assuredly no. Even after generations of living together, diverse people eventually end up fighting with each other and partitioning territory (at best) or trying to kill each other (at worst).
Brooks continues to engage in false equivalency - the right/Republican/Trump movement is animated by racial and ethnic hatred and tribal spirits flogged on by an authoritarian leader and a right-wing news propaganda machine. That and corrupt obeisance to the ultra-rich donors is what is all it is about now. Brooks, who until recently spent his time and earned a chunk of his ample book profits giving the right a pseudo-intellectual legitimacy, should own up to his role in all this, albeit it was a small role. Pew and other polling actually show that Democrats overwhelmingly are not filled with hate or radicalized or unable to grasp facts; think Clinton, Pelosi, Shumer - like them or not, they do not encourage or vent hate or routinely indulge in blatant lies. Most kids even on very liberal campuses are well-meaning and mostly worried about grades and getting a job after graduation. And protests about racism and policing and climate change are protest about something real - not a made up threat like Trump's imaginary Mexican hordes of rapists. If we want to build community it must be based on truth and not false equivalency of the sort Brooks displays in this column.
4
The name “law professor”is not a good fit with the ad hominem nature of this comment. Where is objectively, the law’s cornerstone?
The point is that the author here - Brooks - is expressing an argument that is destructive in that it creates a false equivalency that obscures that radicalism, animus and disregard for the truth have not happened at all equally at the two poles of US political life. In my view, Brooks and others like him have been responsible for letting right-wing propagandists funded by Koch, Murdoch and other billionaires off easy by using random accounts of student/campus leftwing excesses as proof that somehow this a general, rather than a right/republican, phenomenon. My comment thus was personal but it was not ad hominem in the sense that term is used typically - as when personal remarks unrelated to the substantive point are made to obscure the substance or just be nasty (which is of course an essential Trump strategy).
1
We have always been a tribal nation but we have now drifted into the realm of bizarre cult behavior. Donald Trump has become a cult religious leader and the religion of the tiki torch whites is anti antisemitism and white supremacy. They even have a special hand gesture. When Donald Trump speaks he always make a circle with his thump and index finger while leaving the other three fingers sticking straight up on his right hand as he waves it up and down, his finger form the letters WP for white power. Religions always have their symbols and special signs to assure the disciples of their loyalty and commitment to the cause. Trump is the high priest of the tiki torch white power religious movement, it is beyond tribalism. It implies blind loyalty where logic and reason are impenetrable to subservient devotion to the faith.
3
One party vilifies the “other,” i.e. those of different race, ethnicity, religious belief, gender, sexual preference than their own. This party does its utmost to deny the “other” their inherent constitutional rights — it doesn’t view the “other” as equal and its policies have reflected this for decades. Exclusive vs inclusive. The GOP doesn’t care whether our country fulfills its fundamental promises of equality, equal justice or “forming a more perfect union.” No, Mr. Brooks, your party actively works to deny these promises, reveling in intolerance. And you wonder why divisiveness is so rampant? The bigoted narcissist occupying the White House is the rotting culmination of your party’s last 40+ years. To ignore it is to enable it. Open your eyes.
1
This reeks of "both sides do it." Are we really more tribal today just because historically dispossessed peoples are finally gaining a voice? Were we less tribal when we had slavery or Jim Crow or ethnic cleansing of native peoples? If you want less tribalism, David, advocate for greater social justice.
1
I've heard no evidence that our minds "... evolved for tribal warfare ..." I think the opposite is more likely: our minds evolved to adapt creatively. In spite of gloomy, misapplied metaphores about maypoles, the kids are likely to figure it out. Try not to stand in the way.
There are only two tribes in America. Capital and Labor. Capital seeks to destroy labor, labor must resist.
1
I find this comment section hopelessly ironic. Mr. Brooks wrote of how tribalism is created by building your own innocence on your status as a victim. This is simple, and as he states all you need to do is find your 'herd's oppressor'. If one reads through this comment section, one can clearly see this with everyone blaming some other group for the tribalism. It's as if most of the readers did not understand the intent of the article. Perhaps our nation would be benefitted by looking inward instead of blaming others.
1
One more copout from Brooks. Yes, the alt-right has gone tribal and is now completely anti-USA. No more united...a word they hate. And the alt-right with Trump are dragging the republican party and its more moderate members over to their tribe. How, exactly, should the rest of us respond? How did Lincoln respond back in the day?
It's not like the liberals and progressives have developed their own media replete with alternative facts. That is all on the right. Right wingers call mainstream media...corporate media...liberal. It's not. Unless you admit that facts and the truth have a liberal bias. They do when the other side, the "right" side decides anything that is "inconvenient" can be safely ignored and their faith based opinions "trump" any fact based opinions from the left.
So, yes...tribalism is picking up speed on the left because we can see what is happening on the right. Tribalism on the left is a natural reaction to the threat from the right. And that threat is real...witness Weimar Germany. No country is immune from a fascist dictatorship if the people do nothing to stop it.
David Brooks can wring his hands about tribalism on both sides, but only one side wants to rip the country apart. Only one side believes that America was great when whites had even more power and others knew their place and kept quiet. We can have an egalitarian society, or we can descend into apartheid. As in the 1860's, it's time to pick which side you are on.
3
Fun read but I am offended by your choice of photos. To decry “identity politics”
and couch your objection in a cloud of moral superiority is a little rich. Republicans and Democrats aka Business Party A and Business Party B have failed the American public -and trump is Exhibit A. The internet’s role in “individualism” has tapped into tribalism as well.
But well done, David.
2
I say it's time to stop talking and sharpen the sticks.
The storm about to be.
2
Mr. Brooks:
I really don't things are spinning out of control because of Physics. Another glib metaphor that attempts to ignore the obvious and pass blame onto the blameless.
1
Brooks seems very accurate in his description. But he does leave out the very important role played by the media from newspapers to radio to tv and movies and to the internet. Getting readers or clicks in order to increase owners' revenue has become the media watchword. That, of course, includes pundits like Brooks too. Maybe you can't make it into the holy 1%, but you can strive for the saintly 10%
Tribalism's just another word for "partisan" and its been an American trait since colonials used war-paint and feathers to make this point about taxation. Should we also examine the Aryan identity in America as tribal as well? Hasn't it always been? To redirect the narrative and claim that indigenous peoples were "savages" and "heathen" when early Americans themselves were not all Christian nor civil in its media and narrative about Indians while building the perfect beast through military buildup like the Germans, Russian and China? Until Americans understand that tribalism is more of a European quest than they'll admit, they will never see that tribalism has always been a part of their DNA as well.
2
OK, but shouldn't we mention the roots of this stuff in 60s do-your-own-thingism (what Mr. Brooks calls excessive individualism, actually a Left phenomenon, not Right) and the decades-long effort by the Left to undermine a civil order they see as corrupt by encouraging groups to define themselves not as members but as separate victims of it?
You forgot to mention Fox news, which has for decades, devoted its energies to making millions of people angry at their fellow citizens.
It is, beyond doubt, the most dishonest and demonstrable destructive force in our nation.
5
Yay! Another "both sides are guilty" article.
1
Mr. Brooks forgot to mention the pseudo-sufferers we are supposed to pity. You know, those poor billionaires and multimillionaires who just don't have enough money.
2
And don't forget all those "psuedo-sufferers" who still see themselves as the downtrodden and misrepresented, even though the very tenets of this nation's foundation radily gave white men the advantage over everyone, and everything.
I am 74 years old, and I can tell you tribalism in America is not new. It was rampant when I was young. Take religion--Catholics and Jews were shunned and feared in some areas of the nation. In the South cross-religion marriages were discouraged with the subgroups being Baptists versus Presbyterians. Methodists appeared to be acceptable to both groups. Racial and ethnic groups were legally and socially segregated. Women could not attend architecture school at NC State University. My parents had to dress-up to go to town or be banded as country rubes. Somehow, even years later when I had enough money to shop in an expensive women's clothing store, a whiff of prior poverty clung to me and no one would wait on me. Gays and lesbians hid in shame. Women held few positions in banks, science, math, law, and medicine. Africa Americans could not find a hotel when traveling in certain areas of the country and, in the west, had trouble buying gasoline. If a woman wanted a bank account she needed the permission of her husband.
Contraceptives were hidden from view in pharmacies and, in some, you even had to ask for menstrual supplies. Everybody at the local country club was a Republican and the mill workers were Democrats. There was bible study in schools and Jews and Catholics had to leave the room. Colleges were full of identity politics--there was a single dominate ethnic group, namely white male. TV portrayed southerns as stupid and uneducated. The list is endless.
5
So let's form a party of the middle. The passionate slogan is bipartisanship (perhaps another name for true patriotism), and nobody who indulges in calling the other side bad names can belong.
En passant, David, your image of Maypole dancing does not describe a centripetal force. If you gave the players suits of armor and tuned the Maypole into a magnet you'd have centripetal force.
1
The "tribals" tend toward authoritarian parenting practices, which kicks this dynamic up a notch.... producing kids with more rage, less sense of self, and a deeper need for scapegoats.
The Christian right has embraced the childrearing practices of writer Gary Ezzo, which include physical punishment of babies, cry it out, and rigid scheduling-- though Ezzo is denounced by child development experts and the AAP.
This is a secret source of Christian tribal range: very early child abuse.
1
Too many victims, too few role models.
1
Mr. Haight, and through him, Mr. Brooks complains that college students protest against speakers whose prior work endorses racism. Even though our president chooses to praise Nazi sympathizers, young people and all people do good when the dog whistle of Republican populists is denied.
When Republicans complain about the divisiveness of identity politics, somehow they forget to include white nationalists. Trump appealed to this identity group and they were crucial to his election. The purpose of his tweet storms is to keep them engaged.
2
When will David be honest enough to admit that he was one of the facilitators that brought us to this point?
2
My goodness, David. Do you know the location of any distant and safe caves where I can finish out my life?
2
My white male son, as liberal, open minded, kind, and accepting as anyone can possibly be, is attending a public university in California and taking a required course in which, according to his account, I is teaching him that all the wrong and injustice in this world is the fault of white males like him. The instruction is so binary good-evil that when he asked about certain religions' treatment of women he was answered with a silent frown. No woder so many young white males coming from less fortunate backgrounds and less cosmopolitan environments are joining racist groups
3
your son needs to decide who he will be, despite encountering the adolescent absolutisms of the very young. if he can hold on to his own inherent decency in the face of unfair targeting by people wounded far more than he comprehends, he will have deepened and internalized the values of a good man, no matter what. if he turns in the pain of rejection to white nationalism, racism and misogyny, YOU have failed by making too many excuses for the inexcusable.
1
I think this is largely correct, though I'm not sure why it focuses mostly on liberal tribalism. Still, as a liberal who hates Republicans, the left drives me insane right now. It has a cultish, intellectual laziness that angrily obsesses with adherence to whatever today's groupthink line is. But there's a problem unaddressed here: the fringe right has taken over and won't acknowledge any truth in anything the left cares about. MLK wasn't arguing that segregation and racism existed; he argued it must stop. Shown videos of dogs and fire hoses, 45 would say fake news and commend the police. He pardoned the prairie fascist Arpaio for God's sake. Republicans just stood behind a child molesting, slavery loving theocrat. The left can't ignore identity and simply speak to the common good. How does one take identity seriously but not fall into a tribalist trap?
3
AT THE BEGINNING............................tribalism was the first of our many mistakes.
1
Most of my friends stand on the post-modern pluralistic side of the political fence, i.e., liberal. The discourse about our president often resolves around affirming our shared footing on higher moral ground - 'he's such an idiot.' This condemnation easily and often extends to 'the uneducated people who voted for him.'
As emotionally satisfying as this echo-chamber is, I've argued it's not this simple. What's been interesting to me, is that in challenging the certainties of our tribe, I've been quickly labeled as 'a conservative.' I violate tribal morays.
Granted, I've stumbled in my arguments, but David Brooks nails what I've being attempting to say in this op-ed.
The fact is that polarities are being magnified beyond any sensible assessment of our shared humanity. The schisms between, say, economic nationalism and globalization are real, but sensible debate is drowned out by a lust to be morally righteous (and a narcotic distraction from the actual global chess game). And as much as this righteousness may be an authentic response to our bombastic, divisive and, it seems, not very self-reflective president, it is dangerous to luxuriate in the certainty that 'they are all wrong.'
The net result is collective indecision and ineptitude in the face of unprecedented global challenges.
1
It's republicans what done it.
2
Mr. Brooks, you've made it seem that only liberals or those on the left are truly oppressive and out of bounds. But "Once you’ve identified your herd’s oppressor — the neoliberal order, the media elite, white males, whatever —" is a list of complaints made by those considered on the left.
Did you conveniently forget to mention the corresponding lists that are made on the right? Your list just as easily could have read ".....your herd's oppressor--- campus liberals, feminists, transgenders, Clinton cash...." Etc.
2
Media Elite would be blamed on right wing talk radio 3 dozen times a day. I think the author was playing the middle here... Both sides seem equally offended
1
And where were you Mr Brooks in the scorched earth politics of the Republican Party since the first ascendancy of Gingrich? And in the wildly asymmetrical talk radio and fox "news" for 20 and more years?
Yes tribalism is at our throats but your double standards of assessment aided and abetted this calamity. You need to take responsibility for yourself before pointing out the guilt in others for you to be personally taken seriously.
3
Brooks uses false equivalence. No judgement is offered as to the rightness or wrongness of the two sides, just the assumption the two sides have valid points. Where on the left is the equivalent of the Nazi, the racist, the misogynist, the homophobe, and Donald Trump? There are no equivalents on the left. That's the right's problem. That's why Brooks, et al, speak in false equivalences.
4
I was subjected to the recent Star Wars movies over the holidays. No gray areas - all about good guys vs bad guys, with no explanation of why anybody would folow the "bad guys'" orders, who were totally evil. But if the "bad guys" are essentially anti-freedom that begs the question Erich Fromm explored in Escape From Freedom - why do people sometimes choose less freedom (as in Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, China, and often around the world)? Cause sometimes less freedom delivers more of what they want: security. A China expert told me a decade ago that as long as the Communist Party delivers on economic growth, people won't sue for democracy. So far, he's right. At a college hockey game over the weekend, a father was explaining the game to a small child in terms of the "good guys" (home team) and the bad guys! So yes, tribalism is excessive and dangerous today. Any global religion, organization or government/politician that encourages "us and them" thinking is likely more cost than benefit to humanity. Sadly, count me in as one of the Dems who views the GOP "very unfavorably" at this point, but they can redeem themselves at any time if they wish to actually address instead of avoid 21st century challenges, not burden future generations with collapsed ecological systems or excessive government debt, etc. and not act on the edge of constitutionality, e.g. not allowing Obama to appoint a SCOTUS judge; claiming election frauds that don't exist, 5 lies per day from POTUS.
1
The "centrifugal force" referred to by Brooks, a modern thinker, is the chaos and relativism of postmodern society.
I am surprised that in the wake of this huge stinking dead fish of a tax scam that Thomas Pickety's book Capital hasn't been mentioned. It is relevant. Mr. Brooks, have you read it yet?
1
Defining the Modern world is a lot like the situation of seven blind men defining the elephant.....each one has a very good understanding of one piece of the elephant, but then extrapolates his knowledge and defines a completely inaccurate elephant!!
As a pretty good blind man....here's my analysis of Modern Times.
All the elements described in Mr. Brooks article are created by the Electronic Network which provides instantaneous communication, trade, information to anyone with access anywhere in the world.
Marshall McLuhan pretty much pegged it way back in the 1960s. We once defined ourselves by "nationality"...that was the common bond. Today, thats not good enuf, its not relevant....everyone wants everything, right now!! Instantaneously. Special interest groups....tribes.....are marshalled into action.....flash mobs......ie MOBS.....quickly form around what once would have been considered trivial events..........
"We've regressed from a sophisticated moral ethos to a primitive one". True and it is the Republicans fault.
1
"Out of the mouths of babes..." "NO!" To fascism! They're right on, David!
You need to listen. Those kids aren't tribal they're our future.
Thank God.
3
Please tell me a time when major nations have not been tribal--from ancient Greece and Rome, to the Florentine Medici, to the first faltering, uncertain steps of the USA. Our Founders were aware of and worried about partisanship and its attendant tribal behaviors. From Kant to Isaiah Berlin and those other modern philosophes favored by Mr. Brooks, we've been parsing the subject for a very long time.
Maybe Prof. Haidt and others can support an idea that something novel is occurring, but most of this looks like reversion to the mean, or some sort of similar process.
Can we mitigate the growing problems, problems that have been building for the last 3-4 decades? Can we do it peacefully, without war or some other cataclysm? Most of us hope so, but no one is comfortably certain. Will we get much help from our congressional leaders, selected for their intense brands of tribalism? We all have our doubts.
2
What a lot of mumbo jumbo.
The only "tribe" that I know of that appears to be in retreat is the one largely comprised of rich white males.
3
Best Brooks column ever
1
Thank you David for presenting a relatively balanced narrative. The problems in America don’t exist because of a political party, problems exist because of the inequality now prevalent in our society and all the screaming about the red haired one won’t change that, he merely forced the issue of our nation having to perform a self examination and seek immediate changes before it devolves into revolution as those marginalized and left behind by both parties turn their guns on the rich rather than each other, because let’s face it it’s not tribalism about race, gender or the other red herrings thrown up by both parties it’s about greed whether tech companies off shoring jobs(just imagine if the millions of jobs created in Asia to make our tech devices were in America instead paying Americans a decent wage and their billions in profit were being taxed rather than held in off shore accounts and kept from the taxman and the potential to do good for all Americans not just shareholders and executives, and these are the liberal “good guys”?)or the Koch brothers attempting to drill baby drill at any expense to nature and our world. David’s right it is tribalism, the rich and those aspiring to be rich against the rest of us; but when you think about it that’s what most of the people coming to America want, to walk those streets paved in gold, the ones that stay in their own nations seeking to improve the lives of their fellow countrymen are the real heros not the billionaire immigrant.
6
"...excessive individualism paradoxically leads to in-group/out-group tribalism. Modern individualism releases each person from social obligation..."
At some point in time Republicans started talking about "taxpayers" instead of "citizens". Taxpayers make demands for their money, and they are the ones that without a doubt feel the least "social obligation", in a very Randian take of what society should be.
And in typical David style, he tries to blame the other side. This time was subliminal. The person with the "NO!" sign is anti-Trump. THOSE are the people that broke the fabric of society. Sure.
3
David Brooks has written a challenging piece, and it is full of great points, but it is so abstract as to be almost meaningless. Does he really mean that college professors and their students are as responsible as Donald Trump and the GOP for centrifugal forces tearing apart America? A second, careful reading suggests that Brooks is in fact aiming most of his barbs at Trump and the GOP, but so abstactly, that he maintains a distance, even deniability.
Many of the commenters point out that it is mostly the GOP that is doing many things to undermine our democracy and its principles, as they cater to the desires of the billionaire donors.
David Lindsay Jr. is the author of The Tay Son Rebellion, Historical Fiction of Eighteenth-century Vietnam, which came out this September, and blogs at The TaySonRebellion.com and InconvenientNews.wordpress.com
2
"Many of the commenters point out that it is mostly the GOP that is doing many things to undermine our democracy and its principles, as they cater to the desires of the billionaire donors."
What was Hillary doing when she should have been campaigning in the 'Democratic firewall'? She was courting rich donors. How many people on Wall Street were indicted by Obama, even after some pleaded guilty? How much money is Obama getting from speeches to Wall Street?
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
thank u for the links! I'd rather not take wisdom and insight second hand from Brooks.
It is interesting, at this comments board, to see how even in the context of a discussion about tribalism we quickly blame the other side (at the Times that means blaming the right and the GOP). I think the nomination of Hillary Clinton illustrates how insular and polar the left has become too - along with the right.
It seemed to me that the "going nuclear/scorched-earth" approach to losing an election started with the right after Bill Clinton's election - they just wouldn't cooperate on anything and bogged governance and governing down in hate-filled rhetoric and obfuscation. But we matched them, or almost did so, during W's administration and then they upped the whole game against Obama - John Boehner was honest: “We're going to do everything — and I mean everything we can do — to kill it, stop it, slow it down, whatever we can.” Mitch McConnell promised “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.” Now we are doing the same to Trump - he is so evil that we cannot participate in government. On campuses the same dynamic has led to the seemingly incompatible claims that diversity is our most important mission but there are some ideas - mostly Republican ideas - that we will not allow to be spoken on campus - we're banning opposing arguments. And yet in these comments the problem is all from Fox News and the GOP. That is not a good sign
6
The adage that to fix a problem we first have to admit that there is one applies here. Brooks claims we've "we’ve regressed from a sophisticated moral ethos to a primitive one," which is just as unproductive in its delusional idealism--though not nearly as destructive and repulsive--as MAGA, candidly articulated by Roy Moore. The 1960s Civil Rights Movement was a time of "high social trust?" For whom? Blacks who could trust that the police would club them or set dogs or fire hoses on them if they demanded equality under the law? Yes, Dr. King was drawing from Biblical truths, but he was operating against 300 years of institutional perversion of those truths, not a "refinement" of them. The current hostile environment, Trumpism, White nationalism, victimhood and "identity politics" are manifestations, not an abberations.
3
Nearly three decades ago, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., diagnosed the problem of "the fragmentation and tribalization" in our country in a short book entitled The Disuniting of America (Norton, 1992). Its trenchant analysis, based on deep historical understanding, is one David Brooks and his readers might find more compelling than more recent articles and lectures.
3
The trouble with full blown identity/tribal politics, without a proper recognition of the Common Good is that it reduces personal freedom as my choices are constrained by group think and what my friends will accept. This has lways been the genuine Christian view where I look out for the good of my neighbour, my neighbour being anyone who needs support.
1
Our country - our world - has too many people, and particularly too many who live on the margins of society. I live in an already-large and booming metro area, in the city. Our mail delivery is spotty. Our streets and roads are pock-marked. Crime is growing. Traffic chokes the metro area. It cripples the city. My doctor had to send me three times to get blood work because technicians did not do what she has asked of them. They are overwhelmed.
We pay relatively high taxes for this life. No one cares. The city is booming. We have a new billion-dollar sports stadium, and we've made a bid for Amazon headquarters. Neighborhoods have become gentrified. Nobody cares.
2
The fundamental relation in society is the effort to participate in the daily struggle for survival. That brings us together in the form of cooperative labor. It also divides us in the form of exploitation. The role of law (and the state apparatus that upholds and enforces law) is to conduct that struggle for survival within definitions of property rights that protect the interests of the exploiters over the exploited. It has been this way since the first appearance of surplus wealth in the last 10,000 years or so.
The irony is that advances in our mastery of nature create the possibility of eliminating scarcity, private ownership of the means of production, and the class divide. If we can eliminate problems related to too little food, housing, education, and health care - the basics - where's the fight? It vanishes!
However, the technological advances that create the possibility of collaboration on a scale only dreamed of in the past also carry with them the threat of immediate destruction (nuclear war) or a slower kind of death (environmental degradation).
What's the missing element that can take us forward? A knowledge-based appreciation of this historic juncture. Advances in consciousness lag behind the technical. The tribal mentality still trumps the common good.
That will require a leap that is currently frustrated by self-serving naysayers promoting a false us/them mindset for the purpose of advancing narrow personal gain. Make your choices people.
2
Tribalism is not all bad, the sense of belonging to a tribe of like minded people is important to the young, they join gangs, bible study groups or black life matters movement. We judge these tribes according to our values, but, our judgement does not negate the need of young minds for tribal belonging. I agree with Mr. Brooks that the current political discourse in the country is too divisive for our own good. Unfortunately, however, I do not believe that a policy, an enlightened leader, or a perfectly constructed set of arguments will unite the country. We may keep marching down this path of divisions until we break apart into States but not United States (Putin’s dream!), or we may hit a crisis point, a tipping point, where unity suddenly becomes the battle cry for the republic. This country has always been an experiment, on equality, freedom, and the human pursuit of happiness. The experiment is ongoing and the result is far from certain.
1
It is not tribalism, which implies valid, albeit alternative, interests and opinions. It’s alternative facts. A large swat of the electorate is persuaded to vote against their own interests through a sustained propaganda supported by extraneous interests or perhaps even by Russia. It is so because in a world of facts, climate change is real, health care is a human right, guns in each household do not guard our independence, woman rights are people’s rights. In a factual world even abortion is a right, despite its religious constrains.
To present our current political state as a struggle between opposite sets of social interests common to large groups of people, is in itself an alternative fact.
2
Brooks is missing the trends which have fueled the justified anger of expressed by young people today. During my lifetime our economy and society has evolved in certain stages. Unionization and expanded higher education opportunities help lift my grandparents and parents generation out of the depression. Post war economic boom provided wide spread opportunity to all economic strata. When I graduated college as the boom was winding down companies were still recruiting for entry level and trainee candidates on campus.
Starting with Reagan , but with the connivance of both political parties, Wall Street, business interests and the wealthy began their investments in Congress. Eventually our legislators became the servants of those wealthy and greedy special interests and the laws they passed increasingly favored their benefactors at the expense of our citizenry in general. Tax laws, trade agreements, labor, health, regulatory laws favors the monied interests.
Think tanks and academics spewed forth propaganda in support of their sponsors goals and denigrating investment in the social welfare, especially revenue dependent programs. Politicians exploited prejudices and fears with so called "values " issues as the wealthy piled on wealth, destroyed the economy for the common man and rigged the recovery to recoup their wealth first.
Youth opportunity has been impaired by factors favoring monied interests. They are victims of a political system that willfully failed them.
6
I sure don't want to have to go through another world war to reach what Brooks thinks we had after WWII: "an identity politics that emphasized our common humanity." Give me some other options. Please. And, to be honest, as lovely as that sounds, I'm not sure we ever really had that. Or had it for long. We had enough opportunity and growth to go around for a lot of our population. But that all was filled out, eaten up in time, and recognized as being quite limiting for women, for minorities, for anyone who wanted to keep growing.
I will say that threatening other world leaders, poking them in the eyes and thinking it'll lead to something good, an event that will "set their people free" and help us all regain that "common humanity" POV is beyond a fool's errand at this point in our times.
1
"Over the past two generations, however, excessive individualism and bad schooling have corroded both of those sources of cohesion."
Pray tell, with which party are these mostly associated, either in terms of ideology or policy priorities?
2
David.. the GOP has been devastating to the middle class while using propaganda that Mao would have been proud of. Worker safety, minimum wage, health care benefits, the fiduciary duties of financial advisors, environment concerns, all have been reduced for the dubious benefit of corporations and the wealthy.
Progressives have been unable to be effective because they are fragmented and severely hampered by redistricting that increases the power of the GOP far beyond their actual voter percentage nationally. GOP uses "tribal" issues such as abortion very effectively to rein in dissenters among the GOP.
Our country is to being helped by the GOP and they are to blame for 90% of the lack of communication between groups.
2
I am convinced this analysis is correct. I would add that the law of entropy strongly suggests that when a new low bar is set in a polity - for example in civil discourse or in adherence to or flouting of democratic norms - it is next to impossible to rebuild and reset the bar.
Many years ago after WWII, a western journalist asked Chinese nationalist Chiang Kai-Sheck whether Western individualism and the principles championed by the French Revolution would prove more enduring than authoritarianism. His answer revealed the time scale of Chinese thought. It also foreshadowed the erosion we witness today throughout Western liberal democracies. Chiang said simply, “It is far too early to tell.”
The regime of Lee Kwan Yuew in Singapore perhaps demonstrates that Churchill was wrong when he observed that democracy is the worst form of government apart from all the others. Singapore shows what can be accomplished by a benevolent dictatorship. It’s the ‘benevolent’ part that is tricky.
1
Correction: it was Zhou en-lai (Premier under Chairman Mao) who said “It’s far too early to tell”.
The divisions in our country are directly caused by the rejection of a common belief in the decency of people by conservative Republicans. They talk like our system of government is an alien institution controlled by an oppressive cabal when they know that it is simply a liberal democracy that the majority of the people have developed from principles like that all people are created equal. They think that if they can weaken democracy, that they will be free to do as they like without having any concern about anyone else. It began with the civil rights movement eliminating preferential treatment for some that resulted in a fairer distribution of public assistance and equal opportunity — the New Deal had catered to racial biases and relieving those injustices eroded support for assistance to needy minorities. Reactionaries who began to dominate the national conversation quickly exploited these biases to dismiss programs which assured everyone basic support and equal opportunities, like college educations, to be against the interests of the people. Instead, they asserted that eliminating public institutions and effectively giving private individuals control over the wealth of the nation would make everyone richer. The effect that this must have upon democratic institutions was never questioned, nor how private individuals could possibly be expected to act in the public good if it did not benefit themselves. These reactionaries even insisted that altruism lead to more poverty.
1
Today's younger generation (and some of us older) use way too much social media. And the news transmitted upon those electronic airwaves is not clear. Either it makes little issues seem bigger OR bigger issues seem much smaller.
This is part of the problem. The news media is either magnified or marginalized depending on who they want the message delivered to.
Most people do not know how to read between the lines or understand propaganda or yellow journalism. They take all at face value. This has always been a dangerous element to truth.
1
The maxim is divide et impera (divide and rule). If we are divided, it is because powerful interests wish us to be divided. The Republicans' southern strategy, their use of wedge issues and their waging of class warfare against the working and middle class have been standard operating procedures for at least two generations now. Do the masters of wedge issues politics now regret exploiting those issues? Probably not. If they did, they wouldn't enact a tax law that specifically punishes blue states; one that is designed to transfer wealth from the workers to the investor class and the already fabulously wealthy; and one meant to eventually undermine and destroy programs such as Social Security and Medicare. Appeals to secessionists and racists; coordinating with foreign powers; engineering elections funded by unlimited and untraceable money all serve not only to divide and weaken our democracy, but to do so for the benefit of those who seek to diminish the United States' position in the world. A house divided against itself, with one side aligned with those trying to burn it down, is a house not worth living in.
3
What if you had a profound insight, but nobody cares? that is where we are now. Brooks is right but we all prefer our evil enemy to having misguided friends, so we will continue to fight even when we have common grounds for agreement. and we will win.
It looks like the American people will soon have a common enemy when President Trump takes us to war against either North Korea or Iran. Or -- if that doesn't happen -- when our next Democratic President of the U.S. takes us to war against Russia as vengeance for the Russians' desecration of our elections in 2016. Not a pretty scenario, but any of those wars would unite the American people with a common patriotic fervor. That might, in turn, have a long-lasting effect and strengthen our common bonds as Americans.
It would seem that "tribalism" and the pre-occupation with individual rights in America is taking its toll. We have a perfect case in point with the recent election in Alabama, whereby, many were more than willing to vote for Roy Moore despite anything else and that was strictly because he was a Republican NOT a democrat.
It is also interesting to note that when a UN representative who was a Director in charge of a committee studying poverty throughout the world,
ironically, some of the worst poverty he found, was within the United States itself, located in "rural Alabama". These are the dichotomies of America which make no sense whatsoever and is gradally tearing it apart.
2
I'm sorry, Mr. Brooks, but I just don't buy the argument. It is simplistic, and invokes the same kind of thinking that you criticize: us versus them, the "sophisticated moral ethos" versus the "primitive."
What you perceive as a regression from a "sophisticated moral ethos" is in part a reaction against the white, male, heterosexual, Judeo-Christian "moral order" that has for centuries systematically enslaved, conquered, oppressed, and marginalized anyone who was not white, male, heterosexual, and Judeo-Christian.
It is not the representatives of the "sophisticated moral ethos" who recognize this and inspire change by challenging power; it is the individuals affected by it who summon the courage to speak from their own experience, however imperfect that expression might be. While it can be messy and disruptive it is far more likely to yield consensus than the "reign of right-thinking people."
Your disparaging treatment of the concepts of "tribe" and "primitive" overlooks the fact that we evolved as tribal animals, and that many tribal societies survived for many centuries in relative stability, developing highly complex cultures with mechanisms for balancing the needs of individuals and the group. That is, until they were conquered and subsumed by civilization and its "sophisticated moral ethos."
“The family trees of all of us, of whatever origin or trait, must meet and merge into one genetic tree of all humanity by the time they have spread into our ancestries for about 50 generations.”
― Guy Murchie, "The Seven Mysteries of Life"
Humans have varying skin tones, but no single skin color identifies all of humanity. We may be characterized by varying tribal histories as well, but no single tribe defines humanity. But fifty generations into any human's genetics reveals we are all closely related. No excessive individualism can satisfy as well as seeing one's self in all others, nor resolve collective human problems save the investigation of the oneness of the world of humanity. Such human oneness can
enlighten all of Earth.
1
"whose minds evolved for tribal warfare and us/them thinking"
The evolutionary branch of psychology veers precariously into pseudoscience and should not form the basis of reasoned argument.
Those of us who engage in "identity politics" are seeking a seat at the table for people who have been unjustly (and often arbitrarily) excluded.
Brooks is suggesting that we have lost sight of the table (in this case, a vision of a just society that values our common humanity), and he is mistaken.
Tribalism seems to become a way of interacting with the world as the perception of opportunities wanes. It has increased along with income and wealth inequality across the world. This perspective is often relative, as the well to do want to assure that not only do they have the opportunity to continue to amass wealth but it is also for the benefit of their offspring so that they may do the same. My observation is that it also coincides with a decline in moral reasoning, where there is a retreat to absolutes, the inability to identify and deal with shades of gray as well as the context of larger structures.
We have an entrenched class structure established by wealth, where the middle and working class are vainly struggling to hold on. Tribalism even increases when identify politics splits along class lines, as what is chanted in the streets during the marches changes when people go home to their respective neighborhoods, where many are grateful that their kids don’t have to share the same schools. It use to be shared, common experiences that brought and held us together, but those opportunities are waning, and are not even desired by many.
What we've seen to date is just a hint of what lies ahead on this path.
1
Though Brooks and by reference Haidt are largely correct in what they have concluded, the main points have been commented on for years, often in these comments.
America is losing its way as a collective enterprise, a country uniquely founded and tied together by a set of beliefs laid out in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, (regardless of their original and ongoing imperfections.) America is, always has been, and always will be a work in progress, but no matter how far we are from full achievement of those goals, they remain what has bound us together, First Nations people and slave descendants, as well as immigrants from vastly different cultures and histories seeking what those born here often take for granted.
Civics used to be a required subject in schools. Yes, our society was often idealized in the process, but the mechanisms for making it better were taught by the process itself, by the emphases on "we the people" and "consent of the governed", legitimating our right to fight for a better society. Sadly, that process, which can bind together people with vastly different beliefs and histories, is on the wane, substituted by the narratives embraced by hyphenated Americans (which we all are), who now primarily identify with the adjective preceding the hyphen, not the noun, American.
Left and Right we now identify as tribalized adjectives,refusing to grant legitimacy of the proper noun, American, to other adjectives who might disagree with us.
7
Maybe. But there seems to be something else going on. Surveys over recent years have shown remarkably increased acceptance for the “other,” including other races, other ethnicities, other genders, alternate sexual patterns, and so on. So, the hostilities Mr. Brooks describes may not be so much tribal as something else he has not described. The accelerating crudeness of political conversation, propelled by cable news irresponsibility and the tasteless posturing of the current occupant of the White House has so tarnished our social standards as to leave the country divided into two seemingly incompatible groups. One (let’s say about 40%) is attracted to the new vulgarity. The other (let’s say about 55%) is offended by, and anxious about it. The situation militates against genial dialogue about big issues. Politics is neither noble nor ignoble. It is, though, a good way to deal with societal challenges; better than violence or war. And, there are politicians who can be noble or can be ignoble. The noble ones need to step forward.
3
Our tribe is not tribal. Their tribe is entirely tribal. That feeling is universal, for both tribes.
5
David, get the president and the Republican Party to govern from a basis of facts and reality, which they are not currently doing. Witness their sales pitch to the tax bill (almost all lies) and their view of climate change (based on misinformation motivated by the short-term financial interests of most of their donors). Once they speak and govern from a basis of reality and facts I can begin to think of them as something other than evil. Read your colleague Paul Krugman's columns on this general topic. It is simply dishonest to claim the tribalism is symmetrical. Republicans act from a basis of lies on a very regular basis. That must change.
240
While I agree with your characterization of the Republican Party, our society is made up of a lot more than party politics. Look at our entire society to Brooks' point, about how splintered and utterly self-certain that the Other is beyond redemption. This goes for right wingers and left wingers.
4
"Republicans act from a basis of lies on a very regular bases." Um, I think you are a part of why this was written - you are a part of a tribe when you make this statement. And you have utterly failed to see the 'lies' from the left. Government lies - both parties lie. Even Pelosi cared not when Politico have her a 'false' as she said 'everyone does it.' Guess that is the real problem.
Saying both sides are equally responsible for tribalism is very much like saying both sides were responsible for the violence in Charlottesville.
2
If possible we need to try and frame our differences in terms of policies and solutions rather then team colors. Abortion? Choice, freedom of the woman, Religious needs, cost, what happens to unwanted babies? Can their be a middle ground?
Immigration. The need for workers, the actual economic input, the actual crime changes, the history of the country. Environmental. Does it cost jobs? the health issue? the solutions. Yes, all of these are complex but if we could get to discussing the actual problems, cause and solutions rather then the gang mentality we could get somewhere. We need to stop the political cheerleaders and their propaganda machines first.
3
Perhaps this time of extreme polarization is more usual in American history than the relative calm between the era of WWII and the year 2000. The early years of the U.S. were extremely polarized, with the Federalists and Democratic-Republicans attacking each other as the Antichrist. This period cost Hamilton his life in a duel inspired by politics. The Era of Good Feelings followed the War of 1812, but after that the nation descended gradually into its nadir, the Civil War. Labor strife marked the end of the century. And so on. The supposedly placeid 1950s were marked by the ugliness of the McCarthy era. Violence and deaths scarred the Civil Rights era. Vietnam divided us with chasms yet to be bridged. Democracy needs to put reins on some of the baser human instincts, and needs to struggle mightily to survive. This could well be business as usual.
1
I'm glad at least some Republicans have learned their binary treatment of Government - a primary bent toward NO COMPROMISE with DEMOCRATS - has lead us to a place of un-civility.
Brooks at least sees the light - about eight years late. I wonder when the Mitch McConnells of the world will.
5
The Mitch McConnells of the our politics will be crying out for bipartisanship when it suits their agenda. In fact, just the other day, Sen. McConnell himself was quoted expressing his hope for bipartisanship in 2018. What with one thing and another, I've come to believe that for our current Congressional leaders, "bipartisanship" means finding ways to blame Democrats for the inevitably poor results of unilateral Republican governance.
It's axiomatic that all of us have a multiplicity of "identities, some "tribal" in the sense of ethnic, religious or cultural backgrounds or more elective affinities such as political party affiliation. True, there's nothing necessarily "wrong" with this: even if it were it would be ineradicable. Some of these identities involve, to use Burke's phrase, "allegiances to which we are born." When it becomes toxic -- as it has in American since the middle of Obama's Administration --whether in terms of extreme political partisanship or on campus in the ugly puerile culture of competitive claims of oppression -- it is because it has surmounted a higher and broader sense of national belonging. The hyphenated identities have grown exponentially, creating a form of Balkanization that harkens back to the 300 states of the Holy Roman Empire. Of course this works in the short term to gain advantage of some sort, whether in politics or in terms of destroying common core curricula at universities and causing us to enshrine loyalties to things less than shared citizenship or a common humanity. I've never seen our politics or the culture of the academy uglier and more divisive in my life. It's frightening. Many have taken one or two of the thousands of components that make us what we are and elevated them into idols -- whether it's gender identity or loyalty to a community of color which is indistinguishable from hating people who are white. If we don't end this it will end us.
It’s ancient, ingrained in the human psyche, and the essential element of survival of the fittest, the shared fact of life of all life on this planet. Amongst species genus, family, order, class, phylum, kingdom, domain, etc. and even amongst our own blood relations, when it becomes us vs. them, any difference whether physical or emotional, intellectual, or spiritual chases us back into the shadows of the fire we abandoned at the entrance of the darkest reaches of the cave from which our common humanity emerged.
Lacking a shared unifying cause, separate tribes will eventually go to war, a war of words or swords, and the consequent conquest of ideology or territory will be followed by empire and then its eventual decline and demise. Such is the history of humankind from the beginning of human time as history repeats itself again and again in a sad and sorry repetition of the effects of the worst of our traits, greed, power, pride, and our insensate and hateful self interest above the concern for others.
The Return To Tribalism is the natural reaction to the divisive and fearful world created by our own failure to live up to the high minded principles we pretend to live by, faith in God, charity, personal freedoms, and hope for the betterment of ourselves and our children.
America as any other empire has a shelf life. Anyone care to say when it expires?
Again and again David Brooks elevates culture over economics as the driving force creating dissension and disarray. Failing to see how inequality stands at the forefront of our social problems, Brooks can offer no effective solutions to the divide plaguing the country.
3
Sorry, David, the tribalism of the left is not the tribalism of the right. Let's put this in terms of what either side imagines about the role of government. Despite the canonization of Reagan's notion that "government is the problem," people on the right still want government to do things. But people on the right want government to do things that help them specifically, especially if those things hurt other people (the "not-us") in some way. People on the left are much more likely to want government to do things that help most people, even people who are not always "like" themselves. People on the left and especially young people on the left tend to demonize rich white people. But then rich white people are often damaging everyone else (they are truly the "takers" in Romney-parlance). So the tribalism of the left isn't really tribalism: it is everybody-else-ism. No doubt, this Bernie Sanders view of the world has its limitations, but at heart it is grounded in a moral vision that the narrative from the right simply cannot match. Koch brother types simply want more money for themselves; white nationalists want a white nation; evangelicals can't even imagine that people who don't share their religious views aren't the spawn of Satan. The left has tiny pockets of that exclusivity, but it's a marginal element of the left. That said, I do agree that the left would do well to re-embrace King's direct appeal to what unites us and tone down the silo-elements of multiculturalism.
4
Food for thought. It is true that a rigid individualism we seem embarked in, based on tribal designs of "Us vs Them", is a deterrent to our common interests as social human beings, and the need to feel part of a'whole', a community where we all contribute according to our talents...and know that our basic needs will be met, based on sound 'politics' promoting societal peace. Remember the demeaning phrase about Mexicans, "so far from God and too close to the United States"? Well, aren't we too far from the common man/woman/child's aspirations, and too close to the corrupting power of money in politics? You spoke about centripetal vs centrifugal forces tearing us apart; in a similar vein, our chain of strength in numbers (inclusion) is only as strong as it's weakest link. And it's not looking good, with a dismal future if we allow our unrelieved chronic stress, and our escape in drugs and alcohol, food and gambling, to tear us apart...instead of a bright future if we have the discipline to do what's right, and just, the only way to gain real freedom, and the joy of living. Shall we start by restoring trust in each other, by become active and contributing to our common humanity? The current destructive behavior 'a la Trump' is disruptive, and based on the triad of fear, hate and division, 'divide to conquer', promoted by our current thug in the White House. This, we must oppose. Do we have the will; and, if so, the courage of our convictions?
1
Frankly, I would love to be able to get along with folks from the rural West and the Southland but it's simply a bridge too far! On the other hand, we in New England and the Northeast share much more in values with our Canadian friends!
We're just NOT going to buy into the Evangelical or Wild West approach to the world, David, and the G.O.P. tax "reform" has exacerbated the "unity" problem still further.
How many of the NYT readers like the SALT rip-off, the benefits of which flow to the South, where they can still again cut their own taxes and feed at the federal trough?
4
“From an identity politics that emphasized our common humanity, we’ve gone to an identity politics that emphasizes having a common enemy.”
Thank you writing this piece. We have, as Americans, more in common with each other than the current discourse tells us.
As an example the white working class has much in common with immigrants, and yet our president tells them that recent immigrants are their enemy.
Our president points out people’s differences as a way to strengthen himself with his base. It is tragic, it has the potential to destroy our country.
2
There are many responses in this thread that conflate right wing Christian zealot behavior with individualism. Totally different, in that the former is tribalism and the latter is the key to societal success. We each need the freedom to decide how much or how little we want to interact with others for the common good.
1
No one person exemplifies this mindset more than trump. He has a history of meism and pitting one person or group against another to obtain the results that he wants for himself. Is there a better example of someone who is constantly playing the victim than trump from complaining about his inaugural crowds, the Mueller investigation, calls to show his tax returns and so on. His tweets exemplify it. Maybe just maybe if we are so lucky the mainstream will so tire of this that we will return to a humane approach.
1
There is a lot of tribalism, however, how to get that social bond or common ground without a common understanding of the facts. When someone tells me the sky is green and I know it is not there is no where for that conversation to go unless it is grounded in a factual understanding of the world. And to be clear the lack of facts is more prevalent on the conservative side and there are far more news outlets on the conservative side that push false, nonsensical stories and conspiracy theories
How can David Brooks write about "excessive individualism" without referring at all to capitalism or economics? What, exactly, does he think is uprooting communities (for better and for worse) and has been for generations?
2
This is a very balanced column, and that is precisely the problem. Rush Limbaugh went national in 1988. In 1996, Fox News went on the air. Ever since then, intellectually lazy people have been bombarded with anti-left, anti-liberal, and anti-progressive messages that have themselves increased in hostility over the decades. The effects have been corrosive.
The Republican Party has followed the lead of its increasingly hostile base, and now tries to run the federal government by virtually shutting Democrats out of the process. This continues to the committee level, where GOP members such as Devin Nunes function entirely independently, without keeping their Democratic counterparts even in the loop. Republicans just admitted that they crafted their tax bill to punish Democratic states.
Forget the balance, Mr. Brooks. The right wing is the problem, and the Republican Party is now for all intents and purposes treasonous.
4
And on the left there are screeching voices preaching nightly on MSNBC, the hate filled rhetoric of Daily Kos, the biased misinformation presented daily in Huffington Post....
1
DRS -
Seriously, you can't equate the likes of Rachel Maddow with Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity. And it's now established fact that those Americans who use Fox News as their primary information source are the most consistently misinformed citizens in the United States. That's been proved in a number of independent university studies. You can't make a similar claim about the Huffington Post.
By the way, you didn't even bother to address any of the points made in my second paragraph. Just sayin'.
"Over the past two generations, however, excessive individualism and bad schooling have corroded both of those sources of cohesion"
That is one empirically weak statement. Making a blanket negative assessment of education weakens your argument considerably
2
This is happening in "my" Democratic Party between Clinton supporters and Bernie supporters. We are determined to blame each other for the election of Trump.
Perhaps it's time to reinstate the draft. There was once a time when kids from all over the United States assembled with a temporary common purpose: the defense of America. Even during years when there was no war, they went into the armed services. My father, a white man from a prejudiced southern area, grew to understand and like his black co-soldiers. Conscientious objectors worked side by side with people who carried weapons. Immigrants were accepted for their merit. This was the true melting pot, not the often praised, but inaccurate view of American society.
At age 18, many people are immature. Their life goals are nebulous. Their job opportunities are minuscule. Some enter college without a plan.
Why can't we have a mandatory draft, not necessarily military, that would require two years of service to your country? During those years, young men and women could grow up, mentally and emotionally. When they emerged from that service, they would also have a marketable skill if they chose not to go to college. We have removed many opportunities for this next generation, and it's time for some new ideas.
2
Reinstate the Draft: Because in order to make people like each other, we have to force them together to maybe get killed. Yeah, sounds like a great idea.
Oh, were you talking about a different kind of draft, like, non-military? So we have to force people to be together for 2 years to do what? Waste their time and energy doing nothing for themselves? Delaying their use of their college education, or denying their going to college to get an education? Yeah, sounds like a great idea.
What "marketable skill" would they have? You forgot to mention any.
2
Another way of saying this is that we have all taken our opinions and redefined them as morals. When you do that then the other side is always wrong.
1
Telling that Mr. Brooks chooses centrifugal force, a "fictional" force, to characterize resistance to oppressive forces, and the oppressors that wield them.
There are so many ways to portray the fraying of a social contract, and Brooks has done a good job of bringing a couple of them to light. But in the end, digging deep into causality with clever and thoughtful analysis only serves to make the problems appear even more complex and intractable. In the end it's not so complicated -- we face an absence of visionary leadership at just about every level of governing and conducting business. This is not the first time we have faced a combination of domestic social, spiritual and political fragmentation. It's just that the scale and the immediacy are so much greater than ever before thanks to technology writ-large and the resulting globalization of economies, and the struggle between populations and resources. Give us leaders with wisdom and the skill to define a clear vision the broad strokes of which we can agree on at the 30,000-foot level, and the more polluted air lower down won't seem quite so thick. However, as long as the majority of us abdicate our responsibility to act as engaged citizens demanding better of our leaders rather than dispassionate hangers-on on the one hand, or overzealous narrow-minded ideologues on the other, we will sink deeper into morass that threatens our way of life.
2
The priority of a party at any level should be to work for the perceived benefit of the country as a whole. There are differences in what each party thinks is required and so discussion, compromise (not a sign of weakness) and then action is what is necessary.
Trying to run the country in the interests of one party only, preferably without any input from the other is what tribalism is all about. (i suspect that if Democrats were in charge, the situation would not be very different).
1
Roger writes, "Trying to run the country in the interests of one party only, preferably without any input from the other is what tribalism is all about. (i suspect that if Democrats were in charge, the situation would not be very different)."
Sorry Roger, but you are wrong. The Democratic party is not just the other side of the same coin compared to the republicans. The Democratic party is multicultural. The Democratic party is multi-ethnic. The republican party is white and Christian...and becoming white supremacist with the bible trumping secular law.
When the Democrats were in charge of the White House and congress, they worked on health care. They invited input from republicans...but were rebuffed. The ACA is not a liberal plan, but a conservative plan first instituted by Romney. The republicans did not want to work with Obama...they wanted to oppose him every step of the way. When have the Democrats ever acted that poorly?
You sound like Trump describing Charlottesville...bad people on both sides. No. One side is behaving badly and the other side is reacting to that bad behavior. Try again.
1
Instructive to review the timeline of events of 1968, fifty years ago. Certainly "tribalism" was alive and well -- on both ends of the political/cultural spectrum -- with dramatically good and bad results.
I think that a spiritual component is missing today. Many presidents have not been religious in the strict sense of being regular church goers, but they believed
in the "brotherhood of man" in the universal sense of the word "mankind."
President Obama, while not specifically religious, had an obvious spiritual side as did the majority of presidents in my lifetime, starting with FDR. When President Obama said, "We are all in this together", it struck a chord with me. Tribalism seems to be an anthropological trait, but tribes have to acknowledge that common good and brotherhood must supersede the individual if we want order.
After Watergate, we pleaded with President Gerald Ford to "bring us together" and he did. Even though his pardon of Nixon was very controversial, he understood the issues of the common goal and the common good. Two of his outstanding
spiritual characteristics were his humility along with his courage.
As long as Trump and his enablers and dupes threaten to tear my country apart and poison this earth, I will oppose him.
He has found the lowest principle of success:
Evil, be thou my good.
He is also encouraging people to stop striving for good but rather to reach for the worst in themselves and let it rip.
Your exhortations for community would be better applied to your top Republican brethren. Try a few Christmas carols, with their exhortations to peace, fellowship, and goodwill towards men.
Don't tell me it's good and Christian to put up with injustice, hatred, violence, and greed.
Try the ten commandments, the seven deadly sins, and the gospels. Don't tell me its spiritual to hate, to hurt, and to exclude. The most ethical people I know are atheists, and I've joined them because of this hypocrisy and the absence of a smiting god to call his so-called worshippers to order.
15
In simpler terms, please compare the Republicans a generation ago to this lot. They've gone downhill fast, and have become wholly corrupt.
Moving the goalposts just to get along ever to the right is not OK. And arming themselves to the teeth to keep in power is also not OK (yes, this is a thing with the far right).
Emulating Hitler needs an absolute refusal, not a compromise.
6
Susan Anderson -- "In simpler terms, please compare the Republicans a generation ago to this lot."
True. While you are at it, compare FDR, Truman, JFK, or LBJ's domestic policies to this lot today.
There is something fundamentally wrong with our politics. I think it is the big money taken over.
2
Thanks Mark, good point. But I'd recommend you get a copy of Dark Money and read it (now out in paperback). I'd be happy to send you one. Lots of what she has to say is in The New Yorker, if you are a subscriber. She's a courageous researcher, as a look at these headlines shows:
https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/jane-mayer
The one about Pence is a shocker.
Here's her most recent, on-campus shenanigans:
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/a-conservative-nonprofit-that-s...
From human behavior to social norms and institutions Haidt and Bruckner are right! As David points out "the center doesn't hold" at this juncture of US society. Haidt's and Bruckner's observations dovetail with Picketty's economic premise on wealth inequality in the US that has risen since WWII. Further the very essence of the split is both mirrored and anchored in our Constitution and the division between the States and Federal Government. Our current leadership is woefully inadequate for the task at hand of putting it back together.
1
Our current leadership is tainted post Citizens United.
Read this article to understand the Russian money connection post Citizens United and how it relates to the GOP and Trump.
https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2017/12/15/putins-proxies-...
If, by "bad schooling," Brooks means that schools from elementary on up no longer teach students about history, philosophy, government, I'm with him 100 percent. However, if he means that colleges "indoctrinate" students with a "liberal" philosophy, I vehemently disagree. While it's true that students get the perspective of those who have little power, this is a welcome antidote to the previous pedagogy in which liberal arts were taught with a top-down perspective.
Powerful politicians, businessmen, thinkers, are, of course, important. But so are the millions of others who had to use subversive and not so subversive ways of gaining power. This is how history, and the world, actually work.
7
The tribe is crucial to identity--the tribe can be your neighborhood, the guys at the tavern, or the family. Mr. Brooks yearns for really really big tribes--like Trump does. White invaders/settlers were nothing if not tribal. Protestantism, capitalism--these are forces that coalesce power--ultimately to the individual. Occasionally, tribes unite when threatened by Nazism, Trumpism. When there's a fire in the neighborhood, everybody carries water; when the fire is out, you go back to talking to your homies.
6
I agree that tribalism has been on the rise for quite a long time in the U.S., probably since at least the early 60s. At this point the unity of purpose arising from WWII waned and people turned their attention to problems at home, specifically the long-ignored civil rights issues, and more foreign military involvement, Vietnam, for which there was no appetite.
Of these, I believe that the civil rights/anti-racism movement was the most consequential, (don't forget women’s rights and the feminism. These brought cultural change and emotions into play.
Now back to tribalism. By definition this is a battle for domination and we must recognize that the most powerful group, economically in our case, is likely to have the advantage. In the “robber- baron age” industrial titans ran things. But I don’t remember that the working class supported their aims. But from the 60s on, the Republican party chose to back the wealthy and corporative side AND were able to co-opt working and middle-class voters by first exploiting anti-civil rights sentiment and then fundamentalist Christianity to create a fairly solid base. They demonized not only Democrats but government as well, as being some “outside” force attacking their values. Democrats were left with their ideals of social progress and equality and opportunity for all, a much less visceral argument, but a more positive one and one which IMO has history on its side. Thus was the stage set for our present situation. Resist and persevere!
12
Brooks, "why can't we all just get along." The Republican Party has blown that to hell!!!!
19
Let’s not pretend the Democrats are United.
Sir Thomas More in "Utopia" wrote: "You wouldn't abandon ship in a storm just because you couldn't control the winds." No, hell no, voters like myself won't jump ship, even when the captain is in his gilded cabin tweeting, but we will throw him and others like him overboard to save the ship of state. I am not always or even often right, but others who support perpetual war on the world, women, the planet, the media and courts, and the poor, are more wrong.
14
David, better check your false equivalence. You search desperately for a logical explanation for tribalism in our politics. Here's one for you: the far left lives in a fairyland, the far right bays at the moon, most of America lives somewhere in between, and our leaders care more about preserving and growing their power than about finding consensus and governing responsibly.
15
Another book report from school boy Brooks. I'd give it a B if I was feeling generous.
15
Every man for himself, that was what I got from the Reagan presidency. It grew and stuck. We were an empire that decided not to pay for the benefits of power, instead, just take care of number one. Trump is a symptom not a cause of our present predictable situation.
23
I find it fascinating how in many of David Brooks' columns, the top comments seem to exemplify the very concerns about society that he is warning us about.
12
Brooks is the master of false equivalence. The "both sides do it" does not stand up to any sort of scrutiny. I am sick of supposedly thoughtful people comparing the foolish ramblings of some college professor or celebrity to the relentless extremism and anti-intellectualism of the entire Republican establishment and their wealthy enablers.
Yeah, but it's all the Republicans' fault.
Joking!
3
This is a very timely piece for me as tomorrow I go back into my eleventh grade classroom to continue teaching Emerson and Thoreau. The Transcendentalist philosophy and the focus on the individual seems to have elements for people of any current political, religious or ideological persuasion to love and to hate. Want to read something that inspired Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi? Want to read something by guys who mistrusted all institutions? Throw in the focus on nature and the Over-Soul and there is no telling who these thinkers will manage to offend. If the individual should be led by instincts separate from what he or she is being told by history or institutions, maybe we need more individualism. "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds..."
I am looking forward to sharing this column with students.
3
Ms. Jones, You are an excellent teacher. Your students will benefit from your teaching them the philosophy of the Transcendentalists. They knew many things that we must be reminded of. Nelson Mandela and JFK/RFK and some other great individuals were also influenced by them.
1
Star Wars, The Last Jedi tells us-"The Force", is ubiqitous and unifying. A spectrum allowing balance but on its surface seemingly promoting sides. Us vs. them, rather than Us. Money Changers finance the friction and tribes go to war. Philosophy not politics is the answer. In a Galaxy, right here, we need to redefine and refind that what makes us, us, to live long and prosper together.
1
I can’t improve on the paragraph about MLK, the two paragraphs that follow it, and the closing paragraph. Thanks.
In Congress, Newt Gingrich championed today’s brand of scorched earth politics in which one constantly demonizes the opposition. It’s worth reading his GOPAC pamphlet “Language, a Key Mechanism of Control,” to see the art, craft, and science of divisiveness and branding as a means to power and control, written down for everyone to read.
I also think intellectuals need to do a much better job building verbal architecture. Broad poorly defined terms that are not used in their ordinary sense have no place in intellectual theories. I’ve been thinking of Bullwinkle the Moose, dressed as a magician, announcing he’s going to pull a rabbit out of a hat. He pulls out a roaring lion’s head instead. “Must’ve been the wrong hat.” A sound intellectual theory doesn’t have broad poorly defined terms that function as a magician’s hat out of which one pulls interesting and provocative conclusions.
But MLK seems like the gold standard for modern American politics, and we have to find our way out of the wilderness into which the likes of Gingrich led us.
4
.
Marxism says history is a class struggle.
Feminism says history is a gender struggle.
Ethnicism says history is a racial struggle.
All make a point, but miss the big picture. What then is history?
Religion/spirituality broadly defined says history is an individual struggle for virtue that resonates into the social sphere -- where individual virtue becomes social justice. History is assimilation to god (god = the good). When an individual tosses out this notion, they frequently grab one of the lesser oppressed-oppressor notions that is fundamentally tribal in nature.
Perhaps, then, assimilating to a common culture that is dedicated to "justice for all" is better than celebrating diversity.
6
There is a vast difference between embracing an oppressor-oppressed worldview where one's own group is the oppressor and embracing one where ones own group is the oppressed.
David Brooks writes an article, steeped in some historical context, which totally ignores the realities of the Republican Party and their clear agenda. Hundreds of readers remind Mr. Brooks to face our reality. This happens over and over and over again. Does he read any of these comments? Or does he read them and believe they have no relevance? Its becoming a waste of time to read his articles....
20
Funny, in the same way, I often wonder whether the commenters read his columns, since so many engage in exactly the type of us vs. them tribal behavior he is writing about (cough, cough).
America has almost always been tribal. Our founders were the leaders of various diverse tribes, brought together, grudgingly, by common fear or benefit. They needed each other far more than they liked each other.
The past 70 years were an atypical period of commonality in our history, dominated by the experiences of the Great Depression and World War II. Trump is just a sign that that period of commonality is probably exhausted. The ascendance of a charlatan is nothing new. We have always been at our best when challenged with truly serious adversity. That adversity will come again, whether it is global warming, world war, or another depression. And I believe we will respond positively, as we have before. It's who we are.
There is a story within a story here which most commenters have missed, which is that of the young lady,attractive with a determined look, wearing a head band that says "no,"and signifying that she is a member of Antifa!Yet if adherents of Antifa were asked to define fascism, or any other ism, could they do so? Don't mean to single them out, but so many of members of that "groupuscule" as well as vast numbers of Sanders's aficionados, when asked to define socialism, fascism, are at a loss for words. This goes to the heart of the weakness of our educational system, which is to let students at h.s. and college levels get by, graduate,without knowing word usage, political history, our Constitution. Classic example is the Sanders supporter who, when asked to define socialism by a t.v. reporter during the Iowa primary, replied, "Gee, that's a tough one. Hope no one at home is watching!" 1 sees such shallowness also in remarks in the Comments section, where it suffices to string together pejorative adjectives re Trump to merit publication.Can't debate with anyone who has "l'esprit ferme!"But Brooks really showed at least in this case why he is writing for the Times newspaper:well written, coherent, informative piece.
5
Obviously, you do "mean to single them out," otherwise you wouldn't do it. You could just as easily point to the rabid supporters of our President in their MAGA hats, who have no clue what they are supporting, or fighting against. Why didn't you?
Again; absurd false equivalence. Anyone can peruse social media for 5 minutes and find a dozen examples of ignorance and extremism from any point on the political spectrum. So what. Listen at the current president. Listen to Republican legislators at the national and state level. Watch the madness that is Fox News. Extremism and anti-intellectualism is rampant among Republican leaders. Comparing this to an anonymous "liberal" is absurd.
2
Oh please!
And how many Republicans spent 8 years calling President Obama a "socialist" or "communist," without having a CLUE as to which either word means?
So you say it's a problem with our educational system. I agree. Now, what do CONSERVATIVES want to do about it?
2
"He may have gained freedom, but has lost security". Would you really have it the other way around, David?
We all know freedom comes at a cost, and it's one most of us are more than willing to pay.
You speak of individualism as if it were a societal enemy. Rather, it is the recognition of the individual, and the assessment of that individual based on their own abilities and strengths and weaknesses - on the content of their individual character - rather than their age, race, ethnicity, gender, disability, religion or lack of one - that has freed our society to recognize talent and ability where it would otherwise be untapped.
And for the welfare of each individual, you forget - or choose to forget - that to be assessed on your own traits is an inalienable right, not a burden. There was no "security" in stereotyping.
But such is the stuff of the modern GOP - the fiercest "tribe" our society has ever faced.
3
When the Soviet Union went away thanks to its own internal contradictions the American Right with its distinctly paranoid reactionary quality was suddenly left without an opponent. So they turned on their fellow citizens.
14
I don' think that Americans needed the Soviet Union to hate their fellow citizens. That was already going on way before the fall of the USSR.
1
Actually, the metaphor is wrong. There isn’t any such thing as centrifugal force. The physics of the kids running around the maypole is about the speed at which the kids are running and the force needed to change direction. Simplify to a ball attached by a chain to the maypole – throw the ball, and it will keep going at the speed and in the direction you throw it at forever – unless other forces act on it. You can see this when a hockey puck is hit – it just keeps going for a long time. For the ball, gravity will drag it down, air resistance will slow it down – and tension in the chain will pull it toward the pole. Give the ball too much initial speed – and the chain will break.
The outermost kid is running in a straight line – she is pulled into running in a circle by the kid holding her hand. If she runs too fast, they simply won’t be able to hold onto each other any more.
A new metaphor – if we want to stay together, then we need to be aware of our ability to “hold hands” – and adjust our speed accordingly. Slowing down and recognizing the person with whom we hold hands might enable us to change direction without breaking apart.
Being slow enough to hear the “other” and recognizing our common humanity with all its strengths and weaknesses might enable us to move forward in directions that keep us together.
9
I was waiting for someone to point this out.
Mr. Brooks, your article contains important insights and wisdom. But let's try to find a pathway out of the darkness.
When one political party (tribe) demonizes the free press, attacks education and science, and shamelessly propagates fake news (Fox and Facebook)...then I think we have found the trailhead!
16
Mr. Brooks....
Once, just once, perhaps you can trace the rise of "tribalism" in this country. Give us the true historical facts of how political leadership has morphed from confronting a president who was brought down by facts uncovered in newspapers to our present state wherein the President of the United States calls the press—including your employer— "the enemy of the people."
The tribalists are not two halves of a political equation. Tribalism emanates, as it always has, from fear. In 1933 (both in Germany and in the United States) it was fear of non-whites (however defined), communists and Jews and aided by the fear of personal economic loss. That fear was exploited then and now, by greed within, and propaganda from, the hyper-monied classes.
4
Both Haidt, a social psychologist who seemingly embraces a form of Social Darwinism, and Bruckner, a moral philosopher who opposes multiculturalism, quoted here have a right-leaning perspective on the paradox of the extension of human relationship from kinship, community and beyond. Mr. Brooks's May pole analogy illustrates the case of conflicting forces in social bonding but like the views of his two quoted scholars, offers little in the way of solutions. The us/them dichotomy is built-in to the social contract and foments both cohesion and conflict. Alas, the real solution is finding tolerance, not a easy path to blaze.
3
what about this david....????.....
https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2017/12/15/putins-proxies-...
1
Great and important article!
Now we know why the mainstream GOP has gone soft on Russia and Trump. Citizens United has allowed a river of dark (Russian) money to finance the GOP.
One thing ignored in this column is that tribalist tendencies are a tool for political manipulation, and have been used, consciously, for decades in this country, to keep us divided. It's been so effective, we are now controlled by a minority party and president who received a minority of the votes in our last national election.
Our congress, who represents a minority of the citizens of this country, just passed a tax cut that no one needed, to the benefit of a very few people who spend a lot of money to keep us divided.
The ruling powers have our number. They easily fool voters into divisions based on race, age and national origin, and they make it easier for themselves each passing year. Money chases power and power chases money. And money, of course, cannot be silenced. The SCOTUS proclaimed it protected by the First Amendment.
We need to stop worshipping wealth and the wealthy. We need to stop equating it with "good." We need to educate ourselves regarding our psychological makeup and known ways of manipulating the crowd, and recognize it while it's happening.
15
The feudal powers of divide and separate have never been so perfected as it is today. It is a very tried and true way of conquering.
2
Concur. Read this article to understand the Russian money connection post Citizens United and how it relates to the GOP and Trump.
https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2017/12/15/putins-proxies-...
1
Group think is an us verses them way of thinking. All genuine good social behavior is based upon the golden rule. Democracy cannot function without a fundamental trust that with open communications other people will tend to respect what is fair and will forsake short term advantages that produce great disruptive conflicts with others. The brand of reactionary conservatism that dominates Republicans has become the main driver of identity or tribalistic politics that is dividing this country.
This conservatism presumes that there is nothing new under the Sun and that change intended to correct injustices will likely create new injustices and that people are basically selfish and brutal. Rules and strict moral discipline are what enables people to live cooperatively and peacefully together. This pessimistic view of life has produced a Republican Party leadership in Congress and a President who have not shown respect for Democracy and equality before the law in a very long time. They deliberately ransack our public institutions and seek to empower private interests at the expense of our public ones by claiming that the mindlessness of base selfishness will satisfy public interests better than the misguided notions of trying to share risks and to assure all have their basic needs addressed thoughtfully. Our civil society cannot be fixed until the fundamentals of trust in our mutual interests and decency are restored.
3
How appalling, and all but predictable, that David Brooks uses a photo like the one at the head of the article while discussing tribalism. This version of "the other", would be more suited to a travelogue from the 60's, where at least it might have met with a generally uninformed, voyeuristic, regard. A whiter image - maybe even one of nazis and supremacists at Charlottesville - would have been much more truthful in conveying the actual oppressors in Trump's America today.
4
Seems to me that religious tribalism is a major culprit of our cleavage, you can see that every day on FoxNews and with the buffoons of our government. As for Bruckner, he is against everything for and for everything against, I suspect he would vote trump! But as a French, I am grateful you read him. Tikkun Olam.
3
But what if Trump really IS outrageous -- beyond what we have seem under any modern president? I think he is. So how can one approach his administration in a conciliatory manner? What does Mr. Brooks think the proper attitude toward Hitler should have been?
3
Good question, this has crossed my mind many times. How can those who are sane get our country to steer off this path of destruction? I hope we are not lemmings following this madness off the cliff. There are a lot of people in the country acting like rabid dogs!
1
says the man who stuffs his pockets with goodies his tribe has produced while preaching book reports to the rest of us.To be clear it's a fight for America.We know whose side he has been on and whose side he is on.Now he runs a big con hoping to get us to disarm so he can get more.It ain't GEICO Jack.
4
We Americans actually still have a common enemy in Russia, Mr. Brooks.
There is only one party that doesn't seem to care about that enemy: Republicans.
As far as Martin Luther King is concerned, had Fox News been around when he was alive, he would have been smeared, belittled and demeaned by the right even more than he was when he was alive and probably wouldn't have the reputation he now has, thanks to the left, which championed him and fought for a holiday in his name. How many Republicans were for naming a holiday for him?
There is only one party in this country that is destroying our institutions. From embracing a pedophile, passing major-sweeping legislation with 51 votes, gerrymandering to the point where even recently in Virginia Republicans were wiped out vote-wise and still didn't have that reflected in the final results, making up rules about Supreme Court replacements, denying science, denigrating our justice department, attacking Special Counsel Mueller - a war hero and a Republican - just for political means, there is only one party with this type of behavior and that's the Republican Party.
Three million people voted for the Democrat instead of the Republican, yet the right operates like THEY have a sweeping mandate.
And now Republicans passed a fraudulent tax bill - cobbled together in secret with lobbyists - that literally punishes blue states. And you, Mr. Brooks, accuse both sides of the same.
The left isn't going to take this garbage anymore.
22
Concur. Share this article to assist others to understand the Russian money connection post Citizens United and how it relates to the GOP and Trump.
https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2017/12/15/putins-proxies-...
Mr. Brooks, once again above it all, describes us to ourselves from the lofty perch of privilege, not once taking responsibility for his complicity in the carnage. Sigh...
8
Amen. David wants everyone else to accept personal responsibility, but refuses to acknowledge his own.
The alt-right seems to have influenced Mr. Brooks here as he proclaims to see “a new form of identity politics, especially on campus.” While it’s true that among students of color particularly there is an identity movement it is, by comparison to white identity politics, fairly small in numbers and non-violent. Nowhere have we seen the sort of mass rallies of leftists attracted to identity politics that we saw in Charlottesville with tragic consequences. And there have been no leftist mass shootings that stem from an embittered racial identitarians like Dylan Roof. From the evidence, Mr. Brooks should have more accurately stated that this new form of identity politics has been seen especially in its most violent expression on the right, among white supremecists. The verbal fisticuffs on campus remain in the realm of intellectual discourse for the most part.
3
Opposition to conservative speakers on various campuses has been far from peaceful. Indeed, “conservative” is a misnomer because among them were people who simply articulated facts that the left orthodoxy did not want to hear. Consider the shameful treatment of Ayaan Hirsi Ali who was accused of “Islamophobia” for daring to speak about the treatment of women and religious minorities in Muslim societies. Intellectual violence is as dangerous as the physical kind and if campuses, supposedly bastions of free thought, become intolerant and narrow minded, it bodes ill for the future. History shows that there is no difference between right- and left- wing totalitarianism.
Fear drives tribalism. There's safety in numbers, and people scramble to find a powerful tribe when they're scared. If they can't find one they fit into naturally, they'll ally with them.
I agree that schools today reinforce tribalism and jockeying for position so as to grab whatever crumbs a child can--and that's because of adults' fears.
It takes courage to envision something better and put that vision out there to be torn apart by those who only know how to destroy, not how to create collaboratively.
My hope is that the left doesn't make the mistake the right does and cower as the angry aggressors on the extreme push through their unsustainable agenda. Collaboration, not nonstop war, is the way to go.
1
Most comments unfortunately confirm Mr. Brooks’ diagnosis of extreme tribalism blaming the other side for everything and one’s own side for nothing. The problem, however, is that his suggested cure is worthless. There is no “shared humanity” to hold us together. People define themselves not in terms of some abstraction of humanity but as Americans or Russians, Chinese or Japanese, Christians or Jews. And this is how it should be. What would a “human” identity, without a specific language, history and culture, be like? A blank space. However, in other countries with significant political divisions there is a shared national identity. Liberals and conservatives may disagree vehemently in Poland or the UK but they are still Poles or Englishmen. The US was not founded as a nation state but as the embodiment of a political ideal. And once this ideal is questioned, there is nothing to hold us together.
2
This isn't PC I know, but the most stable societies in the world are not very diverse.
The US now is like Austria Hungary in 1900, i.e. about to collapse.
1
Yet another example in the mainstream media (of a kind often bemoaned by Paul Krugman, for example) of the false "they're both equally guilty," approach to liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans. All this can do is to create more cynicism about politics per se. Brooks knows better than this. Liberals and Democrats have weaknesses; the present Republican Party has descended into corruption.
2
This is an excellent analysis, which offers great insights into the underlying tectonics of our cultural disintegration. Let us hope that we can find today the same moral high ground that brave men like Martin Luther King led us to in the 1960’s and that we are once again united as a people by the principles of democracy and our shared willingness to further freedom’s cause to all in this great country.
1
We are not retreating into tribalism. Tribalism is the natural condition of the human species. One may belong to many tribes simultaneously, but we always belong to a tribe. And each tribe always seeks to be the one on top.
The GOP tribe (and all the relevant sub-tribes that adhere to it) has been the top tribe since the time of Ronald Reagan. Rampant capitalism and its promoters have remained the top tribe through a variety of machinations until their power, sense of entitlement and superiority, and their corruption have become so blatant and the nation's inequality so dire that the suppressed tribes are finding their voice.
Even in the days before modern technology, these circumstances resulted in revolutions and the moderating of the aristocracies' excesses (for a while). It is ironic that so many of the regulations and traditions that Trump has set about dismembering were vaguely assisting to cohere the multifarious tribes by promoting a common good --- clean water, clean air, fair trading, wild spaces, justice; all brushed aside like pests on a buffalo's hide.
Trump's tribe, the GOP and the clingers-on are ascendant. It is not a retreat to tribalism, but an expansion of the tribal power of the right wing that David is seeing in the US chaos. It is the primitive brain revelling in raw power while better spirits try to push back before America solidifies into the dangerous right wing, neoliberal unity the GOP and its enablers have been striving for.
3
Ha! Mr. Brooks. You call it tribalism. I call it organizing people into a movement around a common set of interests meant to promote the common good for the vast majority. Which interests you may ask? How about: protecting the environment; preserving, protecting, and expanding Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security; expanding and enforcing 14th amendment protections; reduction of military spending and heavy infrastructure investment; the implementation of stricter gun control laws; the retraining of police to curb violent overreactions to minor offenses; the national legalization of marijuana laws.
In short, enact all laws and regulations that are meant to promote the public good and not the pocketbooks of the wealthy. Is that too tribal for you, the faux "open minded" conservative forever dreaming of a Burkean Renaissance? Sorry, but the rest of us can do well without a country ruled by the rich at the expense of the rest of us. So many of us see through all the lies now and we can hardly wait for the next election. Get ready!
8
If there is anything of value to be gained from the Trump years it will be the reawakening of America’s conscience. What Trump seeks to create in America must be opposed at the family gathering, at work, on campuses, and wherever it seeks to assert itself. This will not solve the corruption of America’s democracy but it will hopefully stop us from reversing a century of social and scientific progress both here and across the globe. We saw what a complacent citizenry creates in the 1930s. What we need is clear moral discourse not intellectual handwringing.
6
This column made me feel as though I were dyslexic. Is that a trick Brooks uses to force one to read it again? It doesn't get any better the second time around.
2018 is off to a rocky start in Brooksworld.
3
Lest we forget from this op-ed, Trump is a conman, an ignoramus, and morally depraved. His "qualities" make a strong statement about his supporters.
8
Thanks, I needed that slap in the head. I have been using anti-fat white man rhetoric for some time and now see that it is something I need to overcome. Says a fat white woman.
4
Just give it a rest already. This just reads like a gussied up version of “kids today” with flowery smart-sounding language. The problem is NOT on college campuses. It’s in the White House and the people who drank the victim Kool-Aid courtesy of Fox News. At least you could try your hand at comic social satire, maybe something like “Get off my lawn you damn kids!” Or maybe “Back in my day...”
This reads like something you discuss with your other rich, out of touch Manhattan claque.
When’s the last time you left the city?
Tribalism? That’s rich.
8
Stop with these lame analogies please.
4
Angels dance on pinhead.
This semi-intellectual view of the current state of affairs, spots a few colorful trees but misses the forest.
How 'bout this: Money has fully purchased our political system; journalism has been polluted by right wing propaganda claiming to be fair and balanced; racists have been legitimized by the leader of the free world; millions of citizens are increasingly ignorant and vote against their own interests, if they bother to vote; and Curb Your Enthusiasm is over.
There! Only a hundred words or so and a much better explanation.
10
What maybe is lost when people stop going to church is a weekly thanks for all that we have.
Not to cast any dispersion on the actually poor, but the middle class and lower middle class might have it better now than say the 60s and 70s. It's just that expectations changed. Growing up in the 60s, we had a 1000 square foot apartment, 2 old cars that needed constant repair, same TV for 20 years, land line phone, newspaper. Many families had 1 old car and many families lived 2 or 3 or 4 to a room in bunk beds. College was fairly cheap, but few people went, so they worked an extra 4 years.
Internet service, cell phone, Black Friday splurges .. not really a necessity, but internet and cell phone and cable TV eats up a lot of money. You do not need 500 or 1000 feet per person. You do not need to live better than your parents in your 20s.
We also now need state-of-the-art cradle to grave health care, which gives us on average 15 years more of life, costs $.
What we do need is the social safety net of pensions, social security, health care, quality education in something that society needs (hint, it may be tradespeople, like German system), and a more social lifestyle.
Maybe Meetup (not Tinder) will bring together people based on interests, which can cross many traditional tribes .. maybe volunteer work will catch on and we can build and repair homes and communities together ..
The red states which are more homogeneous, seem to only have church .. and their resentments ..
2
This exemplifies secular views in its utter denial of the fact that we do exist in a world of binary dimensions. A person either has the spirit of the lord upon them, or they don’t. If they do, they are not moved at all by any concept of human diversity, except this one: God and his people vs. the Devil, and those who've blundered into his grasp. As such, the perpetual human struggle between the binary forces of good and evil absolutely does involve a common enemy. As a man of God Martin Luther King, Jr. certainly knew these truths.
For all of the empty rhetoric about diversity, consider how Jesus would view his children. We are not diverse, but one family, and anyone who strives to promote the notion that diversity is somehow a good thing, is sadly lost – and I pray they find God before it’s too late for them. For reasons only God knows, there are but two tribes, and the tribe consisting of all true people of God are the oppressed in this world that is so obviously dominated by evil. Satan is without question the oppressor, and those acting under his direction, either wittingly, or unwittingly, are the people who are perpetrating injustice and inequality in the world today, as they have since mankind’s fall from grace.
Let the people of good will toward others, who have the spirit of the lord upon them, including myself, work to expand and strengthen our tribe, and let us never stray from God’s guidance, nor forget who our common enemy is; for it is no man.
No mention of Gingrich telling the Republicans to use language like "unpatriotic, lazy, immoral, "etc. while he was working with his Contract for America to secure a Republican domination of our politics ...creating an us-vs-them mindset in Congress .... and leading to the extreme division we have now. He supplied the Republicans with the language and attitude that eliminated the healthy centripetal-centrifugal tension within each party and between the parties as they dealt with the issues that affect us all. This lead to the elimination of any Rockefeller republican in the party ... and the solidification of the Republican self-proclaimed righteousness. The corruption of our language began with a conscious Republican campaign designed to do exactly what you, Mr. Brooks, are bemoaning. (And, learn that no one holds onto a Maypole. They link arms in a circle and dance - together - around it. The faster the circle dances - and the more centrifugal force is generated - the tighter each person holds his/her partners ... to keep the circle from breaking up. The progressive centrifugal urge to go faster and expand must be tempered by a conservative centripetal awareness that keeps the circle from breaking apart .... not one that wants to stop the dancing.)
3
Brooks is happy because he has yet found another new sociological model to play with in his head. He will undoubtedly be playing with that for a while, until he finds a newer new model to toy with. Meanwhile he is simply ignoring the oldest model there is to explain injustice and social unhappiness. That old model does not have a clever enough name to keep Brooks fascinated: Inequality. Simple as that. The rest is just NYT editorializing.
4
White nationalists in the White House, a mobilized klan, and you're blaming colleges for identity politics?
16
Often David Brooks complains about the rise in negative attitudes we now have about people in the other political party. He waves dismissively and says, "It's just politics! There are so many more important things in life, like family, and so on." But politics is not just a hobby or an amusement; politics is law-making which reflects our deepest values. If our society values greed and wealth, taxes will be reduced on the wealthy. If our society values repressing women, abortion and contraception will be outlawed. If our society blames the poor for being hungry, politicians will cut food stamps.
Politics is central to our values as a society. 75% of married couples share political orientation. Imagine two parents, one a liberal (usually the mother) and one conservative (father) trying to teach children values when they are so different. Imagine further that the conservative father has been watching Fox News where liberals are laughed at and shouted down when they dare to disagree.
We are not wrong to be appalled if our liberal daughters bring home Republican men. That marriage would be hell for everyone, especially our daughters and our grandchildren.
4
I wonder if David's theory applies to all groups, or just Gentiles.
1
First, I read the editorial by Mr. Sulzberger of the commitment to continue the Times' tradition of following truth wherever it leads, then I skimmed David Brooks' column, but ultimately I turned, as usual, to the comments here.
Although I cannot for the life of me fathom how David Brooks continues to get space for his delusional philosophizing at the esteemed New York Times, I am content that there are many, many people "out there" who can still think and write clearly and will take him to task when necessary. Thank you to you all.
7
gemli gets it right...as usual. NYTimes needs to give him a regular column space.
2
"The easiest way to do that is to tell a tribal oppressor/oppressed story and build your own innocence on your status as victim. Just about everybody can find a personal victim story."
Stoked by a man/child in chief - a narcissistic grifter and a GOP comprised of gutless red state boobs AND their ignorant acolytes: easy prey to these populist demagogues, social media and fox news.
Following the example of H.L. Mencken, a longtime hero of mine, I have always tried to live my life as a Party Of One making up my own mind about things and caring little about the differences between Republicans and Democrats. The obscenity which is Trumpism has changed all that. I have now gone over to the Democrat side lock, stock and barrel and intend to stay there until the cows come home, the swallows return to Capistrano and Hell freezes over.
2
... making up my own mind about things one issue at a time ....
1
Another desperate attempt at "everybody shares blame for Willie Horton, no WMD yes those are centrifuge tubes, Charlottesville VA" G?P crud......again...from the oh so reasonable David, Bret, Ross neo-con "intellectual" right. Happy......new? Year
Well, it's certainly encouraging that "only" 43% of Republicans have a "very unfavorable" view of Democrats - it suggests that 57% have not been sucked into the Trump cult. That information, alone, is enough to keep me out of the equally large fraction of Democrats who view Republicans with similar disdain.
(Republican Congresscritters, on the other hand, deserve no such respect.)
Very well put Mr. Brookes. I wish that someone would present a plausable way out of this predicament, but I'm afraid the jig may be up. Nothing left to do now but stock up on the ammo and dried goods. Best of luck everyone.
Thanks to trump, we now have two new tribes. All of us belong to either one. Morons and non-morons. Plus it’s a New polarization.
3
"The easiest way to do that is to tell a tribal oppressor/oppressed story and build your own innocence on your status as victim."
Congratulations U. S. If the models Mr. Brooks describes are correct, you are well on the way to becoming a U.S. version of the Middle East where tribalism reigns supreme.
But after all, the "United" part of the United States was always somewhat limited. The U.S. was founded on tribalism of states (while ironically decimating the existing indigenous tribes).
“What is moral order today? Not so much the reign of right-thinking people as that of right-suffering, the cult of everyday despair,” Bruckner continued. “I suffer, therefore I am worthy."
That is, "I suffer" and "I am worthy". Everybody else be damned.
2
There's a lot of truth in this warning but also false equivalence.
Since the advent of Fox News and talk radio, the right has monetized the demonization of Democrats and liberals. Social media is full of insults directed at the left.Democrats have become "Demonrats" and liberals are "libtards." But the insults are not limited to anonymous social media posters. Top Republican elected officials regularly refer to the "Democrat" party, eschewing the proper name of the Democratic Party as a petty dig. When is the last time any elected Democrat has done the same?
2
To summarize the majority of the usual NYT lefty comment brigade: My tribalism good, yours bad.
2
I can see why you would be so afraid of college-aged people, who as the ones who will have to deal with the worst fallout from global warming are most certainly going to be mad as hell at the deniers who are made up mostly by the GOP and its supporting oligarchy.
Going all the way back to Saint Reagan, who first vilified the government (which is, after all, simply the collective will of all Americans, or at least supposed to be) the Conservatives have gone down the road of nihilism and self-loathing, and are now all completely crazy, aged dotards, or opioid addicts. How else do you explain Trump as president?
What will you do if a large percentage of young people suddenly start voting?
3
Mr Brooks, you are trying to rewrite history. There was no "high social trust" to which MLK could depend. He was beaten and jailed plenty because he dared to defy "white male privilege." The gap between the rich and middle class are massive and widening, it's not imaginary. People are mad as hell, and for good reason.
6
Here's the problem with your May Pole, David.
There are 3 kids linking arms and running around the pole.
Who do I want to be? The kid that's right next to that pole.
Who do I NOT want to be? The fartherest one out.
That's because the one that is the furthermost out has to WORK TWICE AS HARD or maybe even 10 times harder to stay in the chain.
How fast can their little legs run?
Ho, ho, ho.... we'll find out!
This is a perfect metaphor for our economy.
The one with all of the advantages is the one next to the pole.
Name the pole "1%".
Name the one nearest to it Paul Ryan, a fast runner, healthy...
...and name the last one out a child on Medicaid, poor, not in good health, not tall, not healthy.....
How soon before Ryan shakes that kid off?
How fast does Ryan have to run before he shakes them all off?
Yes, David, you have chosen a perfect metaphor for the first day of this new year, and what your metaphor says - all physics aside - is that you got a new pair of running shoes for Christmas and you are running right next to Paul.
Link arms.
On your mark...
Get set....
And we're off on a new year of sucking the last poor person's nickle to pay for the rich boy's tax cuts....
Welcome, 2018.
5
Yes, both sides promote individualism, but one side does it in the sense of promoting the individual's right to exploit his or her fellow citizens and take as much of what they produce away from them as possible, and the other side does it in the sense of promoting each individual's chance to fully develop his or her skills and talents free from anyone else's judgement of what is proper and moral.
Clearly one of those strategies leads to more disunity than the other.
8
Reinforcing the tribalism trope is a grand strategy to veil the false equivalence it promotes. Initially, tribalism sounded like a lazy way to explain the growing reaction to alt-right, neo-Nazi, racist anti-democratic Republican strategy to overcome the failed Republican wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the financial catastrophe that they inflicted on the world. Voters responded to Republican incompetence by electing Obama who restored economic order and representented extraordinary hope to the world that recoiled from the Bush-Cheney fascism. The Republican response to Obama was outright racism and they painted everything Obama did and attempted to do as Black, Muslim, African, Socialist and continued that for 8 years. Republicans even denied the President’s nomination to the Supreme Court on the pretext that ....effectively denying his authority and terminating his Presidency months before it ended.
The Brooks point of view is less substantial than the rich Republican claim that Democrats are using class warfare or that Obama used the race card. Oligarch racists predictably complain about class and race extremists when in the midsts of oppressing the poor and minorities. Self delusion and securing prominent spokespersons of delusions like Haidt who run against the Keynesian reality in favor of the Hayek apologists for oligarchs is a “bias” so deeply entrenched as to welcome this “fast thinking” tribalism that misdirection good people from taking the time to “think slow”.
3
I find it offensive that a piece with a title referring to "tribalism" features a photograph of Americans with dark skin. This choice of photo for an article about discrimination and intolerance essentially blames the victims of racism for their marginalization. It is not black people or Latino people who are responsible for the mistreatment that they've been forced to organize to protest. They are not responsible for their demonization by Trump and other racists and Republicans. They never wanted to be relegated to "tribal" identities. (The very use of the word "tribal" conjures up racist images of primitive nonwhite societies.) Rather, it has been white supremacists, the backbone of Trump's base, who have embraced and enforced the tribalism that Brooks laments.
Obscuring the causes of racism and division in this country and playing into the hands of the white supremacists with a photo choice like this is inexcusable. (By the way, I am a white man.) The only defensible photo choice for this article would be a photo of white people at a rally for white supremacy, such as a Trump campaign event.
5
Amen.
Mr. Brooks, If there has ever been a time in your life for you to carefully read all comments to an Opinion piece written by you, this would be the one. Please do.
4
David you have been writing the same both sides are to blame column for over 20 years. This is you in 2003: "The United States is in the midst of the certainty crisis.....one headline referred to Bush's unwillingness to go wobbly on Iraq." Brooks 2006: "The McCain-Lieberman Party begins with a rejection of the Sunni-Shiite style of politics itself. It rejects those whose emotional attachment to their party is so all-consuming it becomes a form of tribalism...." It is the Republican Party with its Pravda like fawning, propaganda filled 'tribalist' media empire, of which you are a part, which nominates and elects immoral candidates,'crooked timber', look at Alabama, look at the Oval Office.
5
There is no mention in this article of Fox News or right wing talk radio. Instead, our featured tribalism are a small group of young adults just out of high school (not including lost of other less high profile young adults just trying to survive) going through normal individuation live development processes. Editors, how did you let this slip by you?
4
The over-emphasis on "tribalism" is bickering over deckchair assignments. The bigger wave is the Reagan Restoration - the "ideology" of greed reestablishing the robber baronism and kleptocracy that held sway for the century prior to the New Deal.
Donald Trump is the illegitimate stepchild of Ronald Reagan as the contemporary Tory Party is the heir of Thatcherism. What we are witnessing is only the further denouement of Reagan/Thatcherism's unraveling of good government.
2
So identity politics on campus is a major cause of the divisions in our country? Really? If we just follow the Bible’s morality, our problems will be solved? Really?
We have a country where 32% of Americans, 43% of Republicans, 57% of White Evangelical Christians believe that you have to be born in America and be a Christian to be truly American.
We have a country where 70% of Whites in Alabama voted for a candidate who was a credibly accused pedophile of a 14 year old, who openly stated that the Bible - God’s laws (apparently other than molesting children) should take precedent over the US Constitution - to impose Christian Sharia Law.
We have a country where the majority of Whites, 70% to 80% of Republicans support an overt racist (a Birther who says that good people can march with Nazis and KKK), a sexual predator who both brags about and lies about his predatory acts, a demagogue and liar as our President.
Republicans just passed a tax bill to give more money to large corporations and the wealthiest Americans to fuel more income inequality.
And Brooks talks about campus identity politics and Biblical morality. Brooks should be ashamed.
9
Question: " What is the One overriding 'constant ' political position that has been in vogue over the last 30 + years and embraced by even those in your centrifugal or centripetal orbit ? The constant protests against Israel -as per a Two or One State solution! Why? Does this position really occupy seemingly intelligent people - whom, have no real or perceived interests here- while the bigger questions to them and their Nations problems take a back seat?
That's right your little "tribal" buddy living in another country, say Britain ( Read Oxford-Cambridge here) has a problem could something be lurking in their collective DNA!! Like anti-Semitism under the guise of anti -Israel?
I am not riding a "Hobby Horse" here, this is one serious reality as are other differing yet serious values judgements (like subtle Racism) that your tribe might harbor- yet you do not!
Think individually not as a collective group on each issue. Happy New Year!
The column replete with Brook's usual dog whistles to his dwindling number of followers.
2
Social media is a return to tribalism. That's why Islamic radicals do so well exploiting social media to foment jihad.
While I agree generally with Mr Brooks' argument here, there is another factor. I just finished Lawrence O'Donnell's new book about the 1968 presidential race, He notes, Bobby Kennedy was the only Democratic candidate equally popular on college campuses, in the black ghettos, and among the white working class. 'Bobby told each of those groups what they wanted to hear', O'Donnell observes: To students Bobby gave antiwar speeches; to blacks, social justice speeches; and to lunch-pail blue-collar whites, 'law and order' speeches. Back in the day, you could get away with that. Perhaps any tribal unity was always illusory. However divided into ideological niches our media are in their spin, a politician can no longer be all things to all people by being a completely different person for each audience. In theory this should be a good thing - no more hypocrisy; what you see is what you get. In practice, though, it has worked to eliminate flexibility, pushing politicians away from moderation and into absolute ideological niches. I don't know what to do about this, since you can't repeal the progress of communications.
4
Tribalism is instinctual. It is the natural state of man. All societies and cultures are held together by a sense of tribalism.
The liberals say "Diversity is Strength" but have no data to back up their claims. In fact most of world history would dispute this claim. People don't fight over similarities they fight over differences.
When I was growing up in the seventies diversity was celebrated because we had a basic foundation of shared culture and similar values. We are now more segregated than ever because that shared culture is gone and everybody has different values.
1
Couple of points. One, Brooks contrasts identity politics "that emphasizes our common humanity" as positive and identity politics "that emphasizes having a common enemy" as negative. Um, WWII, y'all...
Two, with regard to our negative characterizations of one another, that we ought not to make them at all would be what Thumper's mom would have us understand. But claims also can be demonstrated as having merit. I recall a survey that Fox viewers had less understanding of news events than people who got their news from other TV sources, and understood less than even those who did not watch the news at all.
But Hillary broke email protocols...
1
Certainly centrifugal forces makes for a good target for political scientists. "Let's borrow from physics something that everyone knows to isolate a cause." And then there is "tribalism." You take some terms from anthropology (Tribe) and slice out one phenomenon seen to be associated with primal ways of living, and brand that as a problematic feature of those peoples.
To me, this article is nonsense, an indicator of how senseless and useless political science has become. Or maybe it's people like David Brooks who are desperate for something to write about and something which comes with an academic imprimatur attached. If anyone reading this can tell us what good this is doing to work our way through human and social problems, please let us in on it.
2
The primary attribute that I note in this piece is its intellectual laziness.
Basically, Brooks' formulation on tribalism is a long form of saying that there are two groups who disagree. He doesn't explore who is right and who is wrong; who the aggressor is and who the victim is; who is acting reasonably and within the bounds of civil discourse and who is leveraging racial and social resentment to advance their agendas. Mr. Brooks doesn't mention that one side is tearing down political and social norms while the other is desperately looking to maintain them.
Ultimately, the formulation is a banal and easy one and one that a child can pick up on - "there are two sides and they are fighting".
9
and thus starts (again) the GOP's election year "pivot". By July they'll be talking up Medicare for all - until the "new moderate GOP" entirely dispatches with American's social contract in 2019. It's like watching a train wreck.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/30/us/politics/republicans-congress-bipa...®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront
2
No Comment, I’m pretty happy.
True, so very tribal. Take Trump's morning rant against Hillary and Huma, in example. One big super-sized hate pill to sustain his sheep for one good week.
3
Except there is no such thing as centifugal force
1
"Identity politics" seems to be a code word for dismissing the needs and demands of minorities and women. ("Once you’ve identified your herd’s oppressor — the neoliberal order, the media elite, white males, whatever — your goodness is secure.")
I can think of no better example of an hysterical, imagined sense of victimhood than the young white male Neo-Nazis we saw marching in our streets last year chanting "you will not replace us." But I have yet to see the term "identity politics" applied to them.
7
Those Neo/Nazis were here, in my community, and they have permanently placed me in the anti-trump, Republican and Netanyahu camps.
2
Oh David -- c'mon, taking from the desperate to give to the filthy rich? What kind of people are these? The pole we have all been dancing around keeps food on the table --- and I don't know about you, but in my younger years, the chain didn't break, at least not before the one nearest the pole was forced to let go. (Maypole? You are going to get yourself in trouble!)
1
As a 10 year old immigrant coming to America in 1954 from war torn Communist Eastern Europe and finding myself in a WASP, segregated community...it was not the idylic America that Brooks taklks about. This article is just the usual "the good old days" nonsense that old people, myself excepted, blabber about.
3
What happens in colleges hardly matters, although the Right has become obsessed with it. What happens to Black Americans at the hands of police matters. What happens to transgender Americans at the hands of thugs and politicians matters. What happens to desperate women seeking to end a pregnancy matters. What happens to poor people of any race ground down by automation matters. Mr. Brooks lives in the Republican land of the 50's where everything was peachy and negros were only seen singing spirituals in B movies. I really wish he would face reality and work for change instead of wishing for a past that never existed.
4
Hyper-individualistic, ideologically rigid, Koch backed Ayn Rand fanatics have driven all the liberals and moderates out of the GOP since Goldwater. They know that Americans, being intellectually conservative but operationally liberal, want nothing to do with their policies. So they chump and dupe and stooge anyone who will listen, but especially the fundamentalists, with hate and fear, with shabby patriotic imagery and bold, bragging threats. Now that they have power, they are raping America, and us all. Useful idiots may well be the death of democracy.
5
Republicans have a double standard. They can be as viciously nasty as they want, but they squeal with outrage when liberals fight back. Tough toenails, hypocrites. You ain't heard nothing yet.
3
Projection from the right...again.
2
All these words about tribalism, and not one mention of the root cause, religion? There is no greater dividing force in the world than religion, whether it be “christian” evangelicalism, or sunni wahhabism, or jewish zionism. If you want to reinforce the “us” and demonize the “them”, go to church. That’s where tribalism grows..
3
Tribalism? The rest of us are waiting to embrace all Americans regardless of race, color, religion, ethnicity and creed. We are not tribal, we are just not tribal member of a morally bankrupt GOP.
Who first worked to demonize a portion of Americans into un-American and unpatriotic based on religion? Gender preferences? Religious beliefs?
Who deliberately and persistently single out specific segments of our population to divide, ostracize and persecute?
Who first aggressively worked to discredit and destroy critical scientific facts and theories such as Evolution? Carbon dating? Climate Change? GOP.
The writing of Mr. Brooks is full of contradiction, false generalization and deliberate or ignorant interpretation of actual events. His writing loosely implies that religion provides "cohesion" and "moral" directions; a proposal for tribalism. This is typical of many GOPer who keep seeing the world through only their own confused, limited and very narrow-minded world view filters.
The radicalization of the GOP accelerated the growth of identify politics. The GOP's greed for power utilizes radicalization as a vehicle to win at all cost. The GOP created a "With Us or Against Us" psychology, gave rise to the Tea Party, and created a tribe of fascists.
Please look in the mirror, Mr. Brooks, and see the truth staring you in the face. Let the barbarian see the barbarian.
9
Tribalism and racism are tools used to convince the masses to do something that might be immoral or detrimental to ones own health or well-being. The blacks don't always have a choice when it comes to who they choose to represent them. It's often white guy who wants to take us back to slavery or white guy who takes the blacks for granted and maybe in his heart would prefer to go back to Antebellum America but his policies don't say let's go back to a better time when everyone who was a white Christian straight male had all the power and no need to share or be fair. Those were the days.
1
Once upon a time we had a revolutionary notion that emerged from the Age of Enlightenment called the social contract. It was a philosophical and political concept that described how various forces come together to form a desired society, as well as the legitimacy of the authority of the state over the individual.
It was an unconsciously synergistic idea in that the whole was greater than the sum of its parts. Star Trek fans would recognize the Utilitarianism of Spock in the concept that "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few". Kirk added, "Or the one."
That was once upon a time, when the majority of America felt "We are all in this together!", (despite centuries of discrimination and prejudice toward the other "tribe", clan, or occasionally religious believers.
In the last 40+ years, political propagandists and wordsmiths have effectively undermined that concept, leading to the reemergence of tribalism and clans that have always been prevalent in undeveloped nations and fundamentalist religions.
Rugged individualism and individual rights have trumped the good of the many, with unlimited greed treated as a good thing.. Somehow wealth has become a measure of moral good for some gullible, useful fools, as well as the wealthy themselves. I hate to disillusion anyone, but accumulation of (immense) wealth is not an indicator of personal moral or intellectual superiority.
We may not like the results of unlimited greed and individualism on our American tribe.
3
As long as an astute, compassionate intellectual like David Brooks remains a member of the Conservative tribe, the centrifugal forces he speaks of will further rip us apart. David your party is the party of the 1 percent. The rest of you, clinging to your tribal allegiance enable the Kochs, Mercers and other mercenaries to rule the land, paying the bill for your party to fill seats in Washington as long as they vote for policies favored by their donors. You want to shift the forces towards the middle, David go public with a repudiation of the Republican party, not just Trump. He's no aberration if you follow the evolution since Reagan began his campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi and then cut taxes and began their assault on the safety net. The last straw was the latest tax cut...unnecessary and cruel, a payback to the Kochs and Mercers. C'mon David we need honest warriors...the fight is against these fat cats.
5
Interesting that Mr Brooks talks about the common enemy.
I have traveled and lived all over the world, but only in the USA and a few oil based "dictatorships" do I repeatedly here the word enemy used to describe people with whom we we do not agree.
The word enemy is typically only used during wartime in most societies around the world, but has become the everyday language for GOP / Republicans to describe anyone holding a differing belief. Republican policy is always to save us from our enemies, to defeat our enemies. It is about polarization, tribalism, authoritarianism.
The GOP spreads paranoia to its supporters : "are you with us or against us?"
There is no middle ground.
The current GOP is a natural evolution of this approach to politics.
This is a/historical nonsense.
The year just past, 2017, was the centennial of the 1917 East St Louis pogrom. It was also the centennial of the silent march where thousands of African Americans marched in New York City to show solidarity with the victims of the East St Louis pogrom and to stand against lynchings. We had a very difficult time getting any national attention to this centennial.
However, there was much attention paid to confederate monuments, and a young woman, Heather Hyer (sp?) was killed protesting white supremacy. We are talking about historical facts and current events. To dismiss history as simply the politics of victimization is to ignore the history of ideas that provides an explanation for historical acts.
If we dismiss this history as simply shaming and blaming without getting to an understanding of what people are thinking when they act, we have no chance of formulating public policy that will help US form a more perfect union or to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.
We ought to face the truth and face our own responsibility to help make a just peace among all of humankind so we may ALL may live lives of sustenance and joy.
1
Mr. Brooks.
Rush Limbaugh has been on radio since the 1980's. Ever catch his show? Ever hear how he describes liberals? Google it sometime "Limbaugh on liberals".
Google the size of his audience. And where his audience lives. And match it up with GOP voters. The ones who do not recognize any of the names you have in your article. Except for MLK, who conservatives hate to this day.
Then come back and tell us all about tribalism.
After you actually learn something.
5
Couldn't agree more. Fox News and Right-wing talk radio propaganda have done more to poison the minds of Americans over the last 20+ years than anything the Kremlin could have come up with in it's wildest dreams. I fear only a major disaster of nationwide proportions will help rest people's present focus on "tribalism."
2
THE FOX NEWS EFFECT: "In 1994, only 16 percent of Democrats had a 'very unfavorable' view of the G.O.P. Now, 38 percent do. Then, only 17 percent of Republicans had a “very unfavorable” view of Democrats. Now, 43 percent do." David, neither you nor any of the people you quote mention Fox News. It was founded in October 1986. Isn't the increase in unfavorableness the Fox News effect? It is a "war party" demonizing drumbeat. MSNBC was founded in 1996. Fox News had 10 unanswered years to "poison the well," and poison it they have. Thanks, Rupert.
1
Mr Brooks piece is very timely given the state of affairs in the US since Trump's election. But he is talking about people who think, assess and analyse whatever comes out of a tribal mantra. These are people with some degree of integrity who are not willing to follow the tribal mantra just because they believe in it.
This is what happened to the German people between the wars; they were so aggrieved by what happened after WW1 that they bought into everything put out by Hitler and we all know what happened there. I can say that this is not dissimilar to what is happening now with Trump diehards. They blindly follow ALL of Trump tweets even thought they suspect they are lies and these people are more than willing to give Trump their undying support regardless of what can happen.
1
Hopefully, I "you're" on "You're going to get yourself in trouble."
Nice last line, Mr. Brooks.
So, liberal tribes bother you, but not the Trump base, white, Christian, non-urban, uneducated tribe that is destroying the country and the world? Evangelicals?
3
A big engine of the economy just started to misfire, Auto sales but there are mixed messages.
Along with one stupid mistake a bam you could have a 30% then who’s holding the bag?
I dropped out of the market when DJT started with N Korea.
Centrifugal force is imaginary.
Actually, it is ironic that the right should complain of tribalism. It is exactly the world view they embrace. They have not national image outside of pursuing one's greed and self interest. During the non "debate" around the tax bill which handed 1.5 trillion dollars from the public treasury to the wealthy elite, we heard Ryan and company start talking of "cutting costs" which is benignly called "entitlement reform". It's like calling cancer "creative cell creation". There is a determination by the wealthy elite to get rid of safety rules, pollution regulations, Social Security, Medicaid. You know, those institutions that were created in the aftermath of the Great Depression, Love Canal, Three Mile Island, Deepwater Horizon, the 2008 Great Recession.
The problem isn't that we can't think of nice things to say about one another. The problem is the elite has spent a lot of money to create the illusion that by taking a butcher's clever to social programs and regulations that protect against pollution and environmental damage, we are somehow further ahead. We aren't and it will require a real political battle to restore some sanity to public policy again, despite the best efforts of the Trumps, Murdochs, Kochs and other members of the elite who seek to poison public discourse with misinformation.
8
American elites in the Democratic and especially the Republican Party have ignored the economic decline of the American citizenry. Republicans and moderate Democrats advocated the trade deals that sent manufacturing to China and turned this country into a post industrial service economy that impoverished half of the nation. Our ivory tower economists were the vocal advocates of this disaster. When the resources of a nation decline, sub-groups split up to fight over the resources that remain.
"Once you’ve identified your herd’s oppressor — the neoliberal order, the media elite, white males, whatever — your goodness is secure. You have virtue without obligation. Nothing is your fault"
Refreshing article noting how we as humans, are tribal by nature. This instinct is being manipulated, which prevents a dialog and any real change or discussion. Once we lose the ability to debate, return to our respective corners and fling mud at each other - nothing changes. Our children will follow our lead and cultural advancement will pause.
The hardest thing for people to do is admit fault, and it is a great excuse to blame someone else instead of taking a look in the mirror. Self evaluation and reflection will lead to something positive.
2
True. I recommend the recent book by Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson, 'Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts'. I'd also recommend Dr Tavris' classic 'Anger: The Misunderstood Emotion', in which she notes that, contrary to myth, 'venting' one's anger doesn't diminish it but rather adds fuel to the fire. The dirty little secret of anger is that it's addictive, and moreover a pleasurable sensation (note its physiological similarity to sexual arousal - blood pumps, face flushes, heart races, etc), and we especially love it when we can justify it as 'righteous indignation'.
This is why I've always thought "multicultural day" in school seemed so...impotent. Instead of celebrating the commonality between all cultures, instead of focus on what makes us HUMAN, it focused on what was different about each culture and trying to celebrate the differences without much of an effort to find bridges between the differences. Tribalism runs deep, beyond the politics, media and the economy and into the very core of our schools and educational systems.
Similar to black and white TV, a world without celebrating multiple cultures, their arts, their cooking, their languages, their history, their great achievements, their scientific discoveries, their grief and past oppression (their weaknesses and bad acts), is a small sad version of color TV. Sure some gifted artists can make beautiful black and white photos or movies, just like some shallow minded people can make the antebellum south, the pre civil rights era, the days before immigrants from Mexico, Europe, Asia seem like a vision of beauty.
What is bad is thinking the black and white images are nicer.
Think stew not a cauldron of iron melting. Better with the carrots, potatos, meat (or vegetarian or vegan only) ..
For anyone who is not part of the white American or at least pale enough and lacking the accent or looks of a foreigner ... multicultural day gives children and parents a chance to actually be proud of their heritage .. rather than feeling inferior to the Mayflower families, the 1800s immigrants, the southern plantation owners.
Some more emphasis on art and language acquisition during young childhood might also help.
Judging from many of these comments, it looks as if the left got absolutely nothing from the article,and continue to point fingers at " the other tribe". Nice.
Who is promoting tribalism? I would venture to guess it would be the race/class-obsessive left, David.
Your President* is representative of your nation. Individualism at its noxious best. A billionaire businessman that produces ignorance and willfulness for all to follow.
If you even halved your military budget and intelligence budget and refocused on your people like health care and education you wouldn’t be producing so many illiterate people to go tribal. But then that’s the point isn’t it. Certainly in the south.
1
Dear David. This column is just another re-hash of the vast majority of your columns, which might be boiled down to it's upsetting when people rattle the cage of accepted norms.
You're good guy. We get it. However, here it is a brand new year--do you have any new notes you'd like to play before this column of your comes to a merciful end? And would you like to stop using others intellectual research and rigor and get in there and do some of it on your own?
For example, if you truly believe tribalism is in fact really happening and really ruining our society, maybe go off and contemplate how you might help, contribute, perhaps even create an action plan to counter it. Otherwise, the big blindspot created by all that privilege is only going to get bigger and you will be revealed as a simplistic binary-thinking white male of another era.
My sense is you have no action plan because to consider such a thing would be to consider acknowledging and returning some of your privilege.
So, as it stands, this is no more or less than another David Brooks column that only wishes we could all just get along because it's sad when we don't,to say nothing of threatening to you personally.
To think it through any further would not serve you, so you simply don't. You would have to struggle with the real catalysts at play, the easy and flaccid false equivalencies you toss out would not hold up to any real scrutiny. it's getting so tedious and as such only make you increasingly hard to live with.
3
Does this not remind me, as a terrible & despicable example, the tribalism of the 'lakes region' of south central Africa?...PJS
Time to bring back the draft. Mandatory national service will reimpose a sense of cohesion and obligation among citizens and force this diverse nation to get along. It will allow a cost-effective way of rebuilding national infrastructure. It will also strengthen our national security and reduce the possibility of stupid wars -- because your kids may have to fight and die.
Brooks whips up the fervor of HIS tribe, then complains about the consequences, and also blames other tribes.
1
Blaming the current political discord on tribalism is no different than Trump's moral equivocation between neo-Nazis and their opponents. Black Americans don't stick together because they are black - they stick together because the society at large has rejected them because they are black. Same thing with Latin Americans. There is no such thing as Latino. People from the Dominican Republic or Cuba have little cultural similarities with Mexicans other than their shared language. Their histories, racial mix, music and food are distinctly different. They are distinctly different cultures. But in the United States they are all classified as Latinos, so they identify as such because this is what the society is forcing them to do. We should not equivocate and say that everyone is responsible for tribalism. There is a section of American society that rejects the inclusion of people that are unlike them, and we all know who they are. This rejection is the reason that so often the interests of African Americans, Latinos and others coincide. Don't blame the victims for sticking together. Its not like they have a choice.
1
Poor David. Continues to mine the depths of gobbledlygook to find an explanation for why his Republican Party has become a right wing spewer of hateful unpatriotic louts when a simpler explanation is so obvious.
Greed and the tyranny of the majority are much more understandable. The former has been taught by the world's great religions for generations and the later was our Founding Fathers great contribution to the lexicon of self government.
The greedy unpatriotic Republicans have systematically attacked the foundations of moral and civil society in a greedy attempt to rule our great nation.
Turn the tide and vote in 2018. Bring back moral hazard to the white criminal class.
1
While watching the President and his ilk swaning around Mar-a-Lago in the Florida sunshine as six mass shootings took place over the celebratory weekend; Kim Jung-Il talked about nuclear buttons on his desk; Puerto Rico soldered-on in the dark ages; I wondered where to spend the extra $20.00 realized by the new tax code.
Centripetal (no such thing) centrifugal (the old grape on the turntable) identity politics, tribal warfare, negative polarization: a piffling wordstew, shoulda stuck with the Maypole as metaphor (oh, dear Communism rears it's ugly head).
1
This article blunders by doling out blame evenly. If you think students in universities are blindly lashing out at a made-up enemy then I invite the author to meet my neighbors who are largely trump supporters and deride higher education. If he believes universities radicalize then I suggest he come learn how ignorance and fear of the outside world radicalizes. The so-called enemy is real, and it's ignorance, and there's far more of it on the side that questioned President Obama's birth, courted white supremacists, and believed there was a sex-trafficking ring in a pizza parlor. Now, maybe the author would think me a victim of "bad schooling," but I know nazis are the bad guys which is more than I can say for some neighbors and family members.
2
The nature of the human animal is tribal, and tribes will do anything to deny bad behavior, evil, and protect, and give no ill will towards a member of their tribe, which is immediate family, extended family, neighbors, coworkers, those in the same race, religion, class, business, sports institutions, political institutions, etc. That is how the Holocaust happened in Germany, the overt, decades long institution of Hollywood, and the entertainment industry that celebrated nudity, and in your face sexism, while allowing rape, and sexual attacks, on both women and men, while no one, until recently came out in the media, and risked losing their job. That is the same reason when a father or mother murders the other, often the children just can't believe that the parent committed such an act. Always go with the truth, and you will usually stand alone, even aggravate those close to you, who want to gloss over flaws, and harmful behavior, if the person brings enough personality, and skills to the table. It is not, nor has it ever been about character, or evolution to a higher plane of truth, at all costs, every day, every hour, on every issue!
1
Nevertheless blacks are oppressed in the us. To suggest otherwise is a cover story for that oppression.Brook, bruni, Dowd and Stephens are very good at cover stories. That is why they are trump enablers.
Is this satire? If so, nice job. Seriously.
I find it interesting how many reader comments unironically blame another tribe for the problems of identity politics described by Mr. Brooks. Yes! Identity politics is the fault of those damned at the expense of us virtuous .
A wise friend of mine once said that to be intellectually honest, you must be able to express the opinion of your adversary in a way that your adversary would agree with. So, "you believe X because you have evil in your heart" would not cut it. This might be a way for Americans to escape tribalism, and engage in a healthy discussion once more.
2
"Over the past two generations, however, excessive individualism and bad schooling have corroded both of those sources of cohesion."
"Excessive individualism?" What the hell is the U.S. Constitution about, David, but unrestrained individualism? Sure, the Founders wrung their hands about "faction," but the essence of their patrician wisdom was to assure the sanctity of Property and nearly unlimited scope for the landed/propertied/monied to increase their wealth and solidify their positions. So "excessive individualism" was always a Good and a Virtue, and it's absolutely assured and encouraged by our central founding document--which accords "community" and the common weal only the weak and now-eclipsed protections of a balanced government.
And the failure of education? Whose system is that?! And how has it failed to do its job? I'll tell you: The educational system has been swamped by the unrestricted, anti-community, individuality-worshipping system of wealth accumulation (AKA laissez faire capitalism). That system has eviscerated the lives of communities and families alike with Universal Marketing, Universal Accumulation, and endless entertainment, all of which are inimical to the foundational Good of free and open education.
Capital, without prudent and necessary controls, is ripping the West apart. There's supply and demand--and the suppliers, the marketers, are the ones who are making money. And they care very little about what happens to the American polis.
2
I like the maypole analogy, but let's maybe revise it a touch.
There is a beautiful American maypole that only the white children get to spin and play on. They all get along and laugh and play, while the black children and brown children and gay children sit on the sideline watching. Along comes a parent saying that that's not right that the white kids have to let everyone play.
So, a bunch of the white kids get angry and instead of continuing the maypole dance with everyone included, they all work together to pull it down. If they can't be the ones calling the dance, daggumit, they don't wan't any part of a national maypole. All the other kids try their best to keep it up, but the more they try, the more the white kids just try to screw up the dance for everyone else. Finally, in frustration the white kids get the nastiest kid on the block to go get his dad's ax to start whacking at the base of the maypole.
All the other kids are screaming that's unfair and not how we're suppose to work together to make the maypole dance work.
That's when the nanny (Schoolmistress Brooks) looks from over her book and say "Tut, tut, all of you. You must all play together well."
2
I am trying to understand how governments can afford to offer programs that you are suggesting (many of which would be helpful) when they continue to reduce their sources of revenue through individual tax cuts to the wealthy and to corporations. Workers’ wages have been stagnant for decades so corporations are not sharing their profits with their workers, but with their shareholders, nor have they been making capital investments. The wealthy hoard their wealth for who knows what purpose. I follow you on pbs newshour, and the ny times. I would sincerely like to hear your response to my question. Happy New Year.
Exactly my comments on seeing the first reality campaign rally (NC I think it was),"who the hell are all these angry, aggrieved, victim, losers." Followed by, and why do they want to self identify as aggrieved victim losers? And now we know the only "truth" is that they will line up on 5th Ave. to be shot rather than engage critical thinking skills to figure out e pluribus Unum amounts to liberty and justice for all.
2
Sounding very much like Trump talking about Charlottesville. But he was a bit more generous. A lot of good people on all sides. If you are just talking about not dehumanizing people, even people who mean you a lot of harm, let's say like Ronald Reagan, a person you have great admiration for, that would be one thing. And would be very important in my mind for deep change to ever happen. But that would involve massive resistance to policies and attitudes you are committed to, while always respecting the David, buried somewhere deep, that is yearning for actual freedom.
David, in your present incarnation, what tribe do you think you are part of? What wars do you support, what jails do you want filled?
1
The road to tribalism has been paved with disagreements over basic human rights. One would think we would be united by trying to provide access to good healthcare for every US citizen. Instead we heard about death panels. One would think that at least affordable if not free education would unite us but instead we continue to bloat the military industrial complex. One would think that a living wage for all jobs would be something we could all agree on. Instead we give tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations who are already doing quite well. Tribalism? Damn right! How am I supposed to respect anyone that doesn't believe in these basic human rights.
2
Boring! How many times will Brooks say the same thing? If he disapproves of tribalism, let him direct his anger at Trump and the Republicans.
3
Brooks is an interesting model. He believes in liberty and the high pursuit of justice while maintaining an order through a moral and ethical code. His work often relies on historical context to justify his expression of the moment through both appeals and warnings. At times it's paradoxical because it's never so concrete that it can't be malleable enough to bend some kind of high concept flexibility to serve what I suspect was the foundation of the compassionate conservative. His shortcoming is what he refuses to acknowledge. During the revolution, we had a clear enemy in the form of tyranny. During the Civil War, we had a clear enemy to the republic in the form of tyranny. Mr. Brooks, what might you call the actions behind the curtain that control the levers of power now and towards what end? Were the Founding Fathers tribal? Was President Lincoln a tribal elder? Or might they have been Patriots? Look a little deeper Mr. Brooks, you might yet see the "Glory of the coming of the Lord..."
Perhaps at a point in the future we may find that all of us can unify around our hatred of Donald J. Trump. With each bullying tweet or bullying policy it is only a matter of time before each of us will feel personally bullied. Just watching the parade of the smug looking, rich folks entering the halls of Mar-a-Lago on the eve of the new year portends a "Let Them Eat Cake" moment.
1
Tribalism is the inevitable result when our politics rewards an "us against them" attitude. 'We natives against those immigrants'. 'We law-abiding (white) citizens against those (black) thugs.' 'We working (white) people against those (black) welfare takers'. The constant message is that "Only I can save us" and if we stick together and stick it to them we will "win" and they will lose. Divide and conquer... and the constant undercurrent of racism. The Framers motto - E Pluribus Unum - is changed. Now it is "Only I can save us" -- all our problems come from the illegals, criminals, lazy welfare frauds -- all easily identified because 'they are not like us, they don't share our values'. And they're the wrong color. One political party has made this the core of their political messaging for 40 years. One political party has preached of 'takers' and 'self-reliance' against poor (mostly minority) people. When you see that messaging, you can see that division and dissension in our country has been encouraged for political gains, scapegoating promoted and encouraged for the sake of giving power to those messaging this division. Dr. King would be appalled - King preached a message of inclusion, a message of sharing, a message of unity. Contrast King's sermons with Trump's 'preaching' - all 140 and 280 characters per 'sermonette'. Not much inclusion, tolerance, and unity in Trump's tweety preaching.
2
How IRONIC. The title and the article below.
Tribes. I think of our Native Americans. And how, since the beginning of our nation the sentiments of this article are a naive, sanitized white man's version of history, and how little it lines up with our real national history.
Does Mr. Brooks know ANY American History except White Man's History? And this is hardly his first column where Mr. Brooks willfully ignores ANY existence of anything except his lily white Conservative revision of our heritage.
I am 4th generation Asian. I am really offended by Mr. Brooks' whitewashes.
1
Tribalism is a malign mythical color aka race white European Christian supremacist bigoted slur intended to debase and deny the humanity of color aka race black non-Christian Africans.
By distinguishing the allegedly primitive tribal state of human affairs from the so-called advanced nation state an evil hierarchy was created to legally and morally justify everything from colonization and exploitation of humans by enslavement/ apartheid and natural resources by theft. While over the last 500 years the most inhumane tribes in history are the ethnic sectarian tribes of Europe posing as nations. Which culminated in two world wars that killed, wounded, displaced and made refugees of millions. Both Ottoman Turkey and the Japanese Empire emulated European exploitation ethos and the Soviet Union was a European power.
The tribal schisms among ethnic European and sectarian Christians would have survived the founding of America but for the success of the British Empire over other powers. Antipathy for 500+ aboriginal people plus the enslavement of Africans defined tribal America by two physically identifiable colored aka racial groups who were separate and unequal from the European American tribe.
Whites revere King by misinterpreting his call to be judged by character instead of color into ignoring the physical historical colored. King meant to ignore the bigotry of color. And he and his successors failed. Despite his nature/nurture Obama was all and only black.
1
The only reason you can assert that 'the most inhumane tribes in history are the ethnic sectarian tribes of Europe posing as nations' is that most African cultures generally didn't have a written language or large permanent structures. (Though perhaps you think Great Zimbabwe was built by union labour paid time-and-a-half for holidays and OT, and full benefits.) When you survey the non-European Third World cultures, you find just as much oppression, cruelty, and overall ugliness as anything in Europe. Consider the Aztecs, or the caste system of India, or slavery as practiced by Muslim Arab traders (enslaving black Africans centuries before Europe got into the act). Consider the killing of 'witches' and murder of albinos for superstitious 'traditional medicine', or the rampant corrective rape of lesbians in South Africa. The famous commercial of the weeping Indian notwithstanding, the fact is that Native Americans varied widely in their respect for the environment - e.g., hunting by driving entire herds of bison over cliffs, killing far more than they could eat - and on the whole if they didn't despoil it as thoroughly as later colonists did, it was because they lacked the technology and numbers. And that's just a small sample debunking the myth of the 'noble savage'.
Sorry, blackmamba, but you've volunteered as an example of exactly the kind of narrow tribalism Mr Brooks is rightly decrying.
@ACW
Not having a written language does not mean not having a history. And Egypt has always been an African nation.
I have no influence nor concern for what happened past nor present outside of the United States of America.
My white American roots go back to 1640 Virginia. My free-person of color roots go back to American Revolution era Virginia and South Carolina. My enslaved black African roots go back to 1830/35 Georgia. My brown Native roots go back to 1830/35 Virginia, South Carolina and Georgia. By American convention that makes me all and only black in America.
While the German Trumps and the Canadian Brooks joined the white European American color aka race separate and superior white tribe long after my arrival. America's claim to be exceptional is a myth. Making America no worse than any other nation is the hypocritical retreat from historical reality.
When, where, why, how and from where did you come to my America?
Mr. Brooks wants to white explain, white excuse and white forgive his kith and kin.
1
I enjoy Isaiah Berlin as much as anyone but Mr. Brooks' abstract, ahistorical lamentations against individualism/tribalism, his "both sideism", is much too glib. We've reached these crossroads because the Party of Roy Moore has declared total war against people of color, women, progressives, the college educated and immigrants. Those of us resisting the Trumpist, Fox News, Sinclair, alt-right, Breitbart, christian evangelical, NRA onslaught are attacked as "Other," not authentic Americans, not the "People." To compare a few silly leftist college students (and their outlier academics) with the multi-billion dollar Right Wing media/political empire takes "what aboutism" to absurd lengths. Get down from your pedestal and open your eyes, Mr. Brooks.
2
"...we’ve regressed from a sophisticated moral ethos to a primitive one," you say?
Really? When and where in the world did we ever have such a moral ethos from which to regress?
Here's a list of recipe ingredients that the Right uses every day to bake their version of the "United " States:
"States Rights"
"The Southern Strategy"
"Segregation Now, Segregation Forever"
....starting every sentence with "As a person of faith/I'm a Christian"
"Government is the problem, not the solution"
"Shrink it until you can drown it in a bathtub."
Fox "News"
"Citizens United" (what a joke)
"Think" Tanks
"My whole staff reads Ayn Rand"
Add them altogether with a heaping pile of racism, xenophobia and willfully ignorant people, bake on low heat for about 50 years and you get (and deserve) the nasty, divided, hopeless place called America. If you all can't see it by now, you're doomed to live with the consequences.
1
Look—some people really are victims (sexually harassed women afraid for their jobs to speak out, people of color held in prison because they can’t afford bail, any hispanic person in sheriff Joe Arpaio’s district, or a gay man beaten and harassed).
Then there are people who are oppressed by their fantasies: those who are forbidden to say “Merry Christmas”, or who feel the government wants their collection of AR-15s and bump stocks, or that being white makes them a target for Black criminals, or those who feel oppressed by having Sharia law imposed on them any minute. Or those who think that being “white” is any kind of disadvantage.
Trump has allowed the delusional to act out their fantasies and revel in their victim hood and nostalgia and resentment. It’s not a tribe, so much as a cult. It’s political defeat has already occurred since the popular vote proves a majority of the country doesn’t buy into this insanity . And Trump has attracted no new voters and his popularity continues to wane.
The results of the 2016 election were an aberration and they will soon be reversed. The good news for Trump supporters is that the only negative effect this will have on their lives will exist in their minds.
As for the Resistance “tribe”, the frustration and outrage Pooh-pooed by the hand-wringing intellectuals such as Brook, Haidt and Bruckner as such a danger will subside into relief that majority-rule has been restored. We won’t act like “sore winners”.
1
I am as opposed to Trump as anybody but the blinkered vision of American liberals is astonishing. Sure, there are real victims in this world. Yazidi women raped by ISIS fighters are victims. Secular bloggers assassinated in Pakistan are victims. Children abducted by Boko Haram and taught to kill are victims. Iranian protesters are victims. I don’t hear too many American liberals speaking out against the violations of human rights around the world when they do not align neatly with their master narrative of white racism and oligarchy. When you are willing to acknowledge that your narrow view of the evil conservatives and virtuous liberals obscures a lot of moral and political complexities, Ill be willing to believe that you represent a rational majority rather than another cult.
Paradoxically, the most destructive form of tribalism is religion. Nothing makes it easier to hate the "out group" than to think your "in group" are the chosen people of some imagined deity. We only have to read other headlines in today's NY Times to see where in the world right now that sort of arrogant religious superiority is unleashing cold-heartedness against an oppressed "out-group." When religion is weaponized, things get nasty, and hatred becomes a righteous fuel.
2
More & more Mr Brooks describes the elephant standing before him, and he knows it is an elephant because he is not blind. David, with all due respect, stop with this sort of nonsense:
"Over the past two generations, however, excessive individualism and bad schooling have corroded both of those sources of cohesion."
Remember your guy - Reagan - who said something in a wee speech - I think it is called his inaugural address - in 1981:
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."
I've spent my entire adult life attempting to fix the tear that Reagan caused with that sort of intemperate - nay "centrifugal" - speech, exploring the liminal space between government and enterprise. Over & over again we have proved Reagan wrong, creating companies and building enterprise and employing hundreds of people in that space, where government was a facilitator, just as it was in 1981 when your man Reagan insisted otherwise.
David, just stop, please...you are hurting our country, slathering your intellectual lipstick all over the poor elephant.
2
My one word response to this silliness is Charlottesville.
The American left, as flawed as it might be, seems most interested in ensuring that the civil rights described in the US Constitution are available to all Americans and are not retarded by local laws or the gerrymandering of election districts. Excesses like the Middlebury College episode are properly understood, criticized and discouraged. The "very fine people" on the Right are not interested in such introspection or adherence to the Constitution. Brooks' moral equivalence is consistent with the collapse of the GOP as a responsible political party and simply confuses the issue.
1
Then, unfortunately, we do not deserve democracy. We deserve a leader like Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore, who said "“I always thought that humanity was animal-like. The Confucian theory was that Man can be improved. I’m not sure he can be, but he can be trained, he can be disciplined.”
3
Definitely don't blame the radicalization of Democrats. Or the fact that they've all gone unhinged. How many "radicalized" Republicans protested the two elections of Barack Obama? How many "normal" Democrats protested - and still protest - the election of Donald Trump?
The NYT and Democrats have willfully and with full malice of forethought divided this country into tribes for the past half century. So it's not a surprise to see it happening.
1
Well Dave you got one thing right. It IS a power struggle between good and evil!!!
The right wing in this country has moved so far to the right ( and by the way dragged the center along with it) that they now represent horrible concepts..Great, horrible people selling horrible policy. Of course I'm hard to live with, so are you, and, in fact, you and your kind have been so for a long time. We have been patient but that's run out. Republican doctrine has insulted us for too long, and we're not gonna take it anymore!!
3
The term "identity politics" is a right wing word game used to manipulate people into voting against their interests.
Brooks' faux sociological ruminations complete with the usual quotations from a self-appointed "authority" grow tiresome.
He continues to enable and legitimize the worst characteristics
of the right wing, pretending to help innocent people while hurting them. Bad faith.
1
Sometimes it takes me more than one reading to understand David Brooks' columns and their purpose. You don't have to agree with him, which I often don't, but you likely will learn something.
While I was sorting out the differences between centrifugal and centripetal forces I thought about people like Trump, Devos, Rick Perry, Ben Carson, Kellyanne, the Huckabee-Sanders person, the entire cabinet and all the Neanderthals in Congress and their voters.
They wouldn't understand a word of a Brooks column, the compound sentences, the multi-syllable words. Brooks will have to learn to pare down his preaching/ teaching to tweets and bumper sticker slogans to get to the audience that needs his help.
2
Corporatists and white suprematists united in the l960's and systematically starved public education. Cold calculation drove the rich to try to destroy the power of the federal government and seduce the population to make the nation unable to support itself.
They succeeded. Huge tax cuts for the wealthy with the bonus of "deficits" undermining government sponsored insurance programs: medicare and social security which have been rebranded as welfare.
This is a long careful campaign to undermine our nation: including consolidating the information industry and disinform America.
The rich only need our armed forces to protect their estates. They are buying up media: Murdoch now owns The National Geographic. I read an article from Fox News about Christian faith healing suffering marriages.
It's been hidden treason against democracy for 50 years. Can we reverse this?
Good Question.
1
Tribalism, at least the variety we’re talking about here - the upper class white variety - ends at the pocketbook and at the point at which people feel physically unsafe.
Right now, upper class white people are obsessing over small differences within their tribe. A slight majority breaks for the GOP, and a slight minority breaks progressive, but outside of college campuses the most vocal proponents of political extremism tend to be comfortable white people, the same people who monopolize news desks, journals of opinion, the entertainment industry, and politics itself.
Expose a conservative to a bungled war and a crashing economy, and he’ll happily vote for an unknown Democrat named Barack Hussein Obama. Expose a progressive to enough urban blight, high local taxes, and high crime and she’ll cozy up to pro-development, pro-reform politicians who all but openly endorse gentrification and enact policies that make major urban areas islands of white privilege, astronomic property values, and low crime.
And this is where the progressive tribe is at risk. They’re about to start paying for the policies they say they support. For the comfortable white ones, who are going to really feel the impact of this, it’ll be interesting to see how long they stay with the tribe that significantly hits their pocketbook with high local taxes. My guess is that we’ll see that small majority of comfortable whites who lean conservative grow.
In the Gospel of John, chapter 3, Nicodemus slinks out at night and finds his way to where Jesus was staying. He thought he should get more information about this unusual man and his counter-cultural group. Jesus didn't let Himself get pulled into a discussion of "you guys" and "us guys." He stayed with the problem "we all" have with Creator-God. Creator has an idea of how human life on Planet Earth should be. More like "contingent creatures living according to His design" than "everyone for himself seeking whatever 'fulfillment' might seem to be." (In Judges, "everyone did what was right in their own eyes." Jesus told Nicodemus, "You must be born again" and "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."
For you who believe Jesus came to save us from our sins, let's encourage one another along the lines of St. Francis's prayer - it is better to give than receive... because we've already received infinitely more than we will ever be able to imagine.
For you who do not believe that sin is in us all, that we all need reconciliation with our Creator, and that we all must receive it by grace like trusting children, get to know people who believe in Jesus, challenge us with excellent questions, watch us live our lives, notice our hypocrisy. Listen to see if our failures are why we turn to Jesus. Get to the bottom of that. Get through a few chapters of the Gospel of John, and see...
1
The so-called Gospel, and the concept of an Invisible Sky Superbeing for whom we are a principal concern, is a primary factor in the destructive tribalism Mr Brooks describes.
Only if it isn't True. There are a lot of ways to get glimpses of reality that transcends the physical-energy reality. You could try reading Signature in the Cell by Stephen Meyer. There are lots of ways people become convinced that metaphysical reality must exist. If it does, then Jesus is a person whose reality should be dealt with. C.S. Lewis talked about three options: Jesus is either liar or lunatic... or Who He claimed to be. No other options.
1
I had pretty much given up on the New York Times. My reading has steadily declined for years. Ross Douthat's diatribe about Hugh Hefner while not saying a word about the women who for decades willingly participated in that lifestyle was silly enough. Then the moronic piece weeks later about the "brutal nature of male sexuality" pretty much had me giving up on The Times.
However David Brooks piece about tribalism articulates what a of people think. The polarization is due to many factors including economic, religious and social. The moral failings of the Catholic Church alone make people question where to turn for foundations. Add to that job loss due to technical innovations and global competition plus our ethnic diversity being seen in more prominent positions and today's fractious culture isn't a surprise.
However my own opinion is the human race has a stunning capacity to reinvent itself into something better. Tribalism is a step backward but at the risk of sounding cliched, sometimes that is the only way forward. David Brooks' warnings are needed but the next column should be about a millennial generation coming along with a broader world view at a younger age than any generation in history while also having access to technologies to create industries not possible 20 yrs ago.
Tribalism is regressive. Might be the perfect time to start building that cohesive world view to pull together future generations.
Guess I haven't given up on The Times yet.
1
Common humanity?
I start with my mom, interred in Gila River, AZ for being Japanese American.
And my dad, forbidden to own land in the West Coast for being Chinese.
And my Hawaiian ancestors, who, admittedly were treated better than their Native American counterparts. There was less deliberate ethnic cleansing involved.
As Asian Americans we know we have been treated better than Native Americans, or Hispanics, or Blacks. I cannot speak for them, but I know about Sand Creek, and the reference in Billie Holiday's "Strange Fruit".
You can dress it up however you want, but I absolutely get that I can never live in the "David Brooks' America" because it is totally my fault that I am not Caucasian. As I have been hearing from white people for most of my 67 years.
My God, what I would not give to live in the ignorant bliss that David Brooks inhabits.
3
Once again David Brooks engages in tacit false equivalency. The current "tribalism" he references has its origins in the tacit racism that has always been a part of the Republican Party since the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. When you add the misogyny and homophobia of the Christian Right you have the perfect environment for the rampant intolerance endemic to the Republican Party. Gutenberg's printing press democratized knowledge which ultimately destroyed the plenary power of he Church and Monarchy. The existence of social media is destroying the plenary power of "fact" which enables ignorant narcissists like Donald Trump to serially distort the truth and threaten he very essence of the American political system.
2
Thank you David R. from Logan Airport. You saved me from pulling out my old Halliday and Resnick Physics book!
Mr. Brooks: Please do some research, and look through the comments posted by readers on FoxNews throughout the Obama presidency. You'll find incredibly disgusting vitriol spewed not just about Pres Obama, but any Democrat and/or person who lives in a Blue state.
Then compare that with contemporaneous discourse in the NYTimes.
This will clearly show you who is to blame for the "tribalism" that you've only recently recognized. For more than 20 years, FoxNews and conservative radio have been fomenting tribalism. The rest of you "reasonable" Republicans turned a blind eye, and sat in complicit silence.
Now suddenly you create false equivalences about who's to blame?
We dreaded Librul Socialists have been fight against tribalism all along; isn't Socialism all about sharing among the commonweal? You sat in silence while the Rightwing media demonized us, and while the RepugniCants capitalized on the stoking of angry tribalism.
I bet that if you graphed the rise if negative feelings, the curve for the RepugniCants peaked many years before the Dems'. Our current anger is in response to all those years of demonization, and the fact that we've learned just how hypocritical you and the rest of "reasonable" RepugniCants have been over all these years.
You allowed FoxNews et al to stoke angry tribalism among the Deplorables. You allowed the rise of Trump, and the destruction of civil discourse. You own this mess!
The rest of us are justifiably angry about what you allowed to happen.
3
Yes ! Spot on !
Had Brooks ever looked at Staten Island, even casually, he would not have needed a lecture on tribalism. Ditto had he noticed all those hyphenated Americans all over the country. Some of us have been telling him about this since long before he admitted the horrors of Trump. Tribalism has been promoted by the right-wing media and by the GOP-RNC. Divide and rule--remember? Add to that the less specific but equally important doubt and envy promoted by advertisers: "The other guy has a bigger car? That woman has fewer wrinkles? The only way to get a real job is to incur massive debt in student loans! Max out those cards!" Then there's the inherited religion-based hatred! Roy Moore is straight out of an Orange Hall in either Northern Ireland or Scotland! Ian Paisley was an alumnus of Bob Jones U!
3
Trump seized on tribalism as a strategy to win the presidency and he relies on tribalism to maintain the loyalty of 35% of the nation. Unfortunately, like many of his tweets, much of tribalism is grievance-based -- immigrants steal our jobs, technology robs us of yet more jobs, climate change is a Chinese hoax, taxes take too much of our income, the poor are parasites living off the rich, the welfare state is too expensive, global trade treaties play us for suckers, we don't get enough in return for foreign aid, other countries want our protection but won't pay for it -- and these grievances are then blamed on the 65% of Americans who don't want to MAGA because they think America was greater and better off without Trump in the White House.
1
“In 1994, only 16 percent of Democrats had a “very unfavorable” view of the G.O.P. Now, 38 percent do. Then, only 17 percent of Republicans had a “very unfavorable” view of Democrats. Now, 43 percent do.”
What happens when those percentages rise to, say, 75%?? Also, polls now show that parents would be more opposed to a child marrying someone of a different political party than of a different race or religion.
“.....excessive individualism paradoxically leads to in-group/out-group tribalism. Modern individualism releases each person from social obligation, but “being guided only by the lantern of his own understanding, the individual loses all assurance of a place, an order, a definition. He may have gained freedom, but he has lost security.”
When you combine the security destroying effect of globalization, outsourcing, and automation on jobs, and then throw in community “sorting”, media echo chambers, etc., its a toxic stew of division. Lincoln appealed to the “better angels of our nature” but I fear that is quickly being relegated to maudlin sentimentality. Trump is a purely “transactional” President....its either black or white, winners or losers....any media that opposes him is fake, people and politicians that oppose him are ignorant losers. You’re either in his tribe or you’re not. He’s the President of his tribe alone. He’s done nothing to try and bring the entire country together because, frankly, he doesn’t know how and doesn’t care.
1
The US has become more multi-racial. One cannot have that and expect a cohesive society.
I spent a good part of my life living and working with REAL ttribal people - Dine' (Navajo), Hopi, Shoshone, Bannock, Mojave, Chemehuevi and Tohono O'Odham. I know and respect them, and have sopme sense of what they are all about. Mr. Brooks, you are not describing tribal people. You are describing self-involved, mostly white, people. And you are describing them from the viewpoint of a member of the most privileged and affluent "tribe" of all.
You should get out more, I think.
2
When America was allegedly great,gays, blacks, hispanics, and independent minded women weren't play acting and assuming a status of victimhood in order to get an inequitable benefit from society as a whole. They in fact were unwilling victims of the laws and social order that relegated them to second or third class status, and deprived them sometimes of their lives and liberties and impeded their pursuit ofhappiness. Depending on the identity group in question, this is true to a lesser extent today. To ignore or deny this oppression and repression only compounds the harm and makes it impossible to reach common ground with those whose political base is dependent on racism, homophobia and mysogeny. There weren't good Neo-Nazis in Charlottesville, sexual predators don't deserve to hold positions of authority and transgender people are not the spawn of Satan. Unfortunately, about a third of the country thinks otherwise.
1
"Just about everybody can find a personal victim story. Once you’ve identified your herd’s oppressor — the neoliberal order, the media elite, white males, whatever — your goodness is secure. You have virtue without obligation. Nothing is your fault."
This tendency is not the exclusive preserve of students or the left. A self-made man told me just the other day that, because our governments have imposed such burdensome taxes and regulations on hard-working entrepreneurs, they have no choice but to lie, cheat, and scheme in order to achieve their dreams. "Virtue without obligation" indeed.
Is it really "a fact" we’ve regressed to a primitive moral ethos? People have always tended to gravitate toward those who think like them. But we learn early on that the world doesn't confirm to our specific desires.
Politically you find people with strong positions, many of whom inherited their parents' political views when you seek specifics. As the twig is bent...etc.
Yet many more are in the middle of the spectrum. Politicians absolutely create anger/dissension. That you don't have to destroy Social Security and Medicare to lower the tax rate for corporations might be a middle position, for example.
As Haidt has written, we're both the rider + the elephant, + two together can find some success without sacrificing the other. Now this falls apart when Nazis want to take over college campuses, for example, or black protesters with a dissenting point of view at a Trump rally are punitively removed. And a presidential candidate says haul them out as roughly as you want to, I'll pay your legal fees. Utterly inflammatory.
We're in distinctly polarizing political times. The Clinton years were mostly a time of peace + prosperity that changed with the election of George W Bush and instant imperialism in the Middle East. It's been a very divided country since, + increasingly polarized 2015-16 + subsequently. Mr. Trump has directly promoted that polarization since the Obama years, and was given a huge platform of free media to do so.
What bunk! Indigenous peoples and human minds are way more complex than that.
“A funny thing happens,” Haidt said, “when you take young human beings, whose minds evolved for tribal warfare and us/them thinking, and you fill those minds full of binary dimensions. You tell them that one side in each binary is good and the other is bad. You turn on their ancient tribal circuits, preparing them for battle. Many students find it thrilling; it floods them with a sense of meaning and purpose.”
My father-in-law, may he rest in peace, was conceived in Italy and born in Philadelphia in 1918. His first language was Italian. When he began going to public school, he was berated and brutalized by Irish and Polish kids. His only refuge away from home was his parents' church, St. Anthony's, an all-Italian parish, a block away from St. Mary's (Irish) and a block and a half away from St. Hedwig's (Polish). As Pop matured, and his father succeeded as a grocer in their mostly-Italian neighborhood, he became "Americanized," speaking Philly English and counting Irish and Polish youth among his close friends. Pop went to war in 1942, as did many American males his age. He landed in Normandy on D-Day and was present at the liberation of Bergen-Belsen. I never really discussed with Pop what made him "Americanized" in the years from early grade school to high school graduation. Pop died in 1998. He voted for FDR in 1940 and 1944, Truman in 1948, Eisenhower in 1952 and 1956, Nixon in 1960, 1968 and 1972, Johnson in 1964, Ford in 1976, Reagan in 1980 and 1984, Bush in 1988 and 1992, and Dole in 1996. How did he grow out of the Italian tribe and into American society? Was it the Depression, FDR, the New Deal, and having nothing to fear but fear itself, maybe? By the way, Pop left Philly for Texas in 1954 and never looked back.
1
Stop acting like “identity politics” is a new phenomenon!! Tribalism was at its peak when MLK was alive. It was based on skin color. Light skin people from disparate national origins (WASP, Italian, Irish, Polish, German, Greek, Lithuanian, Russia etc, etc.) and regions (North, South, East and west) formed a monolith and it’s common creed relegated people with dark skin to a unquestioned 2nd class status. Maybe it will wasn’t called “identity politics” back then but that’s exactly what it is.
Not sure interparty descriptors “dishonest” or “immoral” are examples of tribalism when the top Republican is objectively, indisputably, dishonest and immoral.
It started with the hanging chads of Florida. The villians in this piece are the cowardly media and spinless politicians who did not speak loudly and forcefully against the fascists tendancies of the GOP and the right. These people (e.g. McConnell, Ryan, Dick Cheney, Justices Roberts, Thomas, Scalia, Alito) are a strait line to Trump and Bannon. You can despise them but they are not to blame. Scorpians are scorpians by nature.
Brook's early pitiful attempts to sugarcoat the philosophy of these people eventually led to this type of polemic. Too little too late. The scorpions' stingers are set too deep in America. We will flop around in agony for a while and either die or recover. It is uncertain.
The United States elected the most palatable, sober, moderate (half!) black man in the country as president. He was utterly rejected by the right wing tribe, with the consequent message to our black brothers and sisters: “Fuggedabodit!” Centrifugal wins.
What you are describing is a society going feral. Welcome to the new #FeralRepublic.
David isn't much for taking ownership of the conservative tribalism he has supported for the past twenty years. What has gone off the track here folks is conservative tribalism - racism, xenophobia, white nationalism, Amerika First and embrace of authoritarian rule.
The rest of the nation, more or less continues status quo.
2
Fifty years ago my mother told me that I could never buy health insurance in the USA so I have spent the past half century in exile, and I am so glad that I have since my native country has turned into a neo-liberal dystopia. The violence, vulgarity, immorality, mindlessness and superficiality of American culture are too much to bear. You can read my story in my book What Rough Beast by Robert Dole, published by Austin Macauley in London in2017.
Throw in the tattoo culture and we're digressing into a Mel Gibson movie.
When one of our major parties is led by fascist demagogue & pathological liar, and by con-men who get their way by suppressing votes, stealing court seats & holding the nation's credit hostage to political demands, when that party collaborates with a vast fake news industry to mislead its followers, when that party seeks to use political power only to enrich its leaders & donors--and only 38% of the members of the opposing party have a very unfavorable view of them, our problem is not partisanship or tribalism.
America was never one tribe. It was always a tiny group of super rich white guys owning the land, the vote, the lives of all the rest. It grew by the labor of slaves, by the economic domination of the working class, the owning of the political class.
Little has changed. We no longer have slavery. Women can vote. The poor aren't cast into prison quite as readily. But a small group of super rich white guys owns this country, determines its policies, and owns its President and Congress.
Beyond that, we are at the mercy of four or five special interests, including the far right in Israel who are tugging America along into an apartheid future.
So, it is not that our tribe is fracturing. America is just being herded along as it always has been. What tribe does the poor American belong to? The rich are taking away our health care, housing, food supplements...
Hugh Massengill, Eugene Oregon
Funny how the 99% has "retreated into tribalism". Yes, everyone feels victimized with little control over their lives because a cabal of billionaires, now running the US government have taken over everything. They remove environmental controls, deny science, enrich themselves with big tax breaks and benefits, downsize you and threaten the free press.
In the 20th century there was a common external enemy that needed to be contained and our parents had first-hand knowledge of what it was like to really fight against global domination. In the 21st century, the common enemy is not so much external. It is a subtle, total control by the super rich, wannabe autocrats and their friends in congress who want to make all the rules so that they eventually control everything. It's difficult to categorize this resistance in society because we all feel threatened, but it's not Hitler or communism threatening us, it's us.
1
yes there is the internal battle we all fight to overcome the demons inside us. But then there are oppressors. Martin Luther King had a clear external enemy: white racist Southerners. Fifty years after King was killed, they are still at it. It' nice to look and say both sides are bad. Brooks is a joke. King fought a clear external enemy and the GOP harbors MLK's enemies today. Back then, there were people in the media who equivocated and said both sides were at fault. Blacks were not being patient enough about the law of the land not applying to us. David Brooks is a good man, but too many whites are like him. There are those possessed by the demons of the Old South and then there are the David Brooks, who somehow can see policy that favors historical privileged groups, who then turn to the world and pretend both sides are evil.
2
The new paradigm of fragmentation began to coalesce in the late 80's early 90's as sub groups began to organize and claim their identities in a more organized way. Then came the Internet and its disintermediation of everything before it. But there's a paradox imbedded in the "cult of everyday despair,” and "Suffering is analogous to baptism". The paradox is that collectively, we reject even modest amounts of "suffering", if for example, sacrifice and compromise would be considered mild forms of suffering. We did it during the post 9/11 era, when the "new enemy" wasn't leveraged for shared sacrifice, but instead, tax cuts. And we do it today with one sided policies (healthcare and tax cuts) being rammed through without the pluralist effort that produced some pretty good societal deals in the past, compromises and all. My fear is that we've lost the potential to iterate over time into a more perfect union that both reflects and informs our society. Each group wants its perfection and it wants it now! We're going into unchartered territory and all these centrifugal and centripetal forces are happening on multiple poles. We've been taught that our country is an evolving experiment. But when dealing with forces and force multipliers that a system was not designed for, predictions aren't grounded in anything. So, we're left with faith, that we will all do our part to keep the machine from destroying itself. It's called a governor, aka governance. Vote. Please.
1
This is like looking at people like they are fish in an aquarium. Brooks can see that they are fighting but doesn't try to distinguish why. He is right that it is unhealthy to fight and that the more moderate fish is better able to make sound and safe decisions. He doesn't see that one of the fish has said that another was born in Kenya and was a Muslim fish. This drove a lot of the fish crazy and the other fish crazy. Brooks position is that the fish should straighten themselves out. My question is how does David Brooks find himself in the position to be looking at the fish in the aquarium. What is his standing? I think he should get into a streetfight now and then to give his columns necessary depth. It's hard to say something meaningful when you're outside of the aquarium.
1
Let me see if I understand your position. You and people like you are good fish, and those who disagree with you are bad fish. Good fish vs bad fish. How obvious. How clear.
I happen to think both Haidt and Bruckner may be onto something.
That said, I find it most curious that, when the time came to wrap up a column loaded with "we," Brooks defaults to the second-person singular:
"That makes it easy to feel good about yourself. But it makes you very hard to live with."
Brooks is a careful writer. Seems to me with that conclusion he is signaling his own purported virtue and "your" dubious moral standing. He could just as easily have written, "That makes it easy to feel good about ourselves. But it makes us very hard to live with."
But he didn't.
2
This morning's Brooks Op-Ed would be better if it didn't polarize its discussion. College students are not that polarized. Here in Atlanta, at Emory there was an anti-Trump consensus: less than 10 percent of students voted for Trump and nearly 80%for Clinton. The picture of student extremism conveyed by Brooks is over generalization from rare events like those at Middlebury and Evergreen and (if one counts outsider anarchist agitators) U. Cal. Berkeley. Brooks himself refers to REPUBLICAN radicalization. The Right-Wing portion of Brooks' "fragmented" media centers on sources that massively violate the values of logic and empiricism held by Brooks.
Sure, calm discourse is needed. However, retreating into a false rhetoric of a balance of polarizing forces, indeed stressing College student intolerance over Fox News and the GOP doesn't help.
1
Russian hackers and propagandists are experts at playing tribal divisions against each other. They successfully infiltrated our election process to further the divisions and hatreds among us, giving Trump the advantage.
1
What a bunch of baloney. I'm a Jew. I know a lot about tribalism both inside and outside my "tribe". I remember when Jews(And poles and Irish and Italians and etc) were so tribal that they only felt safe living in their own enclaves, marrying members of their own tribe, hiring people just like them. And,although I'm old and my memory isn't what it used to be, I remember college campuses in th 60s with angry young people taking over administration buildings and engaging in protest marches. I even remember Kent State when the military turned on children at the behest of the governor of ohio. And I could go on and on with examples of one "tribe" against another " tribe". THIS IS HOW Americans behave.
2
The title “Retreat into tribalism” should be “Report from the Bubble” things are about to burst. Let them eat Cake David.
2
This tribalism concept is simply Elitist political double speak from bored, tired commentators (and academicians) who need new ways to express themselves and justify existence. We have a class issues, we have race issues. Call them whatever you will.
What was the media/elitist word of the day when Dan Quayle ran? Gravitas. Same difference.
2
Neutralize political warfare. Lay down your party; register independent.
1
There are many issues but identity politics is clearly a big factor....when people slice and dice the country into identity groups to mobilize people to support us vs. them, we all lose. Political parties and colleges are serving this country very poorly.
Where are our leaders that identify our shared goals and ideals, and promote an agenda that works towards that instead of sowing fear and distrust?
1
I remember when I was still a teenager when the American Civil Liberties Union fought and won a case against a school board for leading its students to pledge allegiance to the flag and later, another one to recite the Lord's prayer every morning. Even then as a young liberal I thought it was kind of silly to take exception to those things since they reinforce 'togetherness'. That was the beginning of the self and the end on the US. For the interpretation of the 1st amendment that leaves no room for prayer in school and no pledge to common allegiance to our own country and countrymen is, I think, the blueprint for the dismantling of brotherhood in this country.
Reminds me of the philosophical question I once heard a long time ago: Can God create a mountain that She cannot move? Seems that, in this case, the first amendment that protects so much of our basic civil rights may also be immovable when it stops commonsensical customs dead in their tracks.
https://www.aclu.org/issues/religious-liberty/religion-and-public-school...
https://www.aclumaine.org/en/news/know-your-rights-pledge-allegiance
1
It's funny & sad that the readers' comments prove Brooks' point. Readers race to outdo each other to display their tribalist Democrat badges.
Anyone who sees this as a Repub or Dem issue is deluding themselves. This descent into tribalist groupthink based on random categories that never have to do with economic class - except to spit on the lower class, which is ok as long as they're white men - is a deliberate strategy by economic globalists seeking to consolidate their global power through division based on tribal affiliations, which are literally joined by hate, saintly victimhood, & scapegoating, & whose tools are shame, violence, fear, bullying.
It's designed to distract away from the rapid loss of power of the middle & lower classes, the obscene neo-aristocrat-oligarchs who, like the aristocrats of old, have no allegiance to state but rather to their own power. In this sense, the 'establishment' intellectual & upper classes of both parties are their stooges. They get to be virtuous even as they kick the lower classes in the gut, gleeful at the prospect of destroying 'white' lower classes & urging millions of 'migrants' in to replace them. The upper classes then don't have to feel guilty about their actual privilege & can keep on reaping the benefits of economic globalism: cheap labor, global jobs via cronyism, & self-righteous groupthink with good guys (them) & bad guys (the Other).
They too will be victims of the neo-aristrocrats, but they will see it too late.
2
"Excessive individualism"? What a term! The perfect way of preemptively diminishing the person whose conduct or opinion might not support your own? Welcome to the herd.
2
You may not have noticed but your comment make you part of the herd. Mooo!
During tumultuous, threatening times people turn toward fascism. They want a silver bullet or, more correctly, a silverback bully to save the day. They go from working together for the common good - the many helping the many, to messianic populism. An ironic reading of the motto, "E Pluribus Unum" - "Out of Many, One" summarizes this ominously.
As resources decline and people fight, the centrifugal force of the reigning elite take over, electing one of their own. Religion goes from honoring the inclusivity of polytheism (democracy and diversity) to monotheism (dictatorship). The Eye in the Sky reflects The Guy of the Lie.
4
Two words for you: Any Rand (the advocate of the individual over society)
1
You wonder why ,when one party lies about every issue.
Trickle down economics
Gobal Warming
WMD's
pollution
Banking Regulations
Your party lies about everything.
Its not just Trump there kiddo.
3
Right, Hillary never, ever lied. She simply deleted the emails and bleached them to boot.
This is the problem. Tank You.
Trump is the enemy of our democracy as we have known it, acting as a willing agent for Russia and an unconscious agent for China. What makes it disastrous is that the GOP members of Congress have refused to exercies their Constitutional role, have given up on the country's future and are bonding with Trump to focus on short term looting for themselves and their paymasters. The core Trump voters cheer because they just want destruction and racism. The rest of us can only watch helplessly.
3
What angry tribe do you belong to? And, by the way, isn’t it prudent to find evidence for a crime before accusing someone of a crime, or doesn’t your tribe believe in the rule of law?
"But they both point to the fact that we’ve regressed from a sophisticated moral ethos to a primitive one."
Same old David. Whatever his New Year's resolutions are, they don't include trying not to over-generalize to a fault.
Mr. Brooks: the "moral order" circa 1963 which you seem to pine for accepted "separate but equal" treatment of blacks vs. whites, laws prohibiting interracial marriages, common-place rape and other sexual assaults on women as "boys just being boys," abortion seekers relegated to backwoods hacks or worse, recognized no need for women to participate in sports, or the disabled to participate in the workforce, or domestic animals not to be brutalized simply because they can't speak. Gays and lesbians? Freaks to be ridiculed and marginalized.
The EPA, Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, Title IX, ERISA, etc. were all created or passed AFTER the close of Brooks's imagined Golden Age, where all men agreed on how the world should be run, and who would run it.
No, the issue is not too much liberty. The issue is the rise of a party which doesn't believe in individual liberty, and has steadfastly worked to eliminate it for the last 40 years. Because it is bought and paid for by corporations, not real people. This is the clear and present danger to our nation. Talking about it, and attacking the danger at its source, is a patriotic duty, not a failure to be polite.
Time to stop siding with the Ancien Regime, David.
2
“Any man more right than his neighbors constitutes a majority of one already” — Henry David Thoreau
2
Typical Brooks. This is a silly analysis based on a few experiences with silly college students. There is a real reason why Dem's dislike Reps' at a higher rate. It is the more and more obvious commitment to cashing in rather than to country. What we need is a common sense, well led program from the Dem's that addresses the pressing needs of our day without being hijacked by big money.
1