Last week, I saw kindness in the Native American drummer and savage mockery in the boy smirking at him less than a foot away. I saw that in all versions of the video. Yet Mr. Brooks contributed to the inversion of the situation by the right and mainstream media through wishful viewing and a PR written phony apology. Kindness includes overcoming your bias to see a situation as it is.
More generally, Mr. Brooks refuses to endorse policies that implement kindness on a societal level.
57
This column seems like a cry for help; particularly the end. I know David has never reconciled what's become of his Republican Party. At first I chuckled at his unraveling, but now it really is just... sad. I hope if he needs help he gets it.
31
Dear Mr. Brooks,
I read your column to the end because as I have grown to know you through your column, your books and your Friday nights on The News Hour, I feel you have something worthwhile to contribute to any conversation into which you have given thought. I may not always agree with you but I trust that your efforts are for the betterment of whatever you are addressing and I respect your ideas. I do see myself in much of what you said and I read it to the end because I continue to make an effort in my own life to interact in my relationships with others in a respectful and civil way. It’s the very small part I can play in trying to make things different in my own environment. Don’t become cynical. I need you to take the higher road.
26
No, I didn't. Too banal. Just skipped to the end.
12
Easy for a Republican to write.
Our world is being destroyed and this guy talks about being kind to the ones destroying it.
27
"Sad"! Even David Brooks is funny.
9
If I were married to David Brooks, I would not yell Grow up!” But I might ask energetically why his opinions about absolutely everything get published to all of the world while my own extremely brilliant ideas get little notice.
36
Where is your kindness, Mr. Brooks?
12
Useless. Worse than useless. You insulted the reader at the end of your column, adding that abuse to the theft of time. Yes I know you were being "ironic." Why do I ever come back to reading your work, Mr. Brooks? I had a nice long not reading David Brooks streak going, and I'm sad that I broke my streak on this piece of piffle. I'm going downstairs now to find your book that my dad gave me, and throw it (unread) in the recycling bin. Stop writing. You're not good at it!
18
Sweetness and light, Mr. Brooks. Sweetness and light.
"The two noblest of things," said Jonathan Swift.
I am afraid, the political situation right now (which I suppose prompted your column) does not admit of much sweetness and light.
Remember "Independence Day"? Blockbuster movie back in the 1990's. Earth invaded by ruthless aliens bent on sucking us dry and moving on.
"Can we TALK about this?" asks our baffled President. "What to you want us to DO?" He is not left in doubt.
"DIE!" croaks the dying scientist (whose body and vocal organs have been taken over by some detestable alien).
So. It's come to THAT, has it? A military man pulls out his pistol and shoots the alien dead. And oh yes! Earth--our poor, helpless earth--is indeed rescued--
--when a hydrogen bomb finds its way into that alien "mother ship" and blows it to kingdom come.
I'm talking here as a so-called "liberal" Mr. Brooks. A moderate, actually--but my conservative friends call me a "liberal." Believe me, sir--I avoid (like the plague) angry debates with my right wing friends.
But there comes a time, sir--
--when you have to SPEAK OUT.
I am not wedded to liberal ideology, no--not this child! But there are so many--so very MANY--right wing lies out there. Floating about. People (as it were) flourishing little bottles of cyanide, emptying them into water coolers--
--you gotta square your shoulders, step forward, call 'em out.
And oh yes. Yes indeed!
SAD!
19
Morena from Aotearoa/New Zealand. It is part of our Maori culture and heritage to start every hui/meeting with a mihi/personal story introducing yourself. This can cover your mountain, river, sea, tribe, family etc so that people can place you in history, in context, in relationships. For people like me, who are immigrants, this is a rich way to start any meeting that calls for patience and listening. David speaks of the "icebreaker" (a great NZ merino brand by the way), personally I have found this traditional way of starting any meeting as rich and equalising.
9
Actually I skipped to the bottom, didn't read all the way through.
4
To call it a marriage is to say there was once love.
Our leaders knew there was a dark underbelly to our Nation that should not be awoke. It is one of the reasons they installed the Fairness Doctrine requiring broadcasters to present fair and balanced coverage of controversial issues.
Unfortunately, conservatives realized they could no longer win elections using civil debate. They needed to energize that underbelly with fear and misinformation if they wanted to keep power. Enter FOX and Rush.
Remember William Horton?
Now, after two decades of trying to take the high road. Liberals are sick of being called Terrorist sympathizers and or un-American. We have finally convinced our elected officials to no longer tolerating the intolerable.
So no. I will not put aside the fact that conservatives dehumanize my friends of color and those different sexual preference. In the words of Samantha Bee, "I don't want to hug a Nazi." I will not honor them with giving their POV consideration.
You are not here to help. You are hear to be an apologist. To imply that when a man says 'she's not hot enough to sexually harass' a 'agree to disagree' approach is possible.
I know you must feel a deep shame at the actions taken by the conservative movement to keep relevant. But, ask yourself, would you accept losing power fear/hate mongering had to stop?
Democracy doesn't work for conservatives. So, this is the world we now live in.
Sad.
15
Maybe the best tool is a sense of humor, which Mr Brooks apparently has. Nice end to the column.
4
Good to see David writing something really practical instead of just his usual egg-headed stuff.
1
I'm trying to imagine something like this published in a conservative outlet. Give me a break.
7
Excellent piece, that could use some tweaks. David Brooks wrote: "The all-purpose question. “Tell me about the challenges you are facing?” Use it when there seems to be nothing else to say.
Never have a meeting around a problem. If you have a problem conversation you are looking backward and assigning blame. If you are having a problem conversation you’re saying that one episode — the moment the government shut down — was the key to this situation, rather than all of the causes that actually led up to the episode. Instead, have a possibility conversation. Discuss how you can use the assets you have together to create something good."
The first one seems brilliant to me, the second one is not always correct. The whole point of a good quality circle in Total Quality Managment, is to many points of view about a problem, and practice problem solving. Perhaps in some areas, problems are a dangerous focal point, but the text needs to be more specific.
I wish Brook's many critics could take a time out. Mr. Brooks isn't suggesting he can fix everything, but basic social skills are helpful if you want to help people rather than tear them down or incarcerate them.
David Lindsay Jr. is the author of "The Tay Son Rebellion,” and blogs at TheTaySonRebellion.com and InconvenientNews.wordpress.com. He has co-written and his duo performs a folk music and readings concert and sing-a-long about Climate Change and the Sixth Extinction.
1
Kindness is innate, not acquired. Remember the phrase, "she's a kind person" or "what a kind thing to do"? I thought we learned this a very long time ago. What Mr. Brooks presents is a vacuous go-to guide, albeit a lucrative one.
6
I never knew David Brooks as a political reporter, only as a wishy-washy apologist for Republican policies masquerading as a frightfully decent chap. He now seems to spend his days reading the thoughts of others which he then uses as fodder for platitudinous advice columns on how to fix the world and simplistic solutions to questions that have challenged far greater minds throughout history. The only encouraging take-away is the number of readers who are not fooled by this lightweight would-be public intellectual.
18
A few more pointers. Do not have a TV on during the meeting. Do not slam the table. Avoid denigrating all those who work for you, from high to low. This includes your family. Learn to stop talking incessantly about yourself. Profanity is counter-productive. And this is where “sad” is an appropriate sign-off.
15
I think it's very funny that many people commenting on this particular piece by Brooks are being totally oblivious to the simple homespun advice he offers here.
I almost never agree with Brooks on anything, he imho is little more than an apologist for the status quo. That does not mean that he is not capable of writing something that is useful from time to time, as he does so here. Even if such writing is little more than an attempt to make himself look more agreeable (as he is wont to do from time to time), people, please: hold two thoughts in your head for a nano-second and consider judging this piece on its own merits, instead of on the feelings that he normally engenders in you when he writes?
72
I agree with you wholeheartedly, and in every respect, the clincher for me was his last word. Self description while studying the wisdom of others.
Nonetheless I appreciate his thought provoking concepts.
2
If you need to read guides to learn how to be kind then there is not much hope for you.
8
Dear NYT, please stop being nice and hold David Brooks responsible for creating a Republican Party now in thrall to Donald Trump.
12
I understood the entire article - thanks for that - except the last bit.
Sorry.
4
Brooks tries to excuse his own party’s shameless actions by claiming a “culture of savagery” - another false equivalence.
More of the same from Brooks.
5
Paying hollow lip service to ideals is a skill David Brooks has honed to perfection. About a week ago Brooks was playing apologist to racist taunters, and that is after a long history of excusing conservative policies that tear down social safety nets for fellow Americans.
5
When Mitch McConell sets a tone and ethos by his behavior - disallowing a legally elected president to present a SCOTUS nominee - this promotes mistrust and greater tribalism. It's not essentially that the Republicans have a different view or philosophy, of how they want the country governed. It's the malicious and mendacious ways they have of getting their power - through fear, hatred, and dirty politics in the service of "anything to win." It then becomes "them vs. us."
All this polarization is then created. Politics enhances this separation - you are either for or against "us." You are either a capitalist or a socialist. You are either a patriot or not. You are either for the iraq war or for "cut and run." You are either for "big government" or "smaller government."
It is all broken down to categories and sides. Dialogue is almost entirely absent from our political process - at least that's how it felt in the last presidential election. Instead of argument/assertion, rebuttal, response, further response, it is reduced to the good guys or the bad guys and which side you're on. Human nature is a tough thing to wrestle with.
7
Good tips on a micro- level, but maybe not on a larger scale.
You can't speak truth to power if the power is working with a different idea of truth or is otherwise diverging from reality.
As the old African proverb says, when a hyena is the judge, the goat gets no justice.
13
"Fake this.."
People are generally very sensitive to faked feelings. So I'd recommend doing our best to presume the good without faking it. Thanks for this piece.
No, this isn’t a case of “a family where everyone screams at each other all the time.” One side simply ignores data and creates facts out of thin air. Hey, look...I don’t really care if you believe in gravity, or not. But, you NEED to believe in gravity, lift, thrust, and drag if you are going to pilot a passenger jet. If one side wants to ignore facts or cannot engage a reality-based conversation, then no amount of ‘skilled kindness’ can ever bring them back into a productive debate about how to move forward. Just smile (kindly) and leave them for dead. Or, you can spend your time in a long slide presentation on the providing the basic inquisitive skills, scientific knowledge, and facts democracy requires for one to have an informed public debate. But,..there just isn’t time for that.
5
For a different and surprising take on how to tamper extreme views I recommend an article by Charles Duhigg appearing in the January February edition of The Atlantic. It is entitled "Why Are We So Angry". In it He recounts an experiment conducted in Israel where a couple of ads were run taking an extreme view supporting the rightness of taking Palestinian land to build Israeli occupied dwellings. Seeing this inhumane philosophy taken to its logical conclusion significantly changed the target audience's support of the policy. I think that úsing such "reductio ad absurdum" techniques can be a powerful corrective to extreme views. Much more effective than Mr. Brooks kind, and usually ignored, advice we all got from our mothers to "just be nice" to each other. Read the article.
The poet Rumi, born in 1207, said:
“Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing,
there is a field, I'll meet you there.
When the soul lies down in that grass,
the world is too full to talk about
Ideas, language, even the phrase each other
doesn't make any sense.”
We, everyone-everywhere, are all born free of nationality and religion, to be quickly instructed and trained in ideas, beliefs and actions labeled in different and differing types of wrong doing and right doing, most painfully in ever-ongoing wars, minor and major, where each side declares the the “others” wrong and therefore a danger to “us,” who are right and therefore justified in wounding, killing, capturing and imprisoning “them,” the “them” including hundreds, thousands, millions who happen to be in our righteous way.
With this David invites us to take sides in what seems likely to be lifelong war, “fighting a culture of savagery.”
Pogo Possum said, “We have met the enemy and he is us” and John Lennon, twenty times: “All we are saying is give peace a chance.”
Eighty nine years young, it was long before I realized there IS no other, that everyone and everything everywhere is always connected and I am here only to offer loving care to all I meet.
8
Thank you for this gentle column. It occurs to me that even before we get our chairs from the pile and sit down in a circle to discuss issues, we might want to work on just reintroducing everyday kindness in our interactions with those we know we disagree with.
3
Never fear Mr. Brooks. I believe the younger generation, say those aged 20 and younger are simply kinder that those on the north side of 40. Perhaps it is because they are taught bullying is wrong. Perhaps it is because they have been rewarded for random acts of kindness in school. Perhaps it is because they follow Ellen who ends every event with "Be Kind To One Another." Perhaps it is because they know cameras are everywhere and do not want to be caught being mean. I don't know. I just believe that overall kindness is making a comeback.
4
@Kristine Really? I would say that many people who had a general empathy for their fellow citizens lost it in November 2016. I will never look upon unrepentant Trump voters as anything other than selfish, stupid, and/or racist.
2
In my experience, this kind of "kindness" is basically one rational person trying to placate one irrational, immature, irate, ill-informed person (multiple the numbers as needed). Basically we are being asked to baby people who can't handle an opinion different than their own, who are extremely defensive, and who need someone to acknowledge or accept their worldview, no matter how bonkers, in order to find a "common ground." I wanted to read a column about kindness, but I found a column about placating people. Sad.
7
Kindness is not a skill, faking kindness may be one.
Kindness is a general disposition of the soul, towards people, animals, nature, or oneself. Little children may be kind one moment and quite nasty the next one. Wether kind behavior is even free choice for humans is not a settled matter. Pets, however, are routinely bred for kindness toward humans.
Just saying.
5
What comes to mind is the old book, "How to Win Friends and Influence People", which the author admitted was an intentionally misleading title. What it really was about was the ability to listen and understand folks.
Much of the comments dealt with how the other side wasn't following these rules. That shouldn't matter. What matters is how you carry yourself and provide an environment where people can do more than jump to conclusions and shout.
Frank Bruni wrote a piece on 1/27 about the loneliness of the centrist Democrat, and what is important to folks. It was a nice read.
I don't think David Brooks article is sad; it was a nice reminder of what is possible. Good advice can appear anywhere, if you're open to it.
3
not sad at all! leadership and responsible journalism. thank you
3
We're going to need more wine.
7
Mr. Brooks, in a country without universal healthcare, where the minimum wage is defended as a benefit to workers, where a man can be choked to death for selling loose cigarettes, is it fair to ask for kindness towards the policy makers?
8
Very good, Mr. Brooks, and thank you. At an age significantly north of 70 and just a tad south of 80, the other day my wife screamed at me "Grow up!" And you know what? I grew up, just like that!
I have grandchildren who are exhibiting fully grown-up behaviors before they reach 20. I am amazed that they beat me to this state of maturity by more than five decades. This is a good thing.
There's little need to despair for the future no matter how much we might regret the past. I hope my grandchildren understand this so that they grasp their own futures robustly with both hands.
46
As a former counselor educator, I am grateful for your piece.
Thank you!!
1
David and the GOP decided hate and fear were valuable resources, they could be used to get votes and, "TAKE AMERICA BACK". The respect normally given to the office of the president, did not apply to President Obama. After 24 hours a day, 1460 days of "hate Obama for any reason"...Obama was reelected. Where was the civility and respect from the senators and congressman for the peoples representative? And now DB wants what he and the GOP absolutely refused to give to non GOPers. They gave no respect or civility, so they get no respect(civility remains).
6
"You just read all the way to the end of a piece of emotional advice written by a newspaper columnist."
Newspaper columnists intentionally introduce information in a manner designed to create tension. They are paid to keep you reading. If the reader bails on the first paragraph, the writer is doing a very poor job. That's the writer's problem, not mine.
There are two points I explicitly reject.
First, "Never threaten autonomy." That's absolutely bad advice. There is an ocean of difference between saying "Calm down, I'm not sure I understand what you're saying..." or "Calm down, I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say..." and "Grow up!"
Second, I reject "Reject either/or." Don't reject either/or. Either/or is extremely useful. You just have to be careful how you use it. You can't use binary comparisons in double negatives. "Either something bad or something bad." Either/or becomes a personal accusation. That's not how you use conditional statements.
You can however use conditional statements to flow chart a course of action. If this... then that... No? Okay If that... then this... You're still reducing the action to an either/or decision. However, you're also informing the listener about each potential outcome. We can therefore evaluate together. Onto the next decision. Get the meeting over with. You'll make more friends that way.
Emotional rules don't work so well when you introduce nuance and context.
1
This article appears to address the topic of conflict resolution. When addressing conflicts of any size and importance, it's crucial to identify the needs and wants of both parties, the motivations behind their reasoning, and develop doables in order to move forward and resolve the conflict.
4
Tribalism is our shell. That's the space we fight over..our externalities
But, I counsel, look beyond. By and Large I believe the vast majority of people have inside our shell, their core values. And independent of tribal shell, reside inside: Integrity, Truthfulness, Respect, Faith and Beliefs.
This inner core is largely immutable.
1
Negotiation is a skill, along with compromise, debate, persuasion, diplomacy and even listening.
Kindness should be practiced, of course, but to define it as a skill demeans it a bit -- makes it sound a little too TED-talky. Kindness is about being sincere and in the moment.
The word kind or kindness appears nowhere else in the article except in the title. Is this because the very word was sure to encourage clicks?
7
I have enjoyed reading your recent articles. They inspire people to work together to problem solve. Thanks David.
3
“best solution is to create a third tribe that encompasses both of the warring two.“
Are we suggesting an independent candidate for 2020 David?
I think the tangle of chairs will yield better results than a third tribe or party.
1
They are good suggestions in general but I would add a few more
1: either/or is a bipolar construct but it is also a natural tendency for human. Check your own previous columns: when I first read your columns, you too had a tendency to set up a diametrically opposed positions; then you have matured. This is not to fault you though; after all, presenting too many options is no good either. Too many choices is as bad as too few or no choice at all.
2: that leads to another problem. As a moderator, one should be impartial. But it is difficult. Even if you could, the audience might assume otherwise. Being socratic is great on paper, but dialogues like those between Socrates and Meno is hard in real life
3: in conclusion, perhaps one way to resolve the above human nature, objectively and subjectively, is what one might call: in the other person's shoes method. Instead of starting with your own POV, you start with the other person's POV, this includes the moderator. Empathy is not unique to Buddhism but buddhists use it well since they don't have a deistic center. However, even they have their problem. Therefore, even they need to borrow a little for Michel Foucault!
1
addendum: just imagine, if your loyal oppositions who have assumed the worst your column could put themselves in your shoes, maybe they could see their assumed outrage might be over the top
Kindness is a skill. Putting other people's interest and concerns first (or at least before yours) helps focus on other people's stories. Understanding people based on what they want to project about themselves does more to build bridges than explaining yourself on terms important to you. People want to be heard and understood. If we all just listened better.
2
That's a lot of rules. Maybe we could start with: 1) Listen without judgment, and reflect back to the speaker what you have heard him/her say. (Active listening.) 2) Slow down. Leave room for dead air time. 3) Be hard on the issue, not the person.
7
Has Mr. Brooks practiced these steps or is it all theoretical?
3
Another rule : withold the rush to judgment. Think before posting,” would I say this to the person face to face? Do I know all the facts, specially in a fraught moment ?”.
1
Touché
1
Many elements of this column are very helpful; however, it's a typical (middle class? upper middle class?) mistake to think that all people know how they obtained their names - adoption, foster children, death of parents, family dysfunction - perhaps it's a topic people don't want to discuss...icebreakers should be non-personal or really benign...i.e. would you rather be a fish or a fly?
2
Beware the "either-or" Susan, as David Brooks has advised. That said, I'd go for being a fish; we all seem to be drowning up here above the water line.
1
There will be no kindness as long as Fox News broadcasts.
Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity see no place for kindness in the public forum, and they never will.
Where are the modern versions of Chet Huntley, David Brinkley, Walter Cronkite, and John Chancellor? These were newspersons whom everyone trusted—and yes, they were kind.
5
Mr. Brooks - Note that "Get over it" is just as much an order as "be calm" or "be reasonable". Although it might be a good idea in the instance you cite, the parties will hear it as disregard for themselves and their values and feelings, just as I feel that way when people admonish me to "get over it".
4
Maybe, as a recovering alcoholic with a good number of years sober, I’ve come to realize how important it is to look inside before I blame someone. In fact, advice I got once at an AA meeting seems particularly useful - “Blame no one. Expect nothing.”
Problems seem to disappear when we take responsibility for solving them and moving toward a solution.
6
Good timing to reassert mature standards for communication. Kindness, respect, emotional intelligence, empathy and mindfulness are all referenced skills in this article, so let's not get tripped up on semantics. The spirit of the message is in part to avoid reciprocating hot emotions. Kindness needs to trump enthusiasm to get our point across. 'Resolve' and 'persistence' can be other names for stubbornness. 'Honor' can often be a thin shroud over pride. I hear 'integrity' invoked when people do not want to accept change. Everyone deserves a form of compassion. Especially the people who you think deserve it the least.
1
David Drake has said that you should always assume the other party is arguing in good faith, and that making this assumption is especially important in the cases in which it is false.
2
I often disagree with Mr. Brooks, because I am a Socialist. But this is one thing we can agree on to some extent.
My reading of history says that if we cannot somehow solve our political differences with words, then we will (eventually) solve our political differences with guillotines. And... I'd really, really, really like to avoid that.
5
Your column is advice that should be read to all CEOs, Academic Deans, and anyone else in charge of groups or meetings. Respect is the important attitude and it starts from the top.
2
Such kind thoughts, skillfully presented. Thank you, David.
2
It would appear that most of these suggestions are manifestations of kindness or humility. And on one level they would seem to be commonsensical and thus unarguable.
However, this one realistic thought kept nagging at me as I read through David’s list: Just how practical and helpful are these tips when one is confronted with hate and (parroted) demagoguery? Is hate best countered with kindness? Importantly, it doesn’t necessarily follow that hate should be countered with unkindness. Nonetheless something other than kindness might be called for, such as a virtue like righteous indignation, whereby one speaks with controlled, moral anger against the odious and destructive forces of presidentially approved prejudice.
4
I read David's columns and watch/listen to him on PBS and NPR. I appreciate the fact that he listens and responds thoughtfully and is a decent person.
3
I, for one, applaud you, Mr. Brooks, for placing yourself in the center of a largely Democrat arena to represent the voice of an endangered species, the moderate Republican.
Being a Democrat is no picnic because everyone’s view must be heard and they are not only diverse, but divergent views; yet we manage to come together.
These tips you offer describe the approach of Barack Obama’s leadership, in my opinion. Unfortunately, he was not respected by Republicans, who opposed every single policy he initiated. Do you think that someone who has proven his intelligence could not come up with even one good idea? They didn’t disrespect him because of his deportment, manners or personal behavior, which was pretty much 'goody two-shoes.' What was it that white, male Republicans, especially from the South, did not like about Barack Obama?
I think that McConnell and Trump, in their own ways, have taken us beyond the point where the adoption of these tips will change anything. Instead of screaming about it, we have to participate as deeply in the democratic process as we can. A credo of democracy begins with faith that the majority lights the way to wisdom for our nation’s success. But, the majority must vote. Those of us who read the New York Times have a greater responsibility to volunteer and urge everyone to vote in the 2020 election. That would be my tip.
10
What they didn't like about Obama had nothing to do with Obama.
If you listened to Fox News at the time, or frankly to any GOP politician or pundit out there, you couldn't but notice the fact that they constantly spread lies about his policies and what he stood for.
Birtherism was the least nocive of those fake news campaigns.
"Armageddon", as Boehner called Romneycare as soon as Obama passed it, was such an immoral, horrible lie, that nevertheless a majority of the American people believed until, as Pelosi had correctly predicted (words that the GOP has equally transformed into a sentence they could hate and that had NOTHING to do with was she was saying), it had been implemented for a couple of years, so people could SEE its impact on their own lives, whereas the constant GOP attempts to repeal it kept the media's attention on it, and made people finally realize what it was.
Or let's take the Recovery Act. Half of it were tax cuts for the middle class and small businesses, and yet, the GOP decried it as "big government" (at a time when GDP was at -8%), and in 2010 even refused to extend them, only to slow down the recovery and cultivate hatred against Democrats.
Kindness includes compassion, but there is something called "fierce compassion", where you see the inner goodness of any human being (= we all want to be just happy and healthy, in the end) all while firmly fighting against the harm he may inflict on others. We can be kind to liars, AND fight back.
4
“...Democratic arena,” not “Democrat arena.” The word “Democrat” is a noun — a person who aligns with the Democratic Party. The word “Democratic” is an adjective, a descriptor. Every time I hear this noun used as an adjective I know I’m listening to the opposition. No one describes a Republican as a Republic. For some reason it must hurt to even mention this fundamental virtue of the country. I wonder why.
1
What you’re talking about, David, is treating people with respect, not kindness. Kindness involves going out of your way for the benefit of others. Kindness is spontaneous.
Most of this is sound advice. I’m not surprised to see the commentariat of the NYT media bubble howling their disapproval. But for those of us actually doing something about our broken political culture, these are words to live by. You can’t win someone over by being confrontational and insulting.
It’s sad that it has to be spelled out, of course. Do unto others as you would have others do unto you - this isn’t complicated. It just requires you to log off Twitter, stop, and think about being another person before you speak.
170
@Seb Williams
We are not "howling our disapproval" of the suggestions for how to get along with other people and navigate conflicts. It's mostly sound advice.
But we (the dreaded liberals) are also capable of looking at a bigger picture, and asking, in what CONTEXT is someone offering advice to others about how to get along better with others? Who is making these suggestions, who is he directing his advice to, what does he (and the interests he represents) stand to gain from it, and what do those advised, basically, to start acting better stand to lose from adopting the more conciliatory position that he advises?
In other words, we know something about history.
15
@DW There is no downside to treating people with human dignity and respect. I recall an incident in the aftermath of Charlottesville, I believe, in which a black man gave a hug to a young neonazi and asked, “why do you hate me?” That is the courage and wisdom that this era requires - just as it was required in Dr. King’s era.
People are complex. The advice in this column is sound, and worth reading on its merits, rather than through the lens of whatever prejudices you might have against the author. I disagree with David on just about every issue there is; I think he’s blinded by privilege and biased towards those with wealth and power. And yet, I see the wisdom in some of what he writes here.
And that’s the effect I’m talking about when I speak of this publication’s affiliate echo-chamber. I’m a flaming lefty and political organizer in the Deep Red South. It is the default posture of hostility, the accusatory tone, and the unwillingness to even LISTEN to (let alone engage) differing points of view that is tearing this country apart at the seams.
14
@Seb Williams
What is tearing this country apart at the seams is that there is still a thing called "The Deep South." Why don't you just call it what it is, The Confederate States of America. There is even a regular commenter here who for his 'location' lists "CSA". I gave up asking him to expound on that.
3
But...but...David, what will you do if you follow this advice?
Hmmmm?
3
David I watch you on PBS and read your columns and always wish your opinions matched up with your advice!
You seem like the nicest possible totally stuck dunderhead dispensing stuff about "rigid tribal identity" and then proceed full steam ahead into your own rigid tribal identity. You are not on the sidelines.
15
Kay
Like you, I read and watch DB but I don’t see evidence of your claim of rigidity.
I disagree with him, and you, but isn’t that to be expected? In debates, I’ve learned to try to be careful not to box others in or out...if the goal is mutual understanding and not point scoring. And isn’t that principally what he’s advocating?
1
Too bad the columnist chose to only speak in terms of a business meeting. For me, kindness saved my life. Crazy people require that you get in their world and understand their struggle in order to communicate kindness to them so they won't rape or kill you. Worked! I'm still here.
2
I have lost friends since trump was elected. Yes it’s sad but I’m not ashamed to call these fanatics out for what they truly are. They are not kind, they are the exact opposite of kind and they need to be publicly shamed. Fascism is a slippery slope, so is the road to hell. I will not invite them to my table.
10
It's funny to me that that you and your ilk helped get a million people killed in Iraq, and then you think you can write an article like this and be taken seriously.
11
“Your ilk”. Hard to support your points after that.
1
Shaken by the utter failure of his "conservative" politics from tax cut disasters to equally disastrous wars fought on false pretenses, and unable to admit the errors of his ways, Mr. Brooks resorts to high minded faux sociology. Spare us.
12
Now you tell me.
3
Not too sad
1
Oh, boy. Let's pause now and give Mr. Brooks some tips on alleviating his very serious case of obliviousness:
1. take off the rose-colored glasses; the country is in a mess due to Brooks' party and its muddleheaded, selfish agenda for the last four decades and its elevation of a grotesque monster child as its leader and president.
2. stop telling those of us who think Trumpites and the GOP are deluded numbskulls to take them seriously and treat them as if there were not numbskulls.
3. stop writing as if you know something and we don't. Hello? We see and hear and believe what we see and hear despite Brooks' president commanding us to ignore the truth and the obvious, namely that the GOP is corrupt and Trump is a lunatic/moron/crook/semi-demi-traitor.
4. wake up to your own large portion of blame for the current "cultural savagery" by your perpetuating conservatism; conservatism is not kind, not civilized, not smart. Conservatives lie, cheat, steal, vote suppress and gerrymander to seize power and hold on to it to the detriment of the people.
14
George: guilt by association? Hope were never on the same ‘side’ in a debate! Sheesh!
And yet Trump is president
2
Abandon Christianity and seek the Buddha way. That is where skill is developed. Christianity is for kids. If you are to mature, you must put away childish things.
American Christianity is in cahoots with Republican white nationalism. It's hands are bloody with millions of peasants killed in my lifetime. It's hands are dirty with jailing of the poor in America. This is the legacy of the Churches of the Republican Way.
Kindness is a skill, that way too many Christians are not learning.
3
Funny: in the last lines, you just violated the tips you gave. I know: it was meant as humor: "As you were reading this list, you might have thought the real problem was other people’s obnoxiousness, not your own. But take an honest look at yourself. You just read all the way to the end of a piece of emotional advice written by a newspaper columnist. Sad."
PS I did like your piece. Good advice in it.
1
In an age when we face great challenges David Brooks continues to focus on minutia. Rome is burning, the ice sheets are melting, dictatorships are endemic, journalists are being persecuted, people are starving...and David Brooks is spending his time thinking about good manners. A waste of paper. Please..get someone else to write columns.
7
@Adam Orden I was too kind to say this!
I wrote a guest editorial for a San Diego online newspaper to make a point about the Covington High School incident in Washington DC.. Read at https://timesofsandiego.com/opinion/2019/01/28/teachers-could-have-defused-maga-confrontation-in-washington/
In my editorial I identified humility, discretion, and respect as values that were missing on that day. I believe the suggestion put forth by Brooks seem to be largely centered on those three values.
1
At this point Brook's writing is pretty much the only reason I am still a subscriber. If only this paper could find more writers like him. I don't understand why the NYT has allowed itself to become such a biased blather box of liberal bile. At least one writer maintains his decency and intellectual integrity.
David, maybe your column has turned into a marriage therapy column because you just don't want to cover politics anymore. Maybe covering politics would be too disturbing and would upset too many of your long-held but little-analyzed beliefs about effective public policy.
6
Funny how the upper classes are so concerned about civility and kindness—towards them, of course; while they never even think about what would constitute REAL kindness to anyone less fortunate than themselves. There are exceptions to this rule, people who actually are aware of their status and are genuinely kind to others; but exceptions are conspicuously absent in the Republican party at the moment.
Be kind to us all. Vote them out.
7
Sorry David. Though of course kindness and radical empathy are desperately needed, you have supported and been a shill for the Republican Party your whole career. They weaponized racism, starting with old Ronnie, and each administration on the r side kept it up until you now have a racist, xenophobic, sexist, incompetent cruel liar in the WH. Republicans own almost all of this, with f*x news blaring in the homes of the gullible, right wing fever swamp shrieking and so on. And people like McConnell and Ryan and all the other NRA mouthpieces have been anything but kind, allowing weaponry to flourish and kills 10’s of thousands of people, and now our water and air doing the same as dump and his merry band of hateful billionaire incompetent cabinet members deregulate and make it easier for corporations to toxify everything.
Your columns float above the cloud of white male privilege you inhabit and don’t address your own and that of other republicans culpability and ownership of this hateful racist country. So pardon me if you seem hopelessly out of touch and out of date.
12
This column has really helped me today.
46
Every now and then, it is kind to gently remind people to lighten up! (Even if you are a journalist.) Thanks for making me think AND laugh!!!
3
There are some very wise words here. Perhaps the media should adopt some of these principles and ditch the advocacy
"journalism" crusade they are on. Much of our nasty discourse is fueled by CNN, CNBC and Fox which are determined to make their "people" mad as hell for ratings and ad profits.
1
Once again, Mr. Brooks appeals to the liberal and humane readers of the NY Times to calm things down because he knows Trump supporters won't.
And how, Mr. Brooks, do you show kindness towards those who cheer a 'leader' who has literally condoned savagery at his rallies with “Any guy who can do a body slam, he is my type!” and "If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously, OK? Just knock the hell ... I promise you I will pay for the legal fees. I promise, I promise" ?
3
Enough with the pop psychology on the tribal warfare going on in America. Enough with the excuses for the behavior of those that think they are "more American" than the next guy because they are white, heterosexual, christian and were born here. Enough already Mr. Brooks, the GOP is evil, they promote an agenda that is based on inciting fear and enriching their benefactors. Just say it out loud, admit it and move on to joining those who are trying to change that.
7
David, could you "sit down" with your readers on these pages and talk about President Trump's apparent "board of directors", namely Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Alex Jones, Judge Jeanine Pirro, ... and the influence they appear to have on Mr. Trump and on public discourse in America?
From the kindness perspective, I mean. I read your columns and more importantly have seen you speak in person, and believe you to be a kind person. Perhaps you can help us out on this matter.
1
Kindness or acts of kindness require a measure of empathy for the other, an appreciation that this is another human. Acts of unkindness, meanness, are power plays; whether its a verbal putdown, a bully, a racist comment or action, or an unwillingness to give a hand to someone in need. Acts of unkindness are meant to elevate the instigator and demean the recipient. Equally, unkindness hides deeper disturbances of the individual whether personal insecurity or unchecked prejudice, anger or hate or worse plain old indifference.
1
This column has some good advice for a people who are of good will, may disagree, but are honestly trying to reach some solution, or at least an equilibrium, together. (Although the chairs in the middle of the room strikes me as one of those doomed 70's-era social engineering manipulations that helped get us where we are today.)
But we live in a country in which a significant portion of the populace not only tolerates, but champions, a creature with the reptilian passive aggression of a Mitch McConnell. What he did w/ the Garland nomination is a Big Sin, pure evil, and needs to be called out and remedied if we are to survive and evolve. Rare is the reptile that responds to kindness; they are just not as cuddly as Schoolmarm Brooks would have us believe. Some are not even accessible, on any level, and they need to be un-kindly, non-violently culled from the body politic. Their very nature is to Do Harm, and kindness does not compute; it is just an invitation to move in for the kill.
Other than that, nice essay! And the Pollyanna award goes to...
2
@mcguire
The chairs thing … if the people attending the meeting catch on that the chairs were jumbled in the middle on purpose, to create this phony little exercise, the idea will boomerang. If I were attending a meeting and realized this had been done on purpose, I would be QUITE annoyed, and immediately on my guard about the kind of manipulations the meeting organizer had in mind.
Like David says in one of the other points - when people realize you are monkeying with them this way, they feel their "freedom to maneuever" is threatened.
1
I thought this would be a really insightful piece from a writer I don't care much to read. I wasn't impressed. My thought is Mr. Brooks assumes too much we think like he does. Of course, I could be wrong.
2
Okay, David, thanks for trying to help. Yes, in some settings 'kindness' and collegiality are a worthy goal. But the discourse of collegiality can also be used to silence legitimate dissent, even provocation.
We are at war, David, fighting to take back our government from a reckless, deeply bigoted president, and his rabid followers. If we lose, your plea for kindness will become the burden of everyday citizens, while an anti-democratic, self-serving, out-of-touch administration remains as cruel as ever.
6
David Brooks' writings are consistantly worth taking the time to read and consider, and I was grateful as usual to be reading this piece, and then the last lines. Why close by sending the message that his reader is a 'sad' case for having taken the time to consider his thoughts?
2
This is great advice. Now I simply need to get the people I disagree with to read Mr. Brooks column so they will come to their senses and agree with! Right???
1
Kindess is a skill but the Republican Party is based on hate and division. It would be kind to allow people to have healthcare and not suffer. It would be kind to allow Americans to eat. It would be kind to have shelter and not live on the streets. Why the article about kindness today?
5
Kipling, off the top of my concussed old noggin:
If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, and blaming it on you.
If you can trust yourself, when all men doubt you, but make allowance for their doubting too.
If you can wait, and not be tired by waiting.
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies.
Or being hated, don't give way to hating.
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise.
Pretty sad that kindness is now a skill. It used to be inherent from good parenting.
2
Yes you are right David...I'd add go see the Mr Rogers movie. Probably you realize you are swimming up a strong stream with a column like this. But it's a big audience and I'm sure it does some good.
Here's an alternative. Invite everybody who needs to be part of the solution.
Give them good boots, a backpack per person, outdoor clothes, and camp gear requiring communal cooperation. Then drop them in the back country about 50 miles from nowhere with a map of where the food to get out is cached in one-day supplies, and instructions that if there are any stragglers, the group will be airlifted back to where the last straggler is. They must be out in seven days. They can request stretchers or medical aid if necessary.
Then let the group dynamic unfold.
1
Wow, a to do list on how to prevent chaos in a group. Are you kidding? Why don't you share with us a story about something that worked for you. Then you might, if possible, try to establish how in the world that happened. If we all had to do lists for life's biggest problems much would have already been solved. Admitting it is a wild guess, I think perhaps you are sad because the therapeutic value of memoir in this essay just hasn't touched your heart.
2
If M. Brooks actually thinks our reading his column to the end is “sad” may I suggest that he retire and leave the writing to others who have better solutions than to call the readers’ behavior “sad.”
4
Yes David great advice. David take a look at yourself!
4
Perhaps Mr. Brooks might explain, in view of his focus on kindness and civility, why his party has embraced incivility, bigotry, and xenophobia while packaging it as "patriotism." This should be the role of the so-called conservative columnist in these pages.
6
Oh, that's right, you can still afford to hold parties.
3
International Mega-corporations are not kind. They trample indigenous peoples' rights. They ignore the masses needs. They pretend they are human but don't vote. They hide money and don't pay their fair share of taxes. They squash free-energy technologies that could save the world from global climate change disaster. Wake up!
5
You forgot about food, David. Give people food or snacks, and all meetings go a bit better.
1
I read the title of this piece, skimmed the talking points and regret the loss of about 40 seconds of my time.
4
Yeah, ok. Coming from the guy who heartily endorses the most mean spirited people in human history: The Republican Party. Give me a break.
5
I like this quote by Rumi.
“Out beyond wrongdoing and rightdoing, there is a field. I will meet you there”
1
"You just read all the way to the end of a piece of emotional advice written by a newspaper columnist"
Not quite. Skimmed. Not so sad.
1
I didn’t understand the flippant ending of this piece. I thought the advice was solid up to the last paragraph.
1
Love that. Thank you.
Delightful!
Excellent list. Unfortunately, the president is/does the antithesis of each item. The president, for crying out loud!!!!!
I don't understand why Brooks concludes this column with: "You just read all the way to the end of a piece of emotional advice written by a newspaper columnist. Sad."
Then why did he write it, and why was it published? The conclusion insults readers who are genuinely interested possible solutions for our fractured republic.
220
He was hoping to be humorous.
Doing that is a little risky as there is the possibility of not being understood.
15
@Jessica, I agree. I thought the piece had thoughtful suggestions.
The ending was a jolt! Does Brooks intend to insult his readers?
12
@Jessica I think Brooks might be emphasizing that things have gotten "so bad" that the onus of spelling out some of these forgotten lessons has fallen on an unlikely newspaper columnist, i.e. Brooks himself. A final note of satire, perhaps? Perhaps you should follow what Brooks described - presume the good, and might will open your mind to other motives and possibilities.
27
Lawyers and other spokesmen cannot negotiate things their clients do not want to negotiate. If their clients claim that a column of numbers add up and are unwilling to admit that they dont, their representatives are stuck with that, and the best they can do is to avoid or obscure the subject.
With respect to political and social views, we are clients of these views and of the other people who hold them. They are our tribe.
When Mr. Brooks whacks the right, he throws in a whack to the left. That is what his tribe expects and demands -- evidence that he has not gone over to the other side.
Challenging the tribe while remaining a member involves a very nuanced dishonesty and an ability to make sharp issues disappear in various fogs that are summoned for the purpose.
3
I've always said that, though I may not agree with all of David Brooks' political opinions, I deeply believe he has a good heart. This column has that good heart on full display, and it is full of good advice top to bottom. Thanks, David.
Brooks's original, compassionate, and wise column has, in many of the comments below, surfaced the rage in the souls of too many Americans, a politics of resentment and "now it's MY turn to hand out hurt" that will, in due time, destroy the democratic experiment. I applaud Brooks's effort to find the middle way. Don't give up!
2
The world is getting so mean and so tough to live in today, I think it's already a very good start... Always remember that a beach of sand is made of billions of grains of sand. Even if it may seem like very small things, it's only through small steps that one can achieve such an ambitious goal as that of "kindness" - even though I think it is more about "respect" here.
Besides tragedies can happen so unexpectedly, I guess it's important to always speak to people as though it were the last time - even though such a statement may seem awfully pessimistic..
Unfortunately kindness is perceived as a weakness nowadays, because people assume that just because you are kind it means you are weak, that you place other peoples' well being above yours... But in a way I think it's the contrary.. Being kind is a strength, and that's the reason why it is so difficult to achive. I would even say that kindness is the very epitome of humanity...
If you don't respect others how can you pretend to respect the humankind - and thus yourself ?
1
David I would like you to consider further one item on your list, one that nobody at the Times is willing to discuss seriously. Maybe you can try.
The item?
"Tough conversations are usually about tribal identity."
In my USA, the vocabulary given to be used in these conversations is the 18th-19th century vocabulary provided by the US Census Bureau It is evident to me every day here in the Times that most columnists and most comment writers find it difficult to speak about human difference using any terminology other than USCB race words.
Today's example at https://nyti.ms/2HAohf6
"Can Kamala Harris Repeat Obama’s Success With Black Voters? It’s Complicated"
It is complicated, so too are Kamala Harris' lines of descent. Yet in that article where the word "black" appears 54 times she is seen in one dimension only, "black African American", USCB terms for a "race".
The article tells me that "Ms. Harris is aiming to appeal to voters of all races, of course" but I would much prefer if Ms. Harris tells me in her words something like this.
My parents are first-generation immigrants to America, one from India, one from Jamaica, so I understand that every one of us has an immigration history in our background and our genomes.
As candidate I pledge to shape a campaign and a program aimed at making life better for all Americans, especially those who have never been afforded the benefits that I have been given.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Citizen US SE
1
ahahaha, the ending has been the best part. It gave me immediate perspective of the big picture. Bad manners, rage, partisan-attitudes and frustration are so atmospheric lately that one seriously starts suspecting/admitting them for himself . The only hope is that all this period is going to bring us to a huge mass catharsis...and by the way, as "sad" as it could be, it came from my favourite US columnist. I always read (just) your articles to the end
1
January 29, 2019
Not just a newspaper columnist but a very smart and generous, caring gentlemen - so firstly thanks David Brooks.
As well, in the era of Trump this examination of kindness is supreme priority that began when the Republicans were unkind to their own organizational history and towards producing the right candidate - therefore, and we know default to using this kindness catalog skill set and that is worth everything to readers like myself I would surmise and engage its vitality to myself and my times.
1
Maybe take an online visit to a non-profit organization that has been helping people practice the skill of kindness for over 15 years, Ben's Bells Project. Kindness is a skill and we can all get better at it by practicing. Start today.
1
I manage a dozen employees in a very busy marketing/design office. There is no minute of any day when we are not under water or working on demanding, deadline-driven projects. But this office is joyful, even loving, a place where we all want to be, and we have positive, trusting relationships with our colleagues and clients. And this (I believe) is why: Every week in staff meeting, we have a discussion about how traditional, non-religious virtues like honesty, tolerance, patience, kindness, charity, integrity, temperance, gratitude, etc are actually very practical skills in getting along with people and living lives of peace, and are a source of personal and professional success. We talk about one virtue each week, and then we practice that virtue in our interactions during the week to come. There is no mention of God. We're talking about intentional behaviors. IT WORKS.
7
In a democracy, all politics is about getting elected again. What campaigns have found is that it is easier to drive your base to the polls than it is to convince an undecided person to vote for you. What makes people want to vote? Outrage. If the base feels threatened by the opposition, they will turn out on election day.
So it is in the best electoral interest of both parties to generate outrage against the other. Brooks seems to think politicians want to solve problems. Wrong. They merely want to keep their jobs. The month of January should stand as proof.
2
An act of kindness is an act of helping.
It is the proverbial helping someone across the street, hopefully without being asked, hopefully in good cheer and empathy, and hopefully with no expectation of return.
Kindness is altruistic.
Almost everything in Mr Brooks article was not kindness, so much as a broader rhetoric. Trying to set a world so you can bend it to your arguments.
I don't see kindness here. I see tools to try to get people to agree. Not bad in themselves, but not kindness.
Kindness involves caring for others, for their good. Being a kind person is its own reward.
Mr Brooks "kindness" is a pick up artists version. It is not trying to establish a relationship for a common good, but trying to wedge in for personal gain. It seems all about him ultimately. It isn't about helping the other, or even a common good, it is about helping himself to what he wants. People in this kindness, in this formulation, are not beings to be helped for their own accord, but people to be manipulated to accomplish one's personal goals.
No one should be your tool in that way. It is not kind.
7
99.9% of the time I'm in agreement with the comments made by Socrates, Red Sox, Mark Thomason, and similar familiar posters, and I have no disagreement with what they've said today.
But any political comments seem misplaced, as if people are responding to what they expect David to have written, rather than what he wrote. I know I read this piece expecting David's usual "Both sides are at fault" or "All would be well if Democrats would go to church" column, but I don't see any politics here.
Except for the somewhat manipulative strategy of chair stacking, the rest of these "tips" are just basic communication skills appropriate for any human interaction involving mutual coexistence. They might not be the be strategies to use when power dynamics are the better choice, so I understand posters making that distinction, but neither does David ever make the claim that "Kindness" is always best. (Well, at least not in THIS column.)
In all human interactions we are free to chose a power dynamic, or a win/win dynamic, and sometimes a power dynamic is the better choice. But if we choose the win/win, communication path, then it always good to be reminded of these important basics.
1
@ImagineMoments
He is a political columnist. He doesn't stop being one when he decides to offer "practical tips." Those who interpret his words in political context are right to do so. The words cannot be interpreted in a vacuum.
1
Kindness is indeed a skill. There are people who wish to be kind, or believe they are being kind, but fail because they lack the interpersonal skills Mr. Brooks describes.
On the other hand there are no kind people who don't aspire to kindness. Let us remember that while kindness is a skill, it is also a state of mind.
1
Was Mr. Brooks's recent diatribe against Abby Hoffman, one
of the most severe and at heart most decent victims of the Vietnam protests, any show of kindness? While I respect some
of his criticism I've always felt that at heart one of his worst
components is intellectual snobbery and the inability to understand how even significant folks like Hoffman were far
more direct and honest than some of their better put together critics.
2
The partisan media outlets have stolen the once valuable skill of learning to listen to the other side. The ever present media echo chambers reduce the influence of an open mind. And it's not just that media perpetuates party line propaganda, but in a more insidious manner, it develops narcissistic minds as well. Open minds require self-reflection but in this world, the source of our discontentment is always THEM.
I do not attend any religious organization so I always wonder, when I drive past a church, where are the religious institutions with this moral, and yes, spiritual problem. Are they blind, or apathetic, or are they reinforcing with their own self-serving ideals?
"Most disagreements are not about the subject purportedly at hand." But not in this particular case, of the 'national marriage' or rather 'divorce'. The subject is, in a nutshell, 'The times, they are a changing.' One side is in opposition to the changes.
The other side is adjusting to the changes. Guess which side has the healthier approach?
1
I'm a slightly left-of-center moderate and find that I can't say anything to anyone re: current events without getting virulently attacked these days. To conservatives, I'm a "socialist" and to progressives I'm a "hard-hearted monster." I'm neither of those things!
2
David, You are making assumptions. I did not read through your column. I felt that I had read these suggestions before, cut to the chase, and read the ending. Your effort was made in good faith, but the chance of others employing these skills is slim. In the present state of the country, it is hard to imagine the gathering you invision. Have you actually participated in such an adventure? You and Mark Shields manage it, but you two are exceptional--believe me. Either/or is the way computers work, and our brains respond to that. I wish you well on your journey to make us kinder, and end with a smile directed at you.
1
@Maggie Maybe just try one? Any one. And see what happens.
I would've guessed I read to the end because I am optimistic.
1
Be Kind is the new mantra of rich people everywhere. Affluent mothers have embraced “Be Kind” wholeheartedly—on their $75 yoga tank tops, $50 water bottles and bumper stickers on their Range Rovers. I have yet to see a lower income person embracing the trend because they cannot afford to.
Are you suggesting that you have to be affluent to be nice?
These are good tips, but in the age of Trump, they are really, really hard to do.
1
In her memoir, Hope against Hope, Nadezhda Mandelstam said this in respect of life in the Stalinist era: "Kindness is not, after all, an inborn quality--it has to be cultivated, and this only happens when it is in demand."
Is demand for kindness in decline? Or does it only seem this way as the popular demand to indulge in outrage has seemed to soar with social media and the increasingly tribal aspect of social life?
1
Kindness isn't promoted by the media, which currently seems to work to set us apart from each other by name calling. We have a politician in the White House right now who is quite good at name calling as well. Civility is great, but when people feel they've been rightly gypped for a long, long time, civility only goes so far. To quote one of the Yellow vests, "We don't want the crumbs; we want the baguette."
2
No, not sad, Mr. Brooks. Your heart, anyone's heart who reads this column to the end, is anything but pathetic. Goodness is there. The sad part is how naive anyone must be to think that there is skill involved in kindness. This entire column begs the question of where you were in the 70s and 80s while the rest of us were attending entertaining but useless values clarification workshops--full of the axioms you list here--and then retreated, teeth bared, deeper and deeper into the "safety" of our most unkind social, religious and political biases.
1
Barack Obama was kind. And yet, think of how he was treated.
Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell - they are not kind.
Racism is not kind. Misogyny is not kind. Shutting down the government because someone didn't get his binky is not kind.
Just think, Mr Brooks - if you just cut from your unkind party and allowed yourself to see that who and what you are supporting is unkind, you wouldn't have to put us through corporate team building 101.
Just do it. Come on over to the ideas party, the empathy and reason and inclusive party. It is possible, and you will find us to be very kind.
12
I believe the title is completely wrong. I forwarded it to my husband in the hopes that he’ll find the tips helpful in some of his meetings... that’s it.
Conservatism’s hypocrisy knows no bounds. This is an ideology that is willing to rip the beating heart out of a nation for its own profit – yet one of its most vigorous champions lectures us on… kindness?
This would be funny if it wasn’t so “sad.”
Conservatism blindly and rapaciously wants what it wants. It wants a wall and is willing to shut down the government and lay off federal workers to get it; it wants to take away our health insurance; it demands we all be Christian, to adhere to “Western tradition”; it wants to rig elections and to ensure rule by minority; it wants a small government, and it wants us all armed to the teeth.
But most of all it wants a free-market system where the banks and corporations run amok, plundering resources and people, and gorging on the profits.
And fronting this hoard of wants is a never-ending flow of treacle, a persistent Conservative PR campaign selling the eternal benefits of community, religion, respect for tradition and institutions, the benevolent and noble wisdom of our forefathers, emotional attachments, and good fellowship.
Isn’t that just precious?
But what David Brooks can’t fathom, what is his worst nightmare, what he is in deep denial about is that conservatism has failed miserably as an engine for a huge, modern, quickly-changing, diverse democracy. After decades of conservative hegemony, the proof is all around us.
So how about a little kindness instead?
6
Is this opinion piece a joke, or an exercise in hypocrisy?
David, when was the last time you said something kind about the U.S. President, or anybody in his Administration?
His policies have benefited middle american, blue collar workers, North Korea is not shooting missiles, Isis for all intent and purposes is no longer a threat, Iran is proceeding with caution, etc. There are lots good things you could say about the President, will you?
Now that would be an act, perhaps not of kindness, but an act of sobriety.
1
@F1Driver That would be an act. Period.
1
@F1Driver
North Korea is not a threat? Wakey, wakey.
Though Trump's actions as president make me feel hopeless and furious, it doesn't make me feel any more hopeful or happy to hate other Americans. David Brooks's decency always gives me hope.
That third tribe? It’s also called reframing. Trying to argue immigration with a Conservative while pointing to America’s history of allowing lots of immigration for most of our history and identifying it as “patriotic” cuts absolutely no ice with my business Conservative friend. He sees today’s unruly immigration process as a source of major crime though there are no stats to show this. (More to show that citizen gun ownership kills over 33,000 each year. He also provides no ideas for a solution.) He just insists that it’s bad — sort of like the rest of the Trumpian/Republican Party. All complaints all the time and two “solutions”: lower taxes and less government.
These are not new tips and tricks. They are useful little pointers that can be helpful on the job or in your personal life. I first learned most of them many years ago during my MBA. But they do not take the place of working hard and getting the job done well.
And on a national level, they are not a substitute for good public policy.
So these tips are not new information, Mr. Brooks, but if they were a revelation to you, bravo for opening your mind to a new idea. In the same spirit, there is something else that could be valuable for you to learn about. You see, the Russians interfered in the last American election, and many people in the winning campaign actively worked with the Russians. Possibly even the President himself worked with the Russians. We don’t know yet. It’s being investigated. Many people worry that if a President was corrupt enough to work with our national enemy to get elected, he could be corrupt enough to twist the US justice system to try to hide his crimes
Now that you are aware of this, you might want to include it in one of your columns in the future. Keep opening your mind to new truths, Mr. Brooks. Maybe you'll admit how corrupt many - not all, but many - elements of the party you support has become, and maybe you'll start writing about real solutions instead of pure fantasyland avoidance pieces which are honestly simply insults to the intelligence of your readers.
3
If Mr. Brooks seriously wants to cultivate the skill of kindness he should begin by switching political parties.
3
Common decency no longer exists in this country. I lost my phone in a Costco in Naples. It was a cheap $100 phone with a half expired no contract sim in it. Virtually of no value to anyone but me as it had photos of my beloved Golden Retriever on it, who I had to put down due to illness the day before.
Someone has it, as two days later they attempted to use the sim in another phone.
I used to be the guy that when they found a wallet would turn it in without touching any of its contents. Several times I managed to return it to the owner personally. I never even received a thanks.
From now on, I'm taking the cash and throwing the cards on the street. I've had enough of being mr nice guy in a world of creeps.
2
Read Robert Fulghum's "All I Really Need To Know I Learned in Kindergarten." Published in 1986, it predates Mr. Brooks' column by 35 years and is a better read.
Dr. Johnson's book review of two centuries ago is apt for this column (I paraphrase) - This work is both original and well written; that which is original is not well written and that which is well written is not original.
3
There are concrete and practical things that can help. Living without a roof over one’s head, raising children without health insurance, shrugging shoulders as some invest in gold toilets while others need 3 jobs to pay the rent. These are real.
The attitudes of those like Wilbur Ross need to be uncovered and changed.
We are going through a major change in our economy. Going from manufacturing and such to technological. Facing the reality of the fallout, and attempting to make it less painful is a great idea.
84
@Tricia: No one is going to change the attitude of someone like Wilbur Ross. People like him should not be in positions of public responsibility. This was true of most of Trump's original Cabinet members.
4
This is a tragedy and also a travesty. After reading many of the comments, most of which hit the mark, one realizes what we have become as a country.....no make that several countries.
The country of the president and his followers.
A country of two political or three political parties at war with each other.
A country where the Supreme Court, once a hallowed institution, may be in danger of losing its way.
A country where women, minorities and everyone but white individuals are still in many states considered second class citizens and less worthy of citizenship. We have forgotten that we are all descendants from immigrants.
A country where neighbors and families are having difficulty communicating and understanding each other.
And yet, a country where humanitarianism and kindness really could save the day but will it.
1
If I had read only the headline, I would have found the column useful. A reminder to be kind is always important. Unfortunately, I have met the challenge to be kind with too little success too often. When I am able to detach, gain some distance, I think of how I might have been better, kinder, more effective had I exhibited sympathy, compassion and just been more human. I hope one day soon to be able to be as kind to others as many have been to me. I have to give up -- and this isn't easy -- my affinity for verbal sparring, joking and some pedantry, but I truly believe that nothing is more important than being kind.
A few years ago I spent the day with my then three and five year old nieces. We had great fun and "adventures". Before bed I was about to read to them. The older girl, over tired and a little bolshy from the days exertions began to act out, unlike her, but not unusual for a small over tired child. Her younger sister, wise beyond her years, held her face in her hands and said to her very gently, "be kind". It was such a sweet gesture, she was trying to comfort her adored older sister, who didn't appreciate the gesture in the moment. I try and remember her motto, particularly when faced with someone who is creating a difficulty. If I am kind maybe it will help to come to a solution which will suit all parties?
I often feel if we were all just 5% kinder to each other every year the world would be a much better place. It also takes less energy than anger! The old adage do unto others also applies.
1
@Fee
I think you didn't really learn the lesson your story offers. You note that the older sister "didn't appreciate the gesture." That's the lesson. Telling someone else to "Be kind" is very, very likely to be experienced by the person receiving this advice as manipulative and passive-aggressive. That's why the older sister didn't like it, and that's why many of us reading this column don't like David Brooks offering us similar condescending advice.
The younger sister wasn't making a "sweet gesture." She was most likely copying what she had seen a parent do, or what a parent had done to her: she was attempting to control another person, and assert her superiority, and make others realize that she was in control in the present situation while others were losing it. That gave her an ego boost, but it wasn't actually nice. I don't blame her sister for being irked.
Being "very gentle" while you try to manipulate and control other people doesn't make it a nice thing to do. In fact, being "gentle" about is really rather aggressive.
If nothing else, you might note that what little sister did didn't work.
@Fee
I think you didn't really learn the lesson your story offers. You note that the older sister "didn't appreciate the gesture." Telling someone else to "Be kind" is very, very likely to be experienced by the person receiving this advice as manipulative and passive-aggressive. That's why the older sister didn't like it, and that's why many of us reading this column don't like David Brooks offering us similar condescending advice.
The younger sister wasn't making a "sweet gesture." She was most likely copying what she had seen a parent do, or what a parent had done to her: she was attempting to control another person, and assert her superiority, and make others realize that she was in control in the present situation while others were losing it. That gave her an ego boost, but it wasn't actually nice. I don't blame her sister for being irked.
Being "very gentle" while you try to manipulate and control other people doesn't make it a nice thing to do. In fact, being "gentle" about is really rather aggressive.
If nothing else, you might note that what little sister did didn't work.
@DW
ack, sorry for duplicates
Civil Tone. Work at elevating the tone of your group conversations to be inclusive of people higher aspirations. Ask Americans to tell you their genuine Hopes and Dreams and they will.
Americans aren't good at building walls. Why? Because we don't need them. Americans are great at building hopes and dreams because we need them.
3
Lots of talk these days about reviving civil discourse, bi-partisanship, kindness and how to decrease political tribalism but very little beyond impractical talk. Here's a thought. One of the great but little remembered outcomes of WWII was what I call the “Band of Brothers” effect. Huge numbers of our countrymen and women discovered, thrown together by common hardship and experience, that their counterpart in a vastly different part of the country, a different political party, a different religion was in fact their “brother or sister”. Sadly, at that time it often did not yet extend to persons of a different color, but at least it was a start. Another huge war is not the goal, nor a great idea, but some form of mandatory universal service to country, that brings increased and diverse personal contact to every young person after High School, might start moving us back towards a more unified and civil discourse.
I would add another exercise, role reversal: imagine what the plight of your adversary is and verbalize their position. Even debate an issue in teams, but taking the other side. Empathy can be learned and is the key to compromise and reconciliation.
1
David, as usual, well worth a read.
Evocative, a bit, of Russell Baker.
The longest month is coming. Can we agree on that?
Compromise does not always mean getting to the middle. Often it consists of validating both sides' argument in a way their opposite numbers can accept. When two parties have a seemingly intractable conflict, diplomats often resort to a neat trick of accepting that both can be right and then grafting language onto the position of one side that acknowledges their position without pressing it beyond the tolerance of the adversary. And so this is how most international disputes are resolved. The others end up as wars.
1
Lately, on FB, I have seen visual parables of kindness. A man has black seeds in his hand and holds out his hand so squirrels and small song birds can one at a time eat a seed. Another man diving in the ocean comes upon a mantra ray tangled in a net. The ray lets the diver cut the net away. A year later, the same diver dives into the same spot he dove before and the same ray greets him and brings another net tangled Mantra Ray. He cuts the net away. The next year the same Manta Ray swims toward and away from the diver repeatedly until the diver realizes he is to follow. Manta Ray word spread and there are many who need nets cut away! A small dog falls into ocean waters when the boat suddenly accelerates. A dolphin or porpoise spies the dog and swims under the dog. With its nose under the dog the dolphin swims fast and lands the dog on the back of the boat and the people bring the dog to a safer place on deck. There were visual parables of elephants helping elephants get out of bad situations; e.g. swimming pools, ditches, and mud holes. There are numerous carnivores in our world, and yet, animals are able to show basic kindness to each other. Surely we can show the same basic kindness to one another.
This is all good advice, but what does it have to do with kindness? Yes, yes, I know, it's buried in there somewhere, but this is about how to run an effective meeting.
How about this: I just moved cross country because I need to be near a family member due to my failing health. The hospital where I'm having all my care is amazing. Someone who likes their hospital? How can this be? I've discovered that the answer is a corporate culture that's centered on the patient, leading to kindness in acts big and small.
For instance, there are upholstered benches in the elevators. Every.Single.Nurse.Tech.Pharmacist - every single one! - has offered to get me something to drink. I remarked to one of the pharmacists, "But that's not in your job description." She looked me straight in the eye and answered, "Yes. It is." Yesterday the radiology tech comped me a meal in the cafeteria while I waited between the steps of a procedure. She did it with a pre-printed form that only needed her signature. Passing staff stop to offer me help - guiding to a department, carrying things, fetching a wheelchair. Every time.
My conclusions are (a) hire nice people, (b) make kindness part of their job descriptions, and (c) watch it trickle out into the general culture.
4
I have found Jonathon Haidt's book "The Righteous Mind" to be a great help in understanding people who believe differently than I do. People value different core moral pillars differently, not good or bad it just is.
Needs to be posted in every break and meeting room,classroom, home refrigerator and kids cell phone in the country. Anyone can yell, scream and bully and act on their id. It takes strength, intelligence, skill, empathy and practice to be wise adults and decent constructive humans.
The problem is often that the Wild Ids are lionized or so feared that they are allowed to run rough shod on the more evolved rest. There needs to be polite societal way to recognize, time put and eradicate this behavior as acceptable. The problem is , that in many circles from the streets to the boardroom, the raging beast alpha, remains a highly rewarded behavior.
2
Kindness and respect are very important interpersonal strengths. They arise out of character. Perhaps they can be faked by using the kind of punch list offered here, but I doubt the act will be convincing or sustainable.
Wisdom is also important, so we can discern situations which benefit from the soft approach, and those which call for directness and strength.
When the kind people lack forcefulness, and are overly cooperative with those who do not reciprocate, it empowers those who lack both kindness and cooperation. A bit like being co-dependent . . .
Sometimes to be both kind and wise one need NOT to flex.
Absolutely!
All of us are pebbles sending out ripples through the water.
Start with the first graders in school.
(Some of them will teach their parents!)
Every day, practice good manners for 30 minutes.
Respectful behavior will be innate behavior.
David, I enjoyed your column this morning. I appreciate you starting this conversation.
There are two more books I would recommend: Nonviolent Communication - A Language of Life by Marshall Rosenberg and Critical Conversations - Tools for Talking When the Stakes are High by Kerry Patterson and Joseph Crenny.
I've found it helps by defining, in the beginning, the values we, as a group, want to be the container for our conversation: like kindness, honesty, consideration, trust, and many more.
1
This is great advice. Unfortunately, you won't get to be President if you follow it.
Brooks’ essay assumes that having effective communication with someone with whom you disagree is a desirable skill. That seems indisputable. Anyone who is married should recognize this is so.
I am part of a long running, cross partisan discussion group and I can say with confidence that some of these tips really work because I have used them with positive effect. If your friend has just laid out a line of thinking which strikes you as wrong, even offensive, it is emotionally difficult to reach into his pronouncement and find something with which you can agree. However, if you really want to communicate, you must prove to that person that you are listening and that you perceive positive intent on his part.
3
Mr. Brooks:
How kind was the government shutdown? I hope everyone in the G.O.P. reads this. Do you attempt to deal with your fellow conservatives this way? If you do, it isn't working. I far as I can tell, for Republicans kindness is viewed as weakness. The only skill I see being touted here is how to sit on a fence.
I appreciate that you step back and attempt to elevate our national and personal discussions instead of jumping into the ring. There are enough combatants. I hope that some of them will hear your message.
1
Good manners. Having them is not considered so important anymore, but they help keep us civil with each other. They are the bridge between disrespect and respect. Bring them back!
257
@William Schmidt
Indeed those are basically good manners, which anybody belonging to the REAL "elites" (not the financial wealthiest) are supposed to have learned - elites in the sense of "aristos", the ancient Greek word for "the best" ("aristocracy" originally meaning government of the best).
15
@William Schmidt
I appreciate your desire to improve our world and I appreciate the essence of what you're suggesting. Towards that end, I would like to point out that the words good, civil, disrespect, and respect are all labels. (Stick with me here, please.) Labels are used by those who use them to define those on whom they are used. In this way, they can easily be competitive and divisive in nature, invoking protective instincts in those who are labeled. What I believe is needed at this critical time is for society to shift from unconscious competition - not incidentally exacerbated by Russian-style active measures campaigns - to conscious collaboration. I believe that understanding how to collaborate will bear the most fruit for us. That means empathy and honesty: skillful, intentional listening and understanding, and vulnerable speaking from one's own experience instead of from labels, criticisms, or judgments. I recommend Marshall Rosenberg's book "Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life" extremely highly as a way to learn to discern these patterns of communication and bring more peace and collaboration to any relationship.
2
@William Schmidt
I agree about the importance of good manners. David however as usual fails to see that discussions require a foundation of basic common humanity. In the us, there is no compromise possible about the unacceptability of white racism and white supremacy. This means there is no civility due the klan or the racism of the odious Charles Murray BECAUSE their very premise is incivility and the inferiority of other people. It is intolerable and unacceptable to ask the subject of such insult and injury to smile and accept that.
6
I had an experience on a political discussion thread a few days ago. A woman got very angry at something I said replying in several posts. After thinking about it, I finally answered that I heard her complaints and I was sorry that I had upset her. I was so surprised by her reaction - she accepted my apology and said she was also sorry for getting upset. It brought tears to my eyes - something so unusual in these contentious days.
280
@J.Sutton I am glad that worked out for you. Tho I hafta say, I find that when anyone tells me they are sorry that they "upset" me, I find that irritating and patronizing. I think it is because I grew up hearing that used by adults towards children or by men towards women. In the latter instance, I suspected that the men involved believed women's emotions to be childlike and therefore addressed them as such. Now please don't reply by saying sorry that your comment upset me LOL!
9
@Daven How can I resist? But suffice to say there's always a way to become offended if a person seeks it wholeheartedly.
2
People in power lecture about decorum and kindness. The goal of their shaming is to further control the message to keep their power. In a quest for equality, for a more level playing field, if things get out of hand, if people become "unkind", say by breaking municipal codes to protest, or displaying aggressive signs, or sitting in and refusing to leave, the powerful turn on the gaslight rage saying something like, "if you want to have a conversation with me you need to be kind." They try to control behavior to control the conversation. Letting the powerful control the dynamic with kindness rules is not how humanity evolves for the next generation to become more equal. Call it civil disobedience, call it protest, call it breaking rules, call it being unkind; at times, when needed, call it war, call it violence. People in power sell random generosity to keep power; what is needed is systemic equality. Until that equity is reached, be unkind if needed.
214
@PE
"It isn't nice to block the doorways,
It isn't nice to go to jail.
There are nicer ways to do it,
But the nice ways always fail.
It isn't nice, it isn't nice
You told us once, you told us twice
But if that is Freedom's price
We don't mind
It isn't nice to carry banners
Or to sit in on the floor
Or to shout our cry of Freedom
At the hotel and the store
It isn't nice, it isn't nice
You told us once, you told us twice
But if that is Freedom's price
We don't mind
How about those years of lynchings
And the shot in Evers' back?
Did you say it wasn't proper
Did you stand upon the track?
You were quiet just like mice
Now you say we aren't nice
And if that is Freedom's price
We don't mind."
---Malvina Reynolds
If the people remained nice little obedient and obsequious wage slaves and upholders of the oligarchy, there would never have been a Boston Tea Party or an America. With Brooks' faux niceness, there would never have been a successful civil rights movement or suffragette movement.
"The whole history of the progress of human liberty shows that all concessions yet made to her august claims have been born of earnest struggle. If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters." -- Frederick Douglass
63
Systemic equality has never existed, so this is a recipe for perpetual nastiness.
10
@Earthling
I don't think David was speaking of obedient, obsequious wage slave and upholders of the oligarchy. Absolutely, there are times when passion and huge, sustained, courageous action are necessary to move mountains of wrong such as racism or sexism. But that does not negate David's point that the human condition also requires kindness and respect for other human beings when we are attempting to solve problems.
59
Great column, sad responses that demonstrate so well how passionately people reject "the other" even when the topic is not politics but process!
3
Be clear about the true objective. There are often many paths to the same result.
Don't adopt a single solution position (I must have the wall). Focus on the end result (border security).
Try to help the other person win.
Restate the other person's position so that he knows you heard him and so he can correct any misperceptions you have.
Don't blame the other person for being unclear if you don't understand what he is saying. Say, "I'm not clear about X, could you say a little more?"
3
Kindness is a particular kind of skill. I can play chess, although I haven't played since I was young. Yet, however rusty, I still do possess the skill of playing chess.
Kindness is not a skill like that. Kindness is what Aristotle called an ethos -- a habitual, part of one's usual character.
In this category, there are two kinds of skills, both of which are habits of character rather than merely once-learned but no longer practiced skills like chess.
The two categories are virtues and vices. Vices are habits -- used skills, lived-in skills, characteristic skills -- that tend toward shameful or even criminal behavior and character.
Virtues are habits that tend toward excellence in bhavior and character.
Kindness is in that class. All the great habits are: generosity, empathy, courage, honesty, and so forth.
Sadly, we live in a time where people are confused on these things. We call vices virtues, and we view some virtues as only for naive suckers.
I think I'll just stick with Aristotle, and try to keep my wits about me, and be patient -- another virtue.
298
Kindness is never wasted even and especially when that’s not all that’s needed.
24
@pjc I love this comment.
2
Well, David, I liked it. You are right that communication begins with being open to the other. Group-size observation accords with mine. Going to try the "how did you get your name?" Thanks.
1
If you overpower them all, and steal all their wallets, they won't be friendly no matter how you group the chairs.
289
Mr. Brooks, thanks for the laugh. I would like to add LISTEN to your advice.
1
Good grief mr. Brooks. Who is your audience? Who was on your shoulder when writing these self help tips? The unkind are not typically motivated to be kind and the unkind typically view themselves as being kind. This is not rocket science observations. If you wish to be relevant, address this level of denial and refusal when it comes to changing behavior.
1
manners
Great way to start my morning.
Could all 3 branches of our government please be required to read this by noon today? Pretty please.
Yes, "Agree on something." And the best one I use for even the most toxic get-together forum is my ROAD-RAGE THERMODYNAMIC -- outlining how we're all BOTH saints AND devils on the highway.
For example: We're no doubt quick to curse that speeding car which has the audacity to pass us -- at speeds one-and-a-half times greater than ours -- and passionately PRAY for a cop to somehow come outta nowhere to haul him in. Yet, if the same speeding car is seen on the opposite side of the median -- now wreaking havoc among oncoming traffic -- we're suddenly his best friend. Eager to blink our headlights at him in impish cahoots now that we've seen the damnably hidden cop for whom we had just been praying to miraculously appear on OUR side of the highway instead. Beautifully demonstrating an equitable give-and-take on a free will whence our journey never knows whether it's coming from Eden OR going to hell.
That last line wasn't kind.
Perhaps the writer should reread the second to last paragraph and see if it applies to himself.
Perhaps your column is not about kindness, but about communication. It seems the commentariat has no appreciation for your hardwork. I found your words enlightening.
Not quite sure how "Presume the good" applies to the current President when everyone knows he is solely responsible for pieces like yours being written.
why do saddos in these laughable "op eds" (i.e. just another time-wasting blog) have to try and analyse something that is natural, ergo "human nature"?
Best to avoid people whenever possible.
2
I read your column because I aspire to be a kind person and wanted to learn something. If you find this “sad,” why did you write the piece? Surely kindness can be learned from anyone who practices it - even newspaper columnists.
Mr. Brooks forgot the first rule of reconciliation and bridge building. He needs to begin every column for the rest of his career by apologizing to NYT readers for giving so-called conservatives (definitionally anarchists) and republicans (definitionally fascists) social and political cover. I'll talk nice to people who support the institutional kidnapping of poor children, denying health care to the sick, withholding food from the hungry, and in every way promoting racism and hate when hell freezes over. Let these creatures of the dark arts find their way to the light. I'll not meet them half way.
5
Yes, I read to the end. Mr. Brooks, you are my favorite NYT newspaper columnist. No, I don't think you are a sycophant desperately trying to make people who hate you like you. I think people who make comments like that have a limited imagination. Peace.
2
Re: the final lines
The mockery of your readers is unkind.
Sad, indeed.
1
Kindness is nice. Kindness did not lead to the defeat of the Nazis. The abolition of slavery. Or abolition of communism in eastern Europe. Kindness will not lead to the end of Trumpism or the rising tide of fascism in South America, Europe, and Asia.
2
Sounds a bit manipulative.
1
In this household, we are David Brooks fans. We like to read his stuff, and listen to him and Mark Shields on Friday nights. Could someone explain that last paragraph? Did he just insult us for reading the whole column?
We're facing categorical evil in the Southern border and you're pushing the thinnest of veneers. For shame!
1
Your comment at the end was rather incongruent with the message of your column. There's no place for sarcasm in kindness.
Ah, and I had thought David had become a Buddhist. These practical tips are fine, but a bit superficial. Kindness is a skill. Buddhism teaches us a path to cultivating it in ourselves, and we don't need to actually be a Buddhist to use these practices. Let's start with ourselves. I am still working on it, personally. I know, the generic cliche is coming: mindfulness. Try the Tibetan Tonglen meditation specifically - google it. It is a specific meditation that cultivates compassion and kindness. Now go on all you Boddhisatvas! I think I saw David under the bodhi tree the other day, actually.
2
I am one of the 65% of Americans who want a divorce from Trump. The rest of them can continue to play musical chairs with Trump if that is what they want to do.
5
Mr B assumes the invitees to his get together have "good intentions" although opinions are held strongly. That is not
true in this Congress The Reps do not believe deeply in the
positions they are espousing. They lie to themselves in order
to support Trumps devious and ignorant positions. Why? to maintain the allegiance of the Trump Koolaid drinkers back home. How often do you see Pence and other hypocritical Rep leaders looking at their shoes as Trump goes off o one of his indecipherable harangues . Hence the "meetig" Brooks describes is just stage craft.
i
1
If ever finding myself in the "meeting" Brooks imagines, I would walk out, go to the nearby place that makes the best martini, and drink until the memory of the meeting faded.
Even if it was a breakfast meeting.
2
For God’s sake people this is not the forum for anti-Trump and/or anti-Republic sentiment. Express these arguments elsewhere ! I’d like to read responses to this piece that is focused on the behavior of INDIVIDUALS with regard to kindness !
3
@HBomb
For God's sake, H-Buddy, this is a column about politics and society in a national newspaper. If I wanted to read amusing little tidbits on the behavior of individuals I would be reading Psychology Today or People Magazine.
Conservative Republican response to the ideas in this column: "This is great party! Great food, good drink, nice venue, but I shouldn't have to pay for it."
2
These ares not new tips and tricks. I first learned most of them many years ago during my MBA. They are useful little pointers that can be helpful on the job or in your personal life, but they do not take the place of working hard and getting the job done well.
And on a national level, they are not a substitute for good public policy.
So these tips are not new, Mr. Brooks, but if they were a revelation to you, bravo for opening your mind to a new idea. In the same spirit, there is something else that could be valuable for you to learn about. You see, the Russians interfered in the last American election, and many people in the winning campaign actively worked with the Russians. Possibly even the President himself worked with the Russians. We don’t know yet. It’s being investigated. Many people worry that if a President was corrupt enough to work with our national enemy to get elected, he could be corrupt enough to twist the US justice system to try to hide his crimes
Now that you are aware of this, you might want to include it in one of your columns in the future. Keep opening your mind to new truths, Mr. Brooks. Maybe you'll admit how corrupt many - not all, but many - elements of the party you support has become, and maybe you'll start writing about real solutions instead of pure fantasyland avoidance pieces which are honestly simply insults to the intelligence of your readers.
3
David, like you, I've also been searching for practical tips on how we can be less beastly to one another, and I'd like to suggest that they start with outlets such as your own newspaper. You may not be aware, but readers are now seeing columns from your colleagues with the following titles: "Consider Firing Your Male Broker" -- a direct insult to males; "There Is Nothing Wrong with Open Borders" -- a direct insult to US citizens; and various flavors of "Trump is awful, horrendous, vile, evil, and pernicious" and "white men are horrendous and awful." My point is, lately, it's not Trump who's been causing strife and tension, it's the liberal media. The liberal media has gone nuts. The left has jumped into outright anarchy. At the moment, this is where the incivility is coming from as the main source. Are you aware of this?
Once the "marriage therapy" metaphor was out of the bag in the second line, I couldn't help but read this as a cri de coeur from someone who has done time on the therapist's couch. It also weirdly made me feel that counseling advice on political topics from this columnist was a bit too personal.
Maybe you need a different hook, or a different preoccupation?
"Your narrative will never win. In many intractable conflicts, like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, each side wants the other to adopt its narrative and admit it was wrong the whole time. This will never happen. Get over it. Find a new narrative."
Heard George Mitchell on PBS, last week. Until 20 years ago, people in Northern Ireland would not have believed peace was possible. It was hard work, but it did happen. Fighting stopped, terrorism stopped, peace returned, people began to view each other as humans, not tribally identified...
In as much as Jewish ascertain and insist on their rigid identity as Jews, and the Palestinians insist on their right to the land formerly shared by both ethnic groups (Semites), they will remain in a deadlock. Generations of Palestinian refugees who now live in Lebanon or Jordan, have never stepped into Palestine, yet they dream of a homeland, just because their parents remind them of such a place, a piece on earth.
1
I sense so my "my way or the highway" attitude in the responses here.
You can't be responsible for anyone else's behavior but you can be--and are--responsible for your own. Treat others with a measure of respect, don't assume they're moronic because they understand the world in a way different from you, and _in an environment where engagement is possible or appropriate_ don't assume you will hate whatever the other(s) say before you've listened.
Yes, this is Dale Carnegie, and Napoleon Hill, and Emily Post: be courteous. Ask and try to understand before judging, then ask again. It's not all about you. It never has been all about you. It never will be all about you. And even when you think it's all about you ... it isn't.
2
David, you're an American treasure. I've already got your upcoming book on my wish list.
If you ran for president, politics would be fun again.
I'm always disappointed when you can't show up for News Hour on Friday.
It's always funny to read people self-righteously eviscerating a column on learning how to be kind. The irony just drips.
If we're only kind to people who are first kind to us, the world will never become more kind. And really aren't we part of the problem, then?
In Matthew, Jesus says that church members should forgive others “seventy times seven times” (18:22), a number that symbolizes boundlessness. If you want to change the world, you must continue to speak to those who do you ill, and show them kindness.
It's a two party system. The GOP will not be destroyed unless it is replaced by another party which will, by definition, be opposed to the Democratic party. The country will only get better when the GOP gets better. So we must continue to talk to our enemies, to show them kindness. How many times? Matthew said 70 x 7.
1
Thank you. We need more remedial commentary like this. Another piece of marital advice: if you have to choose between being right and being kind, always choose kind. And, as always: happy wife, happy life.
1
Dear David, in the 90's when I was for six years a journalist in Israel for the magazine Tikkun, I spent much of the time going to dialogue groups in Palestinian towns and villlages: Beit Sahur and Nablus regularly. We had one rule that was really two: Be Kind and Tell your Truth fully. The elders in the group meaning we over 40 had our separate meetings which composed some of the best days and nights in my life. Truly.
At one point we decided to keep the group only for lawyers as this was the Oslo period and Rabin was still alive. We met in a nice house in Nablus and there were I guestimate 50 Israelis and 50 Palestinians. I knew all the Palestinian elders and by now in my fourth year of Dialogue groups I had zero fear. But though we tried to model this for a new group we realized that these Israelis who worked in Israel for Palestinians, were in terror. An the Palestinian lawyers were in fury. Those of us who knew, knew that the thaw would come and it did. An elder Palestinian man, maybe in his nineties, was angered by the Palestinians. He told a story about his deep friendship with a Jewish lawyer long ago and that along with an Israeli man who sensed just when things were simmering how to summarize ad respect everyone. By the end of that day, which I shall never forget: Everyone was hugging and begging us to stay and there was laughter and tears. Such meetings are now deemed illegal by Israel. But as an American I still visit my dear friends who are muslims. Wendy O
1
I'm saving this. Thanks!
Re tribal identity:
“He drew a circle that shut me out-
Heretic, rebel, a thing to flout.
But love and I had the wit to win:
We drew a circle and took him In!”
― Edwin Markham
1
When I reached “tribal identity”, I thought Brooks was hitting a full bases-loaded run ( such a term ? exists?). At least, one score can be earned if going well. The crucial core was in fact an easy passage in this column, however. I’m disappointed, but it’s okay. By rejecting “Either/Or”, the columnist also suggests there be no place for existential questions in problem solving meetings. Well said. I like most the title. Es is the intimate form to be for the second person singular. Look the capitalized-three. Missing “es” missed a kiss.
The Dalai Lama said it best: "My religion is very simple. My religion is kindness. "
3
Kindness results from many lessons taught and exhibited by kind people and learned and observed by impressionable children.
Kindness is a skill that the Republicans have abandoned.
1
Isn't it funny after years of being the top dogs bullying the country to do their will, we now have a whole series of columns from conservatives instructing everyone to, "Be polite."
1
"When they go low, we go high."
Good advice for one's personal life. Not so good for taking the country back from a crime syndicate.
3
David is afraid his Republican party is losing relevance. He’s right.
2
I “presumed the good” until I got to the last paragraph, Mr. Brooks,... and then to your last word.
I finish reading what I start, and thank you for the attempt at another thoughtful or perhaps reflective or maybe poking-fun-at column — this isn’t three in a row now I have had issues with and the second in a row I have commented on.
But with this one I am not sure what you’re trying to accomplish.
So let us agree that, in looking particularly also at what other have had to comment, your message wasn’t clear?
I’m sure you won’t sulk or withdraw, though.
3
I first learned most of these bromides many years ago during my MBA, and received refreshers over the years. They are useful little pointers that can be helpful on the job or in your personal life.
But they do not take the place of working hard and getting the job done well. And on a national level, they are not a substitute for good public policy and honest communication.
So this column was not really new information to me, Mr. Brooks, but if these pointers were a revelation to you, bravo for opening your mind to a new idea! In the same spirit, there is something else that could be valuable for you to learn about. You see, the Russians interfered in the last American election, and many people in the winning campaign actively worked with the Russians. Possibly even the President himself worked with the Russians. We don’t know yet. It’s being investigated. Many people worry that if a President was corrupt enough to work with our national enemy to get elected, he could be corrupt enough to twist the US justice system to try to hide his crimes
Now that you are aware of this, you might want to include it in one of your columns in the future. Keep opening your mind to new truths, Mr. Brooks. Maybe you'll admit how corrupt many - not all, but many - elements of the party you support has become, and maybe you'll start writing about real solutions instead of pure fantasyland avoidance pieces which are honestly simply insults to the intelligence of your readers.
A few more suggestions:
Never, never, never hire a narcissistic adolescent as your leader.
Never ask the question "I bet that makes you angry?"
Never hold a meeting to get "input" from other people when you have no interest in their opinions just to make it look like you do.
And lastly, absolutely, THE most important thing. Never, never, ever forget the food and drinks.
Mr Brooks, you COULD be using your pulpit to call out where evil originates in this country. There are plenty of my friends whose roots are Republican who wax eloquent about the sorry state of "politics" in Washington. They don't place the blame where it surely lies and neither do you. Time to be honest and get rid of the fluff for them and you.
Which of these have been tried and found to work? None. I understand why you said that reading to the end is sad. BTW: The chair unscrambling thing happens twice a day every work day on the freeways of America. I scanned through most of the rest. Sad.
If only Republicans had not made it policy to hate their opponents decades ago!
1
You just showed a journalistic piece of advice in the section of 'emotional intelligence'. Not bad, however incomplete. It's the intention that counts.
Brooks is grasping at straws. It seems he is attempting to assuage some inner conflict he is suffering by delving into MBA management techniques. It is quite pathetic.
1
First, get your opponent calm, through kindness. Next, make sure Republicans and Trump are elected again, while all these kind people on the left pet each other. Nice try Brooks.
What? This column seems mean. Yes, I read to the end of the column. The last sentence seemed to be mocking me as did the word “sad”. I did not know it was going to be a “column on emotional advice written by a newspaper columnist”. It is like Brooks is mocking the reader for wanting to read a column on kindness.
And I do not find his list to be helpful. In personal arguments, I find the phrase “you may be right” to be helpful at times. With Trump , I think Speaker Pelosi has it just right-respectful of his position and firm in her decency.
1
I promise to be kind and say kind things to Trump voters when they vote for impeachment and imprison all the crooks and traitors in their midst.
I promise to be kind and say kind things to Republican senators and congressmen when they grow a spine.
1
You sir deserve an award for the first columnist to troll me in the NYT. That last parograph was a total triger! I will read the books you suggest in the beginning. The article is very insightful and it reminds me of works like "Getting to Yes" by William Ury and his subsecuent follow up books, as well as "Difficult Conversations" by Bruce Patton, Et al. I will look at the ones you suggest.
David Brooks, I agree with what you said in one of your examples. You are a piece of work! I love your writing. Keep it up. - Not Sad. :)
I was disappointed when reading the sarcasm at the end.
4
@Joanne
This was my point. That David gives pithy advice and also remains unchanged by that advice. Sad indeed.
1
So now we've learned what the train customer service agents in call centers to do. Acknowledge each other and listen. Great. But none of that deals with the reality of the issues you are discussing. You are discussing them for a reason. They are important.
To simply acknowledge that both sides exist and are good people is a starting point, but it's just the first baby step toward having an intelligent productive discussion of reality and how to deal with it.
1
Today's work place - at least mine - stripped down to the bare minimum of people and devoid of the range of resources that used to make the well-oiled machinery of business run (from great admins to top notch managers) is a fraught place. The stakes are high and there are organic insufficiencies that make it very difficult for everyone to row the same direction, be collegial and achieve the desired goals. Minimal resources are provided yet someone above you wants the deliverables and outcomes that used to be manageable. There is lots of tension and blame all around. Reminds me of society writ large. It is impossible to conjure up collaboration and cooperation from individuals whose nerves are frayed, just trying to survive - if not financially, existentially. The US - both its government and its businesses - need something so much more than tips on productive meetings. Adjustment of priorities; ways to bring skilled individuals back to the workplace; more reasonable regulations that allow business to function. Where's the thought leaders who can synthesize the best instincts from the right and left to help create a strong, sustainable livable culture? People need to work, work needs people. Families can only form and thrive where people are happy. But none of it works if we are psychically a mess. And we all know how many and complex the causes.
3
Tell it to those government workers. Their lives will never be the same.
Many of them chose government work because the public sector ostensibly offered stability and benefits which were more important than uncertainty and higher wages of the private sector. Anxiety is not part of the equation, and every year they will fear a government shutdown and another blow to their livelihood, credit , savings and a host of other concerns unfamiliar to Wilber Ross , Steve Mnuchin , Mitch McConnnel and Donald Trump.
Couples will bicker because one wants to save for the next shutdown whereas the other wants to take a vacation.
Couples and single parents will shortchange the education of their kids because the nest shutdown may be around the corner.
Brooks can serve another platter of bromides and aphorisms but his party, his movement and his president insinuated itself into the lives and dreams of many American families which will suffer for it.
1
So much of Mr. Brooks' piece is about the now common phrase - "civil society". Other than Mr.Trump's egotistical and uninformed comments (I plan to vote for him again), nothing damages civil society more that the tens of spam phone calls most Americans receive each week. The phone (cell or otherwise) conversation was a place where good manners were important (answer quickly, be polite, speak clearly, etc). Today, the unwanted phone calls are an intrusion into our space and civil interaction with others. They simply prevent civil discourse and respect for others.
Thanks David. Despite what some commentors seem to think here, I believe that items are very useful and can actually be applied in other ways. Yes, some of the ideas are old cliches that we have heard repeatedly, but the main reason they are repeated is because they are effective. I have been to too many gatherings lately where the discussion somehow or other ends up drifting to Trump. The civility level immediately starts dropping. Usually slowly at first then quickly to the gutter level. Nobody starts their response to a Trump Wall supporter by saying " I understand the fact that you feel your livelihood and your culture are under threat, but could you please be more specific on why you feel that way and let's see exactly how a Wall would affect each of those specifics." Or something similar.
When the President of the United States engages in juvenile name-calling, ridicule, uncivil and uncouth comments and behavior, he legitimizes that behavior and is a primary cause of the divisiveness and coarsening of the American dialogue. We badly need a return to civility.
3
Right on, Mr. Brooks. Unfortunately you had to couch it in terms that appealed to the corporate way of thinking. Woe be it if you mentioned any psychological perspective. To me the problem is that nobody listens because they are so busy defending their own point of view. Needy egos need to be right and listening to differing views might prove them wrong. Until we are able to open up dialog to hear each other, we will never be able to see new ways of thinking and come up with better solutions. Something needs to change or we are going down the path of all tribal civilizations that fail.
1
The problem with "tribalism" arguments is that they ignore the power dynamic. Sure, everyone's got their group. But there's a whole lot of power difference and historical baggage that make white tribalism very different from black tribalism.
And there's a difference between women's rights advocates and men's rights advocates. The former is trying to remove barriers and stereotypes, while the latter is seeking to reimpose them. Treating them as symmetrical ignores what's fundamentally going on.
3
Kindness grows and is made manifest from a number of character traits, perhaps most importantly; empathy. While the shutdown was going on, but one after another of the people in Trump's administration, in the callous statements that they made, showed they lack empathy. I don't think it was political theater, so much as it is complete contempt for people in need in general. Then there is our President. Gah. The only metric he uses to determine a person's worth besides their blind loyalty to him is the wealth they have amassed. Is it any wonder that our President deeply abhors most of our citizenry (including his supporters), is lacking empathy? The only act of kindness during his term involved pardoning the Thanksgiving Day turkeys.
1
I like this. So many people are so entrenched in their story right now, both politically and personally, many of them don't even know it. We are all looking for a sign of kindness and understanding. But we also have to be the one to reach out our own hands. It seems there was a time when the government people were examples of how to be a better human. And it's pretty discouraging when they're not....and they're not currently. Maybe we should send them all off to a wilderness program and let them battle rattlesnakes, sunburn, hunger, bugs, cold, rain, and snow. Reminders about where we have come from and where we don't want to go back to...or do we?
1
I especially like the idea of scrambling the chairs. The most important message I got in this editorial is the fact that I can only control my little corner of the world. Mr. Brooks shows a way that individually we can deal better with our little corner of the world. My husband and one child are staunchly conservative while I am equally staunchly liberal. How to coexist in this climate is a life-saver in my book.
1
Being around people on a more personal level, who tell me by their garb or bumper stickers that we have basic, fundamentally different views of the world, allows me to move away physically from such people. When one is dealing in facts, derived by reading reputable publications, as opposed to viewing media that puts out lies and disinformation, there is really no starting point for meaningful discourse. Living in a highly respected university town, I am fortunate enough to be in the company of smart, thinking people everyday. Brooks’ pseudo therapeutic essay is better suited for mending familial or marital relationships.
@Sharon Salzberg, what happens when you can't move away? How do you deal with that reality?
And unselfish love is an intention, an exercise of the will. Seriously.
1
All good thoughts, Mr. Brooks. Par for the course. I would add two, the first of which I read in The Times: argue as though you are correct (i.e. be prepared with facts, and be thoughtful and respectful with your points); listen as though you are wrong (i.e. be open to all possibilities).
The second is to learn what it takes to build, maintain and destroy trust. Toward that end, study the research of Drs. John and Julie Gottman of the University of Wisconsin. Their focus is on companionship, but their research applies broadly to all manner of trust relationships. Presuming good, as you suggest, requires us to recognize trustworthiness and to grow and nurture it among well-meaning people who may nonetheless disagree, even strongly at times.
2
The current president, his approach and all he stands for is a point by point refutation of this advice. I have watched and read David enough to know that he realizes this. This is all good advice, and it is being actively and powerfully opposed as we speak.
This will only be helpful advice when the unfettered malevolence of the president that controls our life is somehow curtailed. I for one hope for his continued good health so that he has the time to unequivocally discredit himself.
Failing that there is no antidote for hatred supported by lies, We all know by now that it is the stronger force.
If the scales fall from the eyes of some of his followers, maybe we can work at communicating.
Since we retain the potential for both, I would focus on what motivates both the kind and unkind. I might even begin by asking, 'are the kind truly all that kind', well are you?
1
David, I read through this looking for kindness and what I found was more the type of conversational strategies usually employed by corporate types and hostage negotiators.
In other words, where are the words "respect, generosity, and empathy"?
Yes, I know you're trying to teach kindness in the realm of politics and hard-held social and economic ideas that people have spent a lifetime forming, but if kindness is your goal, you need to describe what that is.
Kindness is putting yourself in another's shoes, both intellectually and emotionally. Which requires good listening. T
Today's culture is all about gaining an edge, winning at all costs, and demonizing your opponent.
Kind people don't do that: they don't make assumptions and they don't seek blame. They are driven more by the Prayer of Saint Francis than dog eat dog.
You have to admit, that's harder than scrambling the chairs or asking the group what their challenges are. I say, get your own spiritual house in order (and I don't mean religion) and kindness will follow.
13
Blind ignorance is a skill too. You have to work very hard to ignore facts and contrary opinions. Yet Republicans have been extremely adept at teaching their constituents to ignore everything outside of what the party line is, even if it's scientifically proven fact. Refer to Trump's call to "ignore everything you read and see" for proof, or his recent statement that severe winter weather is proof that global warming does not exist, when if fact it's a predicted sign of global warming.
But you have to give Conservatives a A plus on teaching blind ignorance to their followers, they've done an incredible job at it.
Republicans have also done an amazing job at teaching their minions to hate the anyone outside their party, even more than our adversaries, such as Russia. "Lock her up" is a great example. Violate the constitutional process because you despise someone so much. Hate the coastal elites even though most of the Republican administration is from elite universities and citizens on the coasts pay taxes that support handouts to Red states. A great combination of willful ignorance and spite.
So while kindness is a skill, and most would agree a positive one, Conservatives have no use for trying to build it.
452
@TheUglyTruth
Change Republicans to Fox news and your post might make sense. Republicanism is not Fox news. At least it didn't used to be.
7
@William when one considers that Fox News routinely pulls the levers that drive our President's attitudes and behaviors while the masses of Republicans simple watch....it's fair to say they are all one monolithic entity. When the so-called Republican Party elites have the courage to try to stand up to Trump the way they did in the early part of the campaign before he became a frontrunner - they will no longer be one and the same.
25
@TheUglyTruth
As Mr. Brooks said - "You rigidify tribal identity every time you make a request that contains a hint of blame."
Surely you have in your jar a brush with a finer point with which to paint?
4
Wealth inequality is not kind.
Lack of universal healthcare is not kind.
Refusing to fund proper safety nets, like food for poor children is not kind.
Calling refugees fleeing violence 'criminals' is not kind.
Separating kids from their parents and putting them in cages is not kind.
Taking away women's sovereignty over their own bodies is not kind.
The GOP is not kind.
1159
@Anne
This piece is focused on what the
individual can do to enhance her ability to practice kindness. it does not concern itself with kindness on the level of public policy
17
@HBomb,
This is column about politics and society in the American national newspaper of record. Not considering the issues Anne raises would be an act of profound un-kindness. Still, many people do ignore these issues every day.
40
@HBomb: I understand that. And I believe I am a very kind person in my day-to-day life. But Brooks often focuses on policy and defends conservative viewpoints which gave us the current administration. I feel he's lecturing people about their interpersonal lives while failing to call his own party out for their utter lack of kindness at the policy level.
75
As long as I don't have to stretch kindness to include the tRump's I am OK with it. One projects kindness to tRump and it enables him and his minions to be exceptionally UNKIND to anyone in their path and even more not in his path. Just look at the children, separated from their families, small kids with no rights, no country, no parents all at the behest of tRump. Is this the "kindness" Brooks speaks of? Or is the kindness just for those for whom he would "scramble chairs"? Time for some of the sanctimonious people who call them selves conservatives to wake up and learn kindness and extend it to everyone. I just find this hypocritical. If Mr Brooks were to really stand up and pound a podium, call some folks out and try to make a difference I would find it much more believable that he really cares about kindness.
1
David, you cannot dialogue with an ideologue. Before people become excellent marriage therapists they need years of training and years of practice. You have neither. You are suggesting simplistic games to solve extremely entrenched differences.
I get that you’re trying to help and give us all hope. And people certainly need hope these days. So you come from a good place. However, your Party has morphed into something ugly, mean and often evil. Maybe if you could admit that, we’d be more open to thinking about practicing, in small ways, some of the ideas you’ve read up on.
The changes you seek are going to be a LONG time coming. Deep change is something both sides have to want. Some major players have to retire, be booted out, or die off. And, that IS sad.
2
Be careful what you put in your body...it makes a difference.
I’ve begged my brother-in-law to turn off the cable. Something gets into his eyes and ears that makes him crazy!
5
"If somebody doesn’t understand you, not communicating with her won’t help her understand you better." This isn't always true nor always good advice. Sometimes it is better to let toxic relationships go. Putting pressure on someone to try and try and try again when dealing with narcissists or sociopaths, etc is ridiculous
3
Amateurish article
Tribalism isn’t necessarily bad or inferior. It dependents on what qualities and quality the tribe possesses. What is making America great again is a vigorous battle of ideas and political identity. It is suicidal politically and psychologically to attack, destroy, and dilute our historical identity and majestic Constitution-based Republic ---warts, mistakes, pain, and triumphs, all. Americans learn and grow from our history, we don't tear it down!
1
As I read this sad list of self-help tips for kindness, I reflected upon the fact that our country came out of a destructive government shutdown in which the President couldn't bother to be kind, that our democracy is in danger because the President's party is a bunch of sycophants who are also not kind. And kindness won't solve the many crises this country is facing or could be facing. Resolve, persistence, honor, integrity, and compassion for the least among us will change things. Save kindness for interpersonal relationships.
115
@MKathryn
I agree that the President and his sycophants are unkind, but we shouldn't give up on kindness because of that. Better that we continue to be kind in ways great and small, quietly and often unnoticed. In addition to being essential for interpersonal relationships, kindness is foundational for honor, integrity, compassion and any the the other qualities you mentioned.
4
Kindness Is a Skill
repubs decry judging and shaming of others who dare suggest they lack desire for self-improvement.
Please, please, no icebreakers. No untangle-the-chairs or tell-about-how-you-got-your-name activities. Those are demeaning and insulting; I would feel much more "included" in a large lecture hall, where I spoke to no one but listened to a reading, lecture, concert, or other performance or presentation. But civil discussions are possible too. It is possible for adults to come together, as adults, around a topic or occasion, especially if the topic is substantial and the speakers and moderators set a standard of thoughtfulness and courtesy. No silly warmups, no mini-confessions, are needed. Just a willingness to deliberate with others.
1
If the world was ruled by kindness and compassion we would all be so much better off. So there is no quibble with any of these suggestions. But it is a big book, the role of power is not addressed here. Martin Luther King said “Power without love is reckless and abusive. Love without power is sentimental and anemic.”
Adam Kahane in his book “How to Solve Tough Problems” describes the process of many groupings that came together shortly after Nelson Mandela was released from prison and everyone knew that a new social compact had to be drawn. A reconciliation scenario was developed that lead the way in South Africa with the amazing leadership of Nelson Mandela. Kahane then went on to work with many other international situations. There were many deep heartfelt meetings between people who had been enemies. Often the tough problems seem to be solved.
Several years later when he revisited many of these facilitated meetings the high promises had not been fulfilled. He wrote a second book titled “ Power and Love: A Theory and Practice of Social Change”. The failure of many of these meetings that had instituted the principles that Brooks outlined was due to after everyone left with good feelings there had been no change in the power equation.
Brooks only addresses the kindness part of the equation but until there is an equitable distribution of power kindness at best only becomes noblesse oblige and that is not the basis of the better world we need.
3
Wilbur Ross and Lara Trump love this and so do most 0.01% who feel misunderstood while 800K federal workers and about 1 million federal contractors just worry about the next shutdown.
It’s the job of all Republican columnists to lull or frighten beneficiaries of the New Deal and the War on Poverty and the ACA into relinquish their rights as citizens. How? “Government is not the solution, government is the problem.” Demonizing unions, democracy in the workplace, bankrupting Medicare by passing the Prescription Drug plan without funding it, the war on drugs, and the war on terror, the war on women come to mind. Then there’s corrupting the Supreme Court so much that Money is equal to speech, corporations have religious rights, and deleting “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” from the Second Amendment.
Read “From Dictatorship to Democracy” by Gene Sharp. It’s democracy’s answer to the Prince. There is no reason to talk to or compromise with autocrats/aristocrats, or plutocrats. Don’t be kind. Resist.
It’s not funny. Not at all. Look at what happens to those who play nice with the rich kids like the Kurds in Syria or the Afghans about to be voided by the Taliban. Look at Maduro. He’s election is dubious. Trump’s is legitimate right. He lost by 3 million votes (Obama won by 5 million but Republicans cut his Presidency short by a year) and he won by 77K in 3 states with the help of cyber attacks by Putin. Kindness to vipers? No thank you.
1
Kind = Reason
Both skills that can and should be taught.
Thank you, Mr. Brooks.
3
There's a name for the culture of savagery: it's called capitalism. It makes people have to come into work sick out of fear of getting laid off, live in fear of speaking against injustice or rocking the boat because people are disposable, employers who can decide to cut you for greater profits. Stop decontextualizing morality from the brutal order that you have supported.
1
To truly fight savagery:
Feed the hungry, house the homeless, free the innocent, clothe the naked, punish the cruel.
5
POLITENESS is a skill that can be learned. KINDNESS is innate and you either have it within you or you don't.
1
@ManhattanWilliam We were all born kind, I believe. But the kindness gets covered up and layered over by environmental events of harm in various forms. To truly understand others, we have to understand their history which informs their current situation. Unfortunately, no one can strip off the layers of damage but the person themself. So there are a lot of damaged people out there, jacked up on their own self of injustice, a story that they have carried for a long time often, with no understanding--or no care to understand--that life can be better, kinder, happier, peaceful. It takes guts to tear down that story. But you also have to know that it exists first.
Be real: Sometimes there is no hope for the relationship (work, personal, whatever, it's all the same). You have to accept it and move on or else commit to a life of abuse. Hanging on to hope where there is none is "sad" not to mention detrimental to your mental health.
1
Thank you David for this lesson plan for communicating with empathy.
2
Not sad, but hopeful, if people read to the end!
2
Unfortunately, we live in an age where kindness and compromise are viewed as being weak or wimpy.
As you said Mr. Brooks, sad.
2
It is too late for peaceful reconciliation in this country anytime soon. Conservative media has pushed their remorseless bile-slander a mile deep across this nation and its airwaves.
Even if Conservative media stopped now, the back-pressure of that hate would take a generation to drain.
Oy vey! Sorry to be UNKIND but, an old Madisonian, you might recognize that the whole constitutional order is threatened. So, you bail and want people, you know, like the 800,000 federal employees only now returning to work to learn the origins of the names of the GOP senators who put many of the employees' families at risk? These office holders, many of whom identify themselves as good Christians, betrayed their public trust and, therefore, kindness just does not come into it.
Not really about kindness. David is talking about how to implement the adage of “two heads are better than one”. The answer is avoiding knocking heads.
1
Referring to David's article of a few days ago on loyalty, I suggest combining the two thoughts. Be loyal to kindness.
Marcus Aurelius: "Kindness is irresistible."
1
Who knew you were a funny guy, David?
I thought about the time I attended a workshop where we threw a ball of yarn at each other, looped it around our finger, then threw it on to show how interconnected we are.
This column made me laugh and laugh. It was a great way to start the day.
Mr. Brooks,
You state
"Reject either/or. The human mind has a tendency to reduce problems to either we do this or we do that. This is narrowcasting. There are usually many more options neither side has imagined yet."
Hogwash. After a few thousand years of human development and in particular the 20th Century, we know all the options to almost all things.
The problem is that we have people who do not share a cohesive view of those things which are not definable, like when life begins or how much money is enough.
Given that there are at least two, and an argument can be made for several more, world views or paradigms there cannot be resolution.
You are just wrong.
There can be accommodation with the attitude that we will agree to disagree or the old American virtue of minding ones own business but that ONLY worked as long as America was vast and not densely populated. It will not work any more.
****
On a side note. I hate attacking the speaker as opposed to the speech, but I think others are more qualified to give advise on marriage, even national marriage therapy, go back to covering politics.
Most of the time, I think your ideas a mushy, semi-contrived and artificially tilted to the right and the religious. Today's article is clear, concise, logical, heart felt and the perfect remedy for much of what is wrong in the age of the 0.01% rule. If the 99.99% can agree to act as you describe, we can defeat the the strangle hold of the 0.01%. Otherwise, the sage words of Dick Cheney will likely apply.
The best advice is simply to speak to another human being face to face if you disagree with them. It's not the chairs or the number of people or the setting. The bully today is nearly anyone with a modern hating machine otherwise known as social media.
62
This was not about kindness. This was about how to run a meeting. Kindness is a generous stance of the heart. It’s not an MBA course on efficient meetings.
4
A lovely column Mr. Brooks. As a woman of a certain age, I can tell you that I have begun many difficult conversations with a self-deprecating comment (such as "I know I'm a piece of work") with mixed results--some people think I need reassurance; others see it as an admission of weakness. Luckily all that matters to me is kindness...
1
No Mr Brooks you went into journalism to promote Republican orthodoxy at venues like the WSJ oped page and the National Review.
3
I love this article. The advice to heed in a situation of deadlock is to find a new narrative. What better? It also reminds me to exercise respect especially with deeply held emotional--even religious beliefs. It shocked me to think that is what is being thrown in our faces daily. We need new techniques. Logic is useless against some ideas. Thanks.
4
Ha, thanks for the laugh at the end, Mr. Brooks!
Jonathon Haidt's work on conservative versus liberal values and their utility is helpful for constructive dialogue. E.g. "The Righteous Mind". In theory, I can understand the usefulness of conservative values, but applying that to current political divides is hard. The main thing I come away with is the sense that we need conservatives to be much better versions of themselves.
1
Kindness is not a skill; it is a benevolent connection. The suggestions in this column are ways to, perhaps, allow kindness to happen.
4
In that meeting remember that the gift granted to the living is the ability to recognize and cultivate the good amid the chaos of everyday events.
Remember that Murhpy's law applies to Murphy's law. Thus we have Dooley's corollary: Things can't go wrong all the time.
Be alert for those positive flickers.
2
If/when you believe the other person's position is immoral, how can you compromise. The only thing it takes for evil to triumph over good is for people of good will to do nothing.
We need a discussion around American values. If we can agree on what we value, it is OK to disagree about how we achieve those values.
Are we a nation of competitive individuals each with the right to destroy others in our quest for our own personal happiness; or, do we live in a union where treat everyone equally and provide equal opportunities and equal protections?
Are we e pluribus unum; or, are we a nation that believes in every man woman and child for themselves?
18
Yeah, I did, but I skimmed a lot of it after the chairs gimmick.
5
Some worthy bits of advice. But there are cases where recognizing the harm and suffering caused by a "tribe" is essential. Think of the reparation efforts in South Africa. Think of the civil rights struggle in our own country: it wasn't a matter of finding what was nice about the opponent, or artificially concentrating on some non-essential point that could be agreed upon. Think of what underlay the civil rights movement: the as yet unrecognized exigency of reparations for slavery. Not to mention the need for reparations and conversion on the matter of Native Americans. Remember the traditional Roman Catholic requirements for the forgiveness of sins (and therefore for the establishment of justice): acknowledgment of wrongdoing, reparation as far as possible, and "firm purpose of amendment". Or if you like, apply the wisdom of the 12 Steps to societal harms. I'm afraid small scale group dynamics exercises just won't get us there.
6
Always leave an out for an " either or" position taker.
10
The wisdom of David's column is not so much that kindness itself is a skill (though it is) but that engendering kindness in others is most definitely a skill. Many of us are like big Labrador Retrievers, passionately positive in our outlook, and affectionate, but knocking over the good china and crystal with our tails and energetic bounding.
21
@Mark Hammer.
So it was your dog that did all that damage.....
If we adhere to Mr. Brooks' marriage therapy metaphor, then our political system is akin to a family with an abusive power-obsessed husband (the GOP) who refuses to provide his spouse and all but one favorite child (who happens to be a billionaire) with basic needs, like housing, education, food, and healthcare. Kindness cannot heal this relationship. It's time to get out and start over by marrying (electing) new, truly kind political leaders.
30
I do agree that kindness is a skill, when practiced, it becomes a habit. Add to this respect, intellectual curiosity and empathy as additional skills, traits and behaviors. They all go a long way in terms of communicating and relating. Have a great day everyone!
11
@peggy2, the Dalai Lama tells us kindness is our innate nature. It is not acquired, it is, we are born with it. We may be conditioned out of it, by watching our parents and adults behave a certain way. It is particularly a problem in Judeo-Christian culture where human birth itself is regarded as a sin, which is simply far far far from the truth, in fact human birth is a privilege and we are fortunate to even arrive here on earth as a human being capable of unconditional love and kindness.
6
I wish these books were around when I started out in my managerial career. Unfortunately, I had to learn each one of these collaborative hints the hard way. Having said that, at least, I gradually learned these principles--what is going on with Congress??? You would think that men and women who have attended prestigious universities, experienced some success in the public/private sector, were elected to a political office, would have learned and practiced all of these successful gathering principles---instead, we see our political leaders violate every principle listed in this article---in fact, it looks to me, like they purposefully engage in the opposite of every principle listed.
14
@Amanda Jones Paul Ryan. Mitch McConnell. Mark Meadows. Orrin Hatch. Steve King. Ted Cruz. Marco Rubio. Scholars or Civil Servants? Not really. Predatory instincts? In abundance.
Good listening, real listening is also very key. All too often in meetings, even when there isn't strife, folks do not listen. They think about what they want to say or (these days) fiddle with their phone, or play with their papers. When there is strife, if each 'side' is simply waiting for its turn to reiterate its positions, nothing is accomplished. True listening is an art which anyone can at least become better at if practiced intentionally.
25
@Anne-Marie Hislop Good point. People want to be heard -- truly heard -- especially when they have a grievance. When everyone feels aggrieved, they're more focused on that feeling than a desire to find common ground.
Allowing some time up front for each side to voice their issue will help diffuse the anger and anxiety in the room, eliminating at least some of the negative energy that feeds discord.
5
@Anne-Marie Hislop IMHO, a tougher skill to master, especially for men.
Your title is not correct. Kindness is a habit. Compromise is a skill. It is finding that narrow passage where two parties (or three or four) can make way through an impasse. Kindness plays a foundation for every act in the search for direction. Without it as a basis, there is no hope for a responsive resolution to an issue. Respect is the other habit that is key to a adequate resolution. In our current political scene, we have neither. Until we do, we will be stuck.
25
@Patrick Stevens
Respect for others is the minimum requirement to create a civilization. Kindness is the virtue that makes civilization worthwhile.
4
You cannot overcome political division with kindness. Being kind is a character trait and like all such traits, is largely inborn. I am not a kind or empathetic person, and I’m happy with myself the way I am. I believe that intelligence is far more important than kindness. Can you prove to me that I am wrong? But in any case, what Mr. Brooks is writing about is political polarization, not a sudden psychological shift across the entire population of the US. Political polarization is a social process. It cannot be stopped or reversed by individual actions, whether rearranging chairs or delivering meals. It will come to an end when the underlying issues are resolved, one way or another. I only hope that this resolution won’t come in the way of civil war.
1
@Mor Sorry, I need to disagree with you. I respect your position, that intelligence is more important than kindness. However, intelligence alone does not make me a better person. Kindness is not just an inborn character trait. It is a practice we can choose to engage in - or not. Intelligence (reason), respect, and kindness toward one another can lead us out of either or posturing to find a third way.
5
@Mor
If the object of one's intelligence is to solve a question in chemistry then perhaps kindness is not relevant. But if the subject is people -- their behavior, attitudes, and interactions -- kindness is as essential as intelligence. Without kindness there is no way to assess a human situation correctly. Kindness involves fairness, respect. Without this element in play no plan -- however logical and well-intended -- can succeed in tempering enmity. Intellect without kindness is ice; kindness without wisdom is jello. We need both.
2
I wish I had read this 50 years ago, but, age becomes a very keen tool. Wisdom, sometimes, accompanies age. If gives one perspective,too. But I have always found it helpful to express my position in the most neutral tone. Sometimes, lowering your voices makes people listen more carefully. Unless you're talking with people my age. They'll always shout :"Speak Up!"
By the way, Kindness is not a skill. It is a human instinct.
8
@Thomas
According to psychology, humans do not have instincts.
Give an example. It always comes down to human drives, motives, and needs.
1
Brooks' "how they got their names" strategy may not be "the best icebreaker" if the story finds its origins in colonialism and slavery. Lament, grief and loss are at the heart of much unkindness on both sides. Mutual trust and respect are essential for forward movement.
11
@George If the story of one's name has to do with divorce and abandonment or a parent that was abusive, "how'd you get your name" isn't a cheery ice breaker either.
I was reading this, in entirety, because- of the op-eds I was so happy to see the word kindness. I felt lambasted and judged because I read the article. Why?! I wish practice human kindness and empathy. The article was great. I just felt the end discounted those generally reading it out of a space of relief and inspiration over connection.
Folks that are reading the times or the more politicized articles and discounting this one are more inclined to be searching for the validation on their rightness. Folks reading this are interested for a reason. I do not view my reading this as sad... I view it as an act of genuine humility and desire to look within myself and to grow beyond my stories and mindsets. Isn't that the point?
And yet I am deemed "sad" for that. Rather hypocritical. Though I do love the rest of the article. Wish he'd left it alone.
24
@carissa Thank you. Exactly right. After reading to the end, I had to practice a little kindness about the way this commentary ended.
6
I've read the last paragraph several times and don't quite understand what Mr Brooks was trying to communicate. As I read the column I WAS considering my own behaviour throughout. I think the "sad" alludes to our President's tweets. so David was signaling that the president and other tweeters quick to blame others could benefit from reading the column with an eye to their own obnoxiousness and unkindness, instead of consistently praying themselves as a victim of the unkindness of others.
5
@carissa David has gotten some flack for some time for writing inspirational/advice-type columns and avoiding political ones, when he's supposed to be a political columnist. I think that might be where the flippancy at the end comes from -- not aimed at you, but at his critics. Not the wisest move, but I think not ill-intentioned.
2
I loved scrambling the chairs and asking how people got their names. Wonderful way to humanize the meeting.
Reading the last paragraph and especially the last word just made me break out and laugh.
Kudos..great article by the way I am a progressive democrat aka liberal. Smiling now.
10
Best advice is the one about remembering gratitude.
And great ending, Mr. Brooks
5
When my kids were growing up, I routinely reminded them: "It's harder to be kind than smart."
19
That's what I am trying to teach my grandchildren. Thank goodness their minds are still pliable and their hearts are still open.
5
Genuine, heartfelt kindness is a graceful reflection of the kind person's authentic self. Techniques and structures for advancing connection have their place, but without an authentically kind intent, can become manipulative. It takes disciplined reflection, humility, and partners in kindness to become and grow kind.
7
@Horsepower Thank you. Kindness is an emotional discipline, not a skill. When it isn't authentic, I think it eventually shows, and people (rightly) do feel manipulated.
Brooks at his best. Insightful, enlightening, and entertaining. Not that I personally need his advice about relationships, of course.
6
David, you seem to have taken my suggestion to reread the American philosopher that James and Royce most revered and respected, Jane Addams. She observed how immigrants moved from the crisis of poverty to productive and stable lives through kindness and cooperation. She developed the American philosophy of cooperation (as opposed to competition) as the goose that lays true golden eggs. The immigrant tenement, she observed, was like a socialist microcosm, where the sick were cared for (while out of work and not being paid), friends and family were the daycare centers for working parents, and everyone shared the common goal which was making sure nobody was left behind. Yet, I wonder, wouldn't it have made sense just to quote Rodney King and to be a tad kinder with the readers, a little less purple, perhaps, in today's column?
8
These aren't about kindness.
They're about negotiating tactics. He tells you that. Relatively calm negotiation is usually the norm.
Kindness would be about volunteering or helping a neighbor.
See how the conservative mind works?
27
@Joe
Kindness can be about volunteering or helping a neighbor, but it can also be about making the space to listen to someone. I work with teenagers and I have used all of these suggestions to help them realize that other people also believe their voice matters, and that they can use their actions to have a positive impact on the world. I don't think Mr. Brooks is wrong at all here, and I think that even if you do equate these tools with negotiation, there is nothing in the rule book that says negotiation does not have the potential to be kind (after all, half of negotiation is what you would like, but the other have is what you would like to GIVE). I think these tips would go further to improve the experience than destroy it. Lord knows I love to disagree with him, but I think he did just fine this time.
1
@Joe
IMO, kindness is both volunteering to help others, and it is also employed to deal with those whose opinions and ideology are different.
I have close family members who support Trump. Their reasons are hard for me to understand. But I've listened to them and, in turn, they
Phave listened to me. We still don't agree, but we acknowledge that what we value together is more than what we do not.
Perhaps we need to begin with talking about what our values are and see how we share them. Then we can more easily see why we differ and might compromise.
1
@Joe Should there be any real difference between negotiating tactics and successful, intelligent, respectful and yes kind communication with another human being? Ideally, they should be combined to create a successful dialogue. Trying to put them in different camps diminishes any human communication.
It may be much different than how he describes. It may be like genes fighting for survival, and trying to eliminate the lethal genes. It's not a matter of equal points of view. It's a matter of which ones serve the continuation of our society and which ones do not. The country is polarized because this is the struggle. There can be no conversation. The shutdown is a mirror image of the predicament. The situation could not be more obvious. Either one group or the other will win out. It is a matter of right vs. wrong, of good vs. evil. It is viewed the same for both sides, but, of course, that is not possible.
I get a laugh when people say, "Well we just need to come together." We can't and we shouldn't. The Republicans, in my opinion, represent an archaic way of thinking, and are either hypocrites or dishonest in how they implement their "principles." They represent a lower form of existence and are the least inspirational of all the actors, unless you are a money grubber. As for the Democrats, they may have their heads above where the sheep graze, but they seem to care about humanity, something other than themselves, and something bigger than themselves. In that there seems to be more of a chance for the ongoing evolution of our society to something much greater than it appears to be in the moment.
15
@Reuben Couldn't it be that part of the problem is either or thinking? Consider the symbol of the I Ching, where there is white within the dark, and dark within the white. This is where we find that which "serves the continuation of our country an which does not" .
2
@Reuben Yes, Democrats care more, but they want to care more with my money. See the problem?
Brilliant. Thank you kindly. @Reuben
For me, one of the best and most interesting things about trying to be a good person is that kindness is addictive. I've been at this for over 40 years and find that I am now driven to do kinder and kinder things just to get the same hit I got from making friends a batch of cookies at age 16. Try it, world! It'll make you feel good!
7
This is a very good column, Mr. Brooks, and certainly people who truly wish to be kind and productive will find much to take away from it.
The problem is, we have perpetuated systems and processes in our society that enable and reward people who are not kind. These are people who want power at any cost. If all you care about it power and winning, than kindness is not in your vocabulary, let alone your actions.
The media has perpetuated this system by covering controversial, nasty people who say and do the most outrageous things to get air time. Voters have perpetuated this system by supporting power-hungry, nasty, mean-spirited people for public office, in the misguided view they would “fight” for them. And some of the least kind people of all are those who claim to be guided by the Bible and its teachings, reassuring themselves of their holiness for an hour every Sunday while they spend the rest of the week judging others and spewing hate.
Yes, kindness in our conversations and discourse would be nice. But how about in how we live our lives?
20
Add one more suggestion to your list seeking kindness in the world, namely, search for and seek out a person whose is incredibly "understanding" - likely a women - befriend her, observe her actions and interactions with others.
The chances are that you will begin to see your own shortcomings, made clearer, and your own understanding will improve. With greater understanding comes greater awareness of the fruits of kindness.
The search for someone of "understanding" is not easy, but keep looking and searching because it is worth the effort. The joy that comes from such a find can alter your life and lead you directly to kindness from then on.
8
At least Brooks uses the word "problem." That word is now verboten at work. We talk about challenges, not problems, even though everyone knows that you can't solve a problem without admitting that it exists.
Brooks says that meeting about a problem means that you're assigning blame. Meeting about a problem is necessary for root-cause analysis. If you're assigning blame, you haven't found the root cause of the problem.
4
Thank you for the advice my mom gave me 50 years ago, way back when people were mature and they solved their problems as if the world didn't revolve around them.
12
@Rick Then the question becomes how do we end up becoming reactionaries, thinking that there was some golden age 50 years ago?
Thank you for this column, David; quite apropos in this day and age. American politics has become more inconsiderate, mean, and cruel, and wherever we can identify proven methods for combating this tendency the better off we all will be.
Kind people leave a much more lasting impression than unkind people. Maybe this is because our memories tend to gravitate towards the good than the bad experiences of our lives.
Kindness and generosity are two of the most important qualities that we can bestow on our children. The world would be a much better place if more folks learned these qualities from day one.
6
If journalists imagine their jobs are somehow disconnected from the emotional processes of the human disasters they're covering, their handling of complex issues will no doubt suffer from "narrowcasting," as you put it, David Brooks.
I mean, isn't the idea that journalism is somehow separate from human insight a sizable either/or we might consider rejecting?
I know you, Mr. Brooks, were sort of joking, but perhaps not entirely. Historically, journalism has been a male-dominated field
that has reflected and supported a mostly male way of thinking about and representing our world.
So... let's see this narrative-- the one that imagines that EITHER I'm a journalist OR I'm veering off into the messier, less journalistc reality of human feelings-- for the narrowcasting that it is...
And let's say that journalists really should get more thoughtful about the human underbelly driving the news...
I mean, of course, that's what you do, Mr. Brooks.
All I'm asking is that you put the narrative that subtly supports the idea that this kind of thinking doesn't really belong in the news...
4
@Wendy Maland,
This essay on kindness by David Brooks, and after reading the comments, brings to mind that 'No good deed goes unpunished'.
A moderate voice in the midst of political turmoil, seeking to establish a sense of equilibrium, Mr. Brooks might be encouraging some of us to branch out and smell the roses on occasion, and offer food for our Constitution and the impoverished soul of our Nation.
5
@Miss Ley
Of course! I do acknowledge that, as well. And I always turn to Mr. Brooks for some much-needed perspective and wisdom...
I just thought, given Mr. Brooks' own advice on narratives /either/or thinking/"narrowcasting", we might pause to consider some of the old either/or narratives we're still punting around...
And perhaps it's time to put the narrative (that imagines journalism as entirely distinct from something involving emotion, that resembles therapy) to rest?
That's all I was suggesting!
1
Solid advice.
In this run up to the next shutdown, we can reflect on why the marketplace for this kind of advice is everlasting.
4
Or you could skip everything else and and consult the Hall-Tonna values map. After all, values, both consciously adopted or implied, are where the discussion begins and ends.
2
Happy.
My feeling, as occurs often, after reading your articles that seek to unite rather than divide. How refreshing and nurturing.
Thank you David.
Now, we need to follow your culled advice as we work toward compromise on major issues facing our country.
So be it.
12
Actual kindness is far more powerful than the idea of it.
Dalai Lama
30
I like this column, probably because many of Mr. Brooks' comments are familiar to me through my studies in the human relations aspects of social psychology. Most of the concepts mixed without identification with strategies are well worn, or new strategies for older ideas. Both are useful.
However, as the title of the column indicates, each is a skill or understanding worthy of developing through practice. I appreciate Brooks' reference to three books, but I'd much prefer a chance to practice, which is found nowhere within his column. Maybe the column format isn't such a useful tool for developing complex skills.
2
Thank you. Like Polonius to Laertes, this reads as practical wisdom won through practice...experience offered as a helpful travel guide for those who wish to travel the road.
There is little here that doesn't ring true to me, and at the root of the matter: Love is a verb.
6
The facts behind our political and social reality are poignantly absent. Here is the question Mr. Brooks may want to ask: “Is the Republican Party Kind?” I suspect that he knows the answer, because he is jumping through hoops to avoid asking the question.
32
@HTS
I thank HTS kindly for this observation about Brooks' now endless apology for the elephant in the room, GOP viciousness.
It seems to me that this article conflates communication tactics and kindness, a central tenet of which is surely precisely its detachment from strategic considerations. "The quality of mercy is not strained…"
22
@Jay How to get a younger woman in mid-life by being "kind" is the take I took... I'm sure that is the only factor she was influenced by. ;-)
Astonishing but not. Brooks gets through an entire column on the subject of kindness without mentioning that cruelty has been given new license from the top. As for faking sincerity and convincing somebody, say a Trump supporter, that I admire them, most of us could be sufficiently good actors for at least five or six minutes. After that we’d be so disgusted we’d leave the room. It’s awkward when a self-help column isn’t helpful.
22
I don't want to find common ground with people who want to separate children from their mothers and put them in cages, or people who say Nazis are fine people, or rich people who tell middle class workers when they aren't paid for 35 days that the pain is worth it, or people that try to repeal healthcare for millions of Americans and replace it with nothing, or people who say that Parkland kids are faking their pain, or people who say that the parents of the children from Sandy Hook faked their children's death, or people who support a pedophile for office because anyone - including a pedophile - is better than a Democrat, or people who act undignified at Senate hearings and spout conspiracies, or people who denigrate public servants and demean Purple Heart recipients and POWs,
Really something has gone terribly wrong with some of our fellow citizens.
The only solution, as opposed to putting chairs in the middle of the room and letting everyone jump into a scrum, is to marginalize these people and take away the tyranny of the minority by voting every Republican out of office and cleaning the slate.
Maybe tough love is the best tip for fighting a culture of Republican savagery, Mr. Brooks.
331
@V Yes, All of this.....^^^^
4
@V
Amen!
3
Sure, it's good to work at being kinder. But the ability to be kind must be learned in childhood.
We have sad evidence, from the tragedy of neglected children in orphanages,that emotional literacy must be acquired from infancy and in the early formative years.
Secure attachment is not something we can study. It is a gift we receive from the people who love and support us in childhood. Without nurturing, a person may never have enough emotional insight to be able to be kind.
Our mothers and fathers show us kindness by responding to our needs and feelings and by helping us respond to the needs and feelings of others. A child who is ignored or raised without kindness will find it very hard to be kind as an adult.
Nancy Pelosi is having a hard time making a deal with Donald Trump because Trump never learned empathy and kindness as a child. He was raised by housekeepers (his mother was often unavailable or distant) and his father Fred Trump was known to be difficult, demanding, highly critical, and someone who “would never let anything go”.
Donald Trump’s mother, horrified by how Trump was treating his first wife, once exclaimed, “What sort of son have I created?” Well, she and her strict husband had created exactly the sort of sad, unfeeling soul that comes from a combination of little love, spoiling, and a lot of brutal control.
Always try kindness, but don’t be surprised if your kindness rolls like water off the back of a duck when offered to the heartless.
39
@Heather
Today and for two decades already, there are TONS of evidence proving the previously prevailing hypothesis of having your entire brain fully developed during your childhood, TOTALLY false - fortunately.
The key discovery has been NEUROPLASTICITY: the brain continues to form new neurons and new networks until the day we die.
Learning something new, developing a skill, means developing brain networks.
And especially when it comes to kindness and compassion, studies have shown that compassion training (and the concomitant brain networks) is possible at ANY age, and no matter what childhood you had.
You can only behave in a compassionate way if you've learned how to be self-compassionate, indeed, but self-compassion is highly trainable. To see how, see for instance self-compassion.org.
That simply means that Trump didn't have the chance to encounter and train those tools yet, whereas Pelosi clearly did. Not that somehow Trump would never be able to develop kindness, even not after being immersed in serious self-compassion training (which of course is not something Pelosi can do; he do would have to take a self-compassion course given by a highly experienced teacher, etc.).
Politics aside though, it's precisely those who never developed their "heartfulness" that need our kindness, even though we don't immediately get anything in return - but studies show that kindness is first of all very good for our own mental and physical health .. ;-)
8
Thank you Mr. Brooks for reminding us how to be good people. Your points are succinct and they hit their target. Thanks for reminding us what is possible if we're willing to keep an open mind.
10
@Steve Webster
Thank you, Mr. Webster, for congratulating Mr. Brooks on reminding us what’s possible if we keep an open mind. Unfortunately, since he’s demonstrated beyond doubt that he can’t keep one himself, the emperor has no clothes.
12
@ADN
Oh please. David Brooks has consistently demonstrated a sharp, clear headed, helpful conversation even when I don't agree with him. I suspect he is a kind man, regardless of the topic.
1
@My Bodhisattva
Well, indeed, please. Mr. Brooks has been on the wrong side of pretty much every right-wing horror of the past couple of decades and couldn’t have an open mind if you tried to open it with a crowbar. He dances fast when he wants to lay horrors he helped create at somebody else’s feet. (That’s an excellent trick.) Which means he can express disapproval of Trump as if he had nothing to do with Trump’s rise and subsequent attempts to become a dictator. At which he may yet succeed. Brooks has no interest in opening his mind to the notion that Mitch McConnell is, as the historian Christopher Browning put it, “the gravedigger of democracy.“ Seriously, Mr, Brooks could have done his own soul a favor, and done us one as well, if he had stuck to reviewing movies where he couldn’t do much harm. No doubt he is, as you suggest, a kind man. As they used to say in the 60s, William Westmoreland was a terrific next-door neighbor and a fine father. (I have it on good authority that Hitler was a very good next-door neighbor too, and loved cats.) Kindness above all, that’s the rule of life. But one good deed does not excuse a dozen sins.
Longtime, I thought that if only I showed other people that I really believed that deep inside they couldn't but have good intentions, sooner or later they would drop their suspicion and the bad intentions that often go with it, and start trusting me more and as a consequence harm me less.
It actually never happened.
Then I decided to read about the neurology of kindness and compassion, to discover that I had made a crucial mistake: there is a fundamental difference between GOOD INTENTIONS and INNER GOODNESS.
Good intentions towards someone else means that you only wish for that person to be happy and healthy and thrive. Obviously, people who harm you do NOT have those intentions in mind, and couldn't care less about your health and happiness.
"Inner goodness", however, refers to the fact that in the end, we ourselves all want to be happy and healthy and live with ease. And that goes even for people with very negative emotions/intentions. It's just that they don't realize how those negative intentions won't bring lasting happiness for themselves, OR if they know this, they don't realize that lasting happiness IS possible, and even for them.
THAT is the basis upon which all kindness cultivation grows: training yourself to see the inner goodness of whomever you meet, all while remaining entirely lucid about their potentially very bad intentions. And that starts with learning to see your OWN inner goodness, contrary to what Brooks claims ... .
5
How about kindness to the known and imagined victims of the person you're trying to negotiate with? How does that change the dialog?
11
For years Mr. Brooks championed the Republican Party's conservatism and agenda and condoned their tactics until they became too coarse and uncivil for him. Now he spends his time and column inches wringing his hands about incivility, scolding both sides like a stern parent for ruining the middle ground as if he is above it all and had no part in creating the great divide that daily gives breath to the rudeness he so deplores.
We don't need your lectures about morality and puffed up indignation now, Mr. Brooks. It's too late for that.
If you're serious about helping to heal the rift in our country, perhaps an apology would be a good place to start.
55
@edlorah
These years last, which feel like a century to some of us, Mr. Brooks has been warning us of the perils that this presidency might entail, and it is a matter of reading between the lines.
Some of us tend to pounce on the judgement throne before reflecting on what he has to share with his readership. He is a fine example of an American; a journalist by profession, who cares about the direction our Nation is taking, and we might one day feel remorse in not recognizing that he is trying his best to instill some harmony among the public, and political voices that lead us astray.
4
@Miss Ley
Agree with you to some extent. Nevertheless where we are today happened over many decades, during which Brooks promoted the Republican agenda which resulted in our current mess.
So I agree with @edlorah. Until Mr. Brooks accepts the errors in his advocacy and apologizes for same, prior to Trump, then it will be difficult to trust his current judgments.
It would also be very helpful if he wouldn't, without fail, always give false equivalency, albeit sometimes warranted, to the other side. It was easy for him to take on the Republican position , before Trump, why can't he take the other side now?
How about just be nice, care about your fellow man, be kind, be charitable, help someone in need, listen to someone else’s problems and lend your support or just be a shoulder to lean on.
This is especially true when it comes to doing something nice for a parent of a child with disabilities.
In my wealthty suburb many people have forgotten these basic skills or just don’t care about anyone but themselves, and that’s really a shame.
And that’s why my severely disabled daughter got abused, because people don’t care, and no one in the state has done anything about it, and no one is outraged, which is outrageous.
www.StopDisabilityAbuse.org
20
@Jon I hear you. I have a handicapped brother and in my wealthy "tolerant" suburb, stuffed with well educated people I have seen and heard some of the nastiest things imaginable. Make an accommodation for a handicapped person? Oh no, not if it inconveniences them. No, it's better to try and get rid of the problem(s). It's even better to lie about it.
Not one person stood up for my brother in public. "Oh" they'd say, "we agree that the way he's being treated is horrible but we don't want to risk losing the respect of the rec director." Even better are the ones who see nothing wrong with lying about him and creating more problems. One lovely soul on Facebook claimed that my brother was convicted sex offender. A few people stood up for him there. And a few others thought it was funny.
So I hear you. My parents and I had thought that once he was an adult some of the problems would end. Instead I find myself worrying about who will make a false accusation against him and get it to stick because his handicap makes him vulnerable. But no one bothers to care about that. He's "weird" and that's all that they see.
Kindness in American life?
Kindness in American life does not seem much removed from the problem of developing kindness in any society historically. Usually when a society speaks of developing kindness, spreading kindness, making the people more kind, it is actually creating a climate in which the people are kept in a state of ignorance, a state where they have a poorly developed sense of distinguishing differences in quality between things, which of course makes it easy for power to provide a basic standard of living and to be generous by occasionally giving a little more.
For example, if a population thinks white rice the epitome of food it's easy to be kind and give an extra bag every now and then. Or if a group of people such as Native Americans thinks trinkets the epitome one can be kind and give a few more. Extending this, it's kind in America to provide fast food, bad films, bad music,--well, you get the idea. The point is it becomes more difficult to be kind the more a population acquires actual taste, knows what a real tomato is like, a real stream of running water, a real musical performance, a real book.
We can always tell the difference between a healthy and deteriorating society by what people accept as an act of kindness, what they think is good to receive. Are they grateful for billboards, bad food, Bibles, television sets, shoddy shoes, cheap clothes, the symmetrical and sterile and predictable in art and so on? What next? Grateful for a robot woman?
7
If kindness is a skill, and I believe that it is indeed one, then here is a great way to increase one’s skill :
Take a moment to imagine all the things that Donald Trump is, and then be the opposite.
21
Greet strangers on a wooded path in the park. Some respond in kind. Some do not. It doesn't matter.
8
I am 59 this week but only recently have I learned
a) that my 'kindness' is not always readily accessible in my dealings with others and certainly not as much as I would want it to be.
b) I can hold back on giving out unkindness more readily than I can give kindness. This is almost always possible.
When I see the impact of unkindness in politics and society as a whole, I am increasingly convinced that we should stop trying to "love our neighbours" and simply aim for consistent non-unkindness.
I think this may be sufficient and a more reachable target for us average humans :)
8
@iain mackenzie
Actually, neurologists today have shown that we can only behave in a compassionate way towards others to the extent that we've learned to treat ourselves with compassion.
And Western cultures do not teach children how to be kind with themselves ...
That would mean that today, the most difficult part in "love your neighbor as yourself" is loving yourself ... .
The good news is that that too is a highly trainable skill though. See for instance Sharon Salzberg's book "Real love. The art of mindful connection".
6
@Ana Luisa
I strongly agree with you Ann. But compassion and self-compassion (at least in my journey) require determination and dedication.
whereas Non-unkindness is a more pragmatic and tangible daily possibility.
For example, in the current political scene, consider how acts of 'unkindness' have impacted on others and how an attitude of "do no unkindness to others" might have allowed for a more healthy outcome.
4
Funny, but not really more than stating the obvious. The real fixes are harder work, over a longer time. Like learning to keep quiet when you have something really, really important that you have to say right now! Another is really listening instead of planning your response. Then there's repeating what you just heard someone say and asking if you got it right. Practices like these can help make real communication possible, if that's what you want.
8
@michaeltide This is good, making kindness a higher value as one’s philosophy. It makes keeping one’s mouth shut and listening an almost spiritual practice.
I have worked at this myself and often I get the sense that it does not make so much of a difference to the other person as it does to helping you love yourself.
[communication? It takes two. I have been listening to my sister for 60 years and still have not gotten a word in edgewise].
8
Kindness includes what self-compassion expert Kristin Neff (Univ. of Texas) calls "fierce compassion".
If you leave that out, you leave out a basic longing for truth and justice. That too is shared by all human beings, but when you've faced too many situation where both where totally absent, you don't believe that they are possible anymore, and tend to become a cynical, amoral human being.
And THAT is clearly what happened to the GOP since at least a decade.
So I'm all for finally starting to cultivate kindness again, but when it comes to DC, the only ones still cultivating it as politicians are clearly Democrats, whereas Republicans have given up on it entirely.
I applaud Brooks' attempt to at least bring the idea back, and his techniques are certainly useful during certain family gatherings.
You do have to have the courage to take this a step further though, and publicly denounce the fact that Republicans in DC have radically abandoned kindness, and for years already, whereas Democrats have not.
Kindness is not just cultivated when you try to have a conversation with people you disagree with.
It also means refusing to suppose that the poor must be poor because of their own fault, so don't "deserve" any government help, or healthcare, or education, or decent minimum wage, etc.
If Brooks believes, however, that you can write about kindness without writing about politics, I would like to hear from him HOW to do so ... ?
10
What appeared to be an advice column to help readers/leaders navigate troubled social waters by attempting to bring compassion to relationships ends on a dissonant note. I felt judged
17
Kindness is a skill indeed, which means that it's highly trainable.
Unfortunately, although since 2 decades now neurologists know how to train it, most schools and work places still don't have a kindness trainer (except for Googly and his famous "jolly good fellow" Chade Meng Tan).
The Search Inside Yourself Leadership Institute based on Meng's extraordinary work in this field, trains leaders to be kinder - one of the reasons being that it has proven that when they are, they are more effective as leaders, and obtain more and better results from their employees.
Kindness, however, is based on a philosophical assumption, that Brooks briefly refers to here: it supposes that in the end, all human beings just want to be happy and healthy and live with ease.
Personally, I'm convinced that that is indeed the case, or at least the most fruitful hypothesis to use in human interaction, as neurologists have shown.
But it does mean a radical paradigm shift, compared to how we tend to think today in the West.
And although Democrats are clearly the only "party of values" today (including the value of truthfulness), many liberals do tend to imagine that GOP voters can't be decent citizens - and GOP politicians even less so.
Practicing kindness, in that case, means trying to understand HOW Republicans became so cynical and bitter that they don't believe in kindness and other moral values anymore. Which means giving up our tendency to judge them, and merely judge their actions instead.
2
@Ana Luisa, while I agree with your politics, I think kindness in pursuit of an agenda is not really kindness, rather a manipulative technique. I find that kindness comes from one's essence, not from one's training. But when practiced often enough, it can become a habit. It would be good to think that the kindness you are experiencing is underlaid with kind thoughts. Otherwise what we are talking about is politeness, which is also a good thing, but will not necessarily transform the conversation.
3
@michaeltide
I do believe that there is something such as "collective kindness".
And "collective" inevitably means "political".
There are kind policies, and unkind policies. "Kindness" here doesn't come less from your essence than on a more personal level.
And neurologists have shown that although kindness is a skill belonging to any human being's essence, for it to dominate your actions, you do have to cultivate it, and develop its brain networks.
Rejecting that training as "manipulation" is imho as absurd as imagining that playing the piano daily in order to develop brain networks that allow you to play better, faster, and in a more subtle way, should be rejected as "manipulating" the piano. How could that make sense?
As I wrote, though, "collective kindness" is no longer limited to having a real and respectful debate with someone. It has rather to do with what we DO, as a society. And politics is inherently about changing things.
Being kind in a conversation about politics creates by definition a respectful environment, and by doing so, the other person will automatically be more open to thinking about your political ideas, so here too, how could you possibly separate kindness and influencing the other? And why would influencing be a bad thing, by the way?
2
@Ana Luisa, thanks for your thoughtful reply. Our only difference is probably semantic. Of course I agree with what you say, as I always do. I think we are talking about different meanings. I think you are saying that all life is political, and that kindness is a tool we can develop to become more persuasive. I hope I didn't mischaracterize your point, but I do feel that kindness has less to do with neurology, than with (for lack of a better word) spirit. I really dont think tat kindness, as I understand it is in any way political. I do, however, think it can enhance the political (or any) process. I agree it can be learned and practiced, but in some, it just appears, and is always present. I love your analogy of the piano player, and yet one can learn to play the piano very well and not become a virtuoso. That spark of genius is not taught, it just appears as a component of the musician's being. I'm with you 100% on collective kindness. It could be the antidote for the terrible fear that seems to permeate so many in our culture.
Influencing is not a bad thing per se. I started to agree unconditionally, then I thought about all those priests who molested the children under their care. I'm sure many did it by influencing them with kindness. We have to be certain that our own motives are kind, not just our manner.
Thanks again for your reply.
3
Thank you. As usual, today's column was thought provoking.
The leadership skills you describe are essential to community-building and to successful diplomacy. The more people who use them, the better the world will be.
3
Wisdom I try hard to live by every single day from Isaac Bashevis Singer:
Kindness, I've discovered, is Everything.
It is. Its easy. And it leaves a profound difference in people who I share my life with--both for myself and them. I don't think its a skill. I think its within us all if we want it to be.
6
I can't help connecting this theme with today's "Pearls Before Swine" cartoon, in which the secret to How to Succeed More is to Fail Less.
Maybe the way to be kind is to be less mean. It's that simple.
4
Two statements I've found effective during heated conflict: "You may be right." And "fair point."
15
@Cal Prof In talking to Trump supporters, this is usually impossible. When the statement is, "Trump has kept all his promises!" or Obama is a terrorist Muslim.", neither of these comments are appropriate.
Oh, Red Sox, I think your paragraph about Anna Karenina and the Count captured so well feigned kindness versus true kindness. And as much as David Brooks essay was helpful as to "how" to be kind it only scratched the service as to what it "means" to be kind, its essence, in other words.
Kindness...well, it is not practiced. Rather it comes naturally within people who are capable of love and compassion. Kindness is not being sympathetic. Instead, it is being empathetic. It emanates. Most decent human beings do not need a guide book toward this attribute. A moral soul and conscience is all that is required to inform and to teach.
4
Kindness does not thrive when we are afraid, nervous, aware that we are being exploited and knowing our government doesn't have our backs.
You want me to be kind? Then help me feel secure . . . make me believe the rich and powerful ( the managers, the directors, the bankers and politicians ) aren't just out to pay me the least possible wage, while charging me the highest rent, the highest medical care fees etc.
Civil, I will endeavor to be civil.
But kind?
No. I will save my kindness for young children, senior citizens, and pets.
22
Neurologists have shown that cultivating kindness and compassion have tremendous health and happiness benefits. That's why we should indeed all start cultivating it inside ourselves, rather than waiting for something outside of us to happen before we allow ourselves to start training and developing this innate skill.
Studies also show, however, that it's NOT just a couple of techniques that we should apply in our relationships/interactions with others.
It turns out that the extent to which you are kind to others is directly determined by the extent to which you have learned to be kind to yourself.
When you make a mistake, do you judge yourself? Do you see it as proof that you are worthless? Or do you see it as a normal part of being human, something that doesn't question your inherent worthiness (including worthiness to be loved unconditionally, at least by yourself), and merely something you can learn from.
In the latter case, you're being kind to yourself. And the more you are, the more you can learn to be so towards others too. Because in the end, we ALL want to merely be happy and healthy and thrive. And yes, that includes Trump and the current GOP. It's not because they're horribly mistaken about America's core values and only seem to have known a maffia world that deep inside they're not craving for the exact same things any human beings craves for.
Kindness, or "fierce compassion", as Kristin Neff calls it, allows you to stay strong all while fighting injustice.
6
@Ana Luisa
Thank you for your wisdom
Or, more realistically, the situation is she’s crazy and I want nothing to do with her. I could care less if she understands me or that not talking will not help her understand me.
In this day and age, and being 40 , I’m done with anyone who doesn’t lift me up, nourish my spirit and bring me joy.
4
As I read this, I couldn’t help but think that Brooks will have to completely abandon his entire modus operandi. I look forward to reading his future columns that don’t mindlessly run down the list of this week’s Republican talking points against the Left, while pretending to be even-handed wih his usual mild criticism of the Right. No more columns declaring Republicans to be infallible and Democrats always wrong. More power to Brooks if he can pull off such a massive change of heart and style after so many decades.
5
In between the lines, the message I'm getting is that there's a huge and subtle difference between helping a person save face versus rubbing a person's face in it. I try to remind myself of the three Ks: compassion, caring, and kindness.
4
I would like to everyone in our government to read “How Democracies Die” and ponder the meaning (value) of forbearance.
And I’d like them also to consider that, if they aren’t inspired by what people (with diverse points of view) have been able to accomplish together when they bring their best selves to the challenges at hand and make a virtue out of finding common ground, they are in the wrong job.
4
Brilliant David! I manage ‘science to solutions’ dialogues with scientists, policy makers, civil society and large companies - the later for which there is zero trust in when it comes to health or environment. Your article summed up the methods needed to have the often difficult dialogues, and to remain solutions oriented. Thanks!!
Thanks, David. Well said. We should all try to fight that fight, unfortunately sometimes taking the high road, the "kind" road, has us end up face down in the street. Buyer beware!
4
Nice one David, an interesting and fun article.
I think, in most things, the process is more important than the product.
3
David, with all due respect, kindness is a choice, not a skill.
We choose to be kind, civil, and humane - or we choose not to be.
I am a Democrat because I choose to be kind, to even err on the side of kindness, believing that kindness is the best policy, and that in most cases, if not all, kindness begets kindness (while hatred begets hatred).
On the conservative side of our political divide, my bias towards kindness may appear foolishness - but err we must, and err I choose on the side of kindness.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VE7uBX8DdmE
49
@Matthew Carnicelli
Matthew, with all due respect, you are a Democrat because you feel that active government is a force for good. You believe that you can use the power of the government to appropriate resources from one group of citizens (taxes) and direct those resources to benefit another group of citizens (benefits), and thereby make the world a better place.
A conservative believes that your use of the power of government is often an abuse that results in more harm (however unintended) than good. That conservative urges more restraint in the use of the power of government.
Whether the actions you encourage the government to take are a kindness is entirely in the eye of the beholder. Conservatives observe that governments are rarely kind; most kindness is one on one, and best left to individuals.
Both Democrats and Republicans believe they are kind and that the other is unkind. It would be foolish (and more than a little self righteous) to assume that the truth lies entirely with one side or the other.
1
@Tom
The way you describe the position of a Democrat makes me believe you're a conservative ... am I right?
Democrats don't believe that the government should tax one group in order to give that money to another group. They believe that IF "we the people" are the government, then the taxes paid by ALL citizens (even the poorest) will be used in such a way that ALL citizens benefit from it.
You can't claim, for instance, that border patrol agents, whose salaries are paid by taxpayer money, somehow do not keep those who paid taxes safe, but only one group of citizens that does not pay for it.
Democrats also believe that IF "we the people" govern, there's no reason to believe that we would by definition do more harm than good - especially when we base our decisions on science and proven facts. Like all big organizations, a government can make mistakes, and then it's up to us to correct them.
I agree that real conservatives (but where are they today ... ?) tend to believe that it is best for all citizens to have a government that almost doesn't do anything, and such, being a conservative is in theory certainly perfectly compatible with having good intentions. In real life, however, the GOP constantly destroys government services that have been PROVEN to make people's lives better, so that is clearly being unkind (to say the least) ...
6
@Matthew Carnicelli
With all respect, I couldn't disagree more.
First of all, it's neurologists who have shown that kindness and compassion are innate skills, which indeed can be developed through specific training programs.
So in the meanwhile, that's simply a proven fact.
Secondly, ONLY when you've seen kindness in action and know why it's so much better than its opposite do you spontaneously start "choosing" kindness. And apparently, you're among the lucky ones ... :-).
Many GOP politicians and voters weren't that lucky. They're living in a maffia world, where no one can be trusted, and lying and violence dominate daily life.
We can certainly learn to cultivate compassion towards such people too.
And the more we do, the more we will be able to have real, respectful debates with Trump voters, and those debates are our only way to fight back against the SC Citizens United ruling and the massive fake news spread by the GOP and Fox News 24/7.
In times like these, kindness is not a luxury, it's vital, IF we want to get our country back.
If all this is new for you, see for instance Chade Meng Tan's book "Search Inside yourself". Or read the new book written by Van Jones, Obama's former adviser who is today calling for a "spiritual revolution". The book is called "Beyond the messy truth. How we came apart and how we come together" (in case you prefer political militant books rather than scientific and psychological books).
Take care ;-)
This good column can actually serve as a blueprint to re-start the dialog between Israelis and Palestinians, whose shared goal is peace. In fact, I dare both sides to dream beyond merely a "permanent settlement" that creates a Palestinian state alongside Israel. Let them dream bigger dreams. Let them not stop at the stated goal but also plan for a "dream" goal of borderless commerce, tourism, shared security, cultural exchanges, cooperation within academia, etc. In fact the post-partition list of political, social and economic issues that stand to benefit from cooperation between both sides will have them wondering why they fought over a border for nearly a century.
When seeking an end to conflict, the quest should include something greater than merely ending enmities.
To resolve conflicts, always have a "dream" goalpost behind the "resolution" one. For example, if the pro-life and pro-choice movements are willing to follow David Brooks's advice, infuse another issue which appeals to both sides - the goal of reducing the need for women to have abortions (while not restricting their reproductive rights).
When a "dream" goal in introduced in conflict-resolution efforts, there is an incentive to reach the "resolution" goalpost. If the "resolution" goalpost is still elusive, nothing prevents both sides to bypass it and pursue the greater goal.
7
@Nav Pradeepan An outcome devoutly to be wished. If only, if only, if only.
Mr. Brooks seems to have been put off his feed by the Covington Catholic brouhaha. I will not speculate as to what he saw or heard that has led to this kind of handwringing. But asking 'why can't we all just get along?' as if our real problem is a LACK OF MANNERS dishonors the children who were separated from their asylum-seeking parents at the border, it dishonors the transgendered soldiers who have been told to take their courage and patriotism elsewhere, and most recently, it spits on and dishonors the federal workers, federal contractors and federal grant employees (and all of their dependents) whose loyal service to this country was used as a WEAPON against them. I didn't want a war, but I know what to do when my position is being shelled, and it sure as sugar doesn't involve piling all the chairs in the middle of the room.
69
@A Brown
He is not assuming people like that are even in the room. He is picturing theoretical scuffles between privileged, upper class ideologues - the chattering classes.
He's not imagining talking TO the people affected by the Trump administration's cruel policies, but ABOUT them.
2
No, not sad, David. Even old folks like me need a little reminding now and then, and your suggestions were good. I have a few thoughts, if I may. Number one, is the "intervention." Now I am not speaking of those necessary ones when our loved ones are, for example, having substance abuse problems. I'm referring instead to the "euphemistic intervention" which is instead a "kangaroo court." Avoid at all costs! I was the victim of one when I was in high school. And wow, speaking of ego deflation. And let's not fool ourselves, many carry that "practice" well into old age!
Also, to quote, "your narrative will never win" is right on the money. Even in the good old days, people knew better than to speak religion and politics in mixed company. Now more than ever it is always best to converse on those two subjects with those who share our philosophy in life.
Finally, one area in which I disagree relates to the title of this essay. Kindness is not necessarily a skill. It is there in most - not all (to wit, Mr. Trump) - individuals...ready to be tapped, ready to reveal who we are as decent human beings. Yes, it needs to be nurtured and nourished during our life times. But it grows and expands as does empathy and compassion for each other.
8
Viewing kindness as a skill fits with your listing of behaviors to practice it. Yet with actors, with dancers, and in life, what is genuine and moving expresses the heart rather than following a prescription. I think kindness begins with recognizing our common humanity and communicating in a way that says, “we are in this together”. Without the soul of common humanity, behaviors ring hollow and are just performances, though they may be “skilled”.
7
Before stating your case, try to summarize the other person's viewpoint fairly, dispassionately, and well enough that they agree that you are stating accurately what they believe. This is Covey's Fifth Habit. I have used it in meetings, in dealing with upset customers, and in my own marriage. It is incredibly powerful and defuses a remarkable amount of anger.
16
"Presume the good. Any disagreement will go better if you assume the other person has good intentions and if you demonstrate how much you over all admire him or her. Fake this, in all but extreme cases."
That last sentence undermines the whole argument. We all know that most often, the other person (or party) does not have good intentions, but is motivated by fear, or hate, or greed.
So it reads like another piece of advice, usually attributed to George Burns: "The most important thing is sincerity. If you can fake that you've got it made".
5
@Glenn Ribotsky
I agree.
Many people (especially those who didn't have access to kindness training tools yet) tend to be driven by negative emotions (which monotheists tend to call "sins").
In that case, of course, you do NOT have any "good intentions".
What neurologists have shown, however, that kindness isn't based on presuming good intentions (it's not naive!), as Brooks writes here, but on presuming a person's inherent GOODNESS, which is something totally different.
That means presuming that in the end, all human beings want to be happy and healthy and live with ease. They may have totally wrong ideas about how to be happy and healthy, they may not have learned how to manage their emotions and as a consequence, may be suffering from a low EQ and often act out of unhealthy emotions such as greed or hatred or fear, which create negative intentions.
Kindness and compassion as a basic attitude towards yourself and others in life is based on the assumption that people act this way merely out of ignorance about HOW to act differently.
And that means suffering more, by definition, than people who had the chance to discover that a life led by good intentions is so much more fulfilling and satisfying. Which only pushes us to try to be kinder to those who don't know (yet) how to be kind ..
2
There are a few phrases that do help in tough situations. One of them is "I'm sorry." Another very helpful thing to say is " How can I help you" and mean it. Sometimes the best thing to say is "I'm sorry, I don't understand what you are saying. Can you repeat that for me please?"
So, Mr. Brooks, I'm sorry but I don't think I understood what you were trying to say here. Perhaps kindness is something that starts in childhood when others are kind to us but ends when we learn, as adults, that our desire to be kind is often abused by conmen and others who rely upon our sense of decency to fool us by playing games with our lives while they score cheap points with stupid tweets and off the cuff remarks.
America is not a kind, tolerant, or merciful nation any longer. It hasn't been for decades. There are too many of us who are angry because we've watched the cheaters and liars do well at our expense. We've lost jobs, lost homes, and lost hope. Decency tends to end when people cannot count on their basic needs being satisfied. Think about that the next time you write a flippant article about kindness.
91
@hen3ry
Capitalism is not kind.
Among it's negative effects are narcissism & lack of empathy.
Corporations pursue profit above all other values. That is the antithesis of kindness & morality.
Mister Rogers knew that our corporate culture, & technology, & busy-ness were shallow & busy, rather than simple, humane, & deep.
1
Brooks’ desire to resolve conflicts between individuals within small groups is admirable, and we have to resolve bitter conflicts if America is to have any future. While the personal is political, America is torn apart by race, class, gender, culture, and town vs. country. White supremacist Steve King’s congressional district is 96% white; no discussion group is going to change that. Both parties get votes off the division, and the commercial media makes money off noisy conflict. Start with points of unity, as Brooks says, but the discussion must be national. All the Trump supporting women I saw interviewed on the separation of children at the border expressed discomfort at breaking up families, kindness, but took Trump’s line of blaming the parents. Connect with Trump supporters by defending their families against the gig economy, the opium epidemic, the uncaring federal government, then dig deeper into immigrant families, their positive impact on the economy, and how Trump uses them as scapegoats for his own lack of a positive economic program. Use Brooks’ method, but on a national scale to change America.
5
@Bruce Shigeura I remember hearing the joke: How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb?
Answer: Only one, but the light bulb has to want to change.
The desire for change is rarely associated with being comfortable. I have never heard anyone say: "I love my work, I've got plenty of money, my marriage is happy, and my children are smart. I think I want to change."
The desire – no, the need – to change comes with discomfort, feeling that one's life is going badly.
The same is true for attitudes and belief systems, but more subtly, because one may feel comfortable with them and not recognize how they are causing pain. The way through this is to relate, not your ideas, but your experience. Let the story be the teacher. Talk about your own struggle with an idea, rather than trying to change someone's mind. It's a much better starting place.
No the desire
David,I never miss your Friday appearances on PBS NewsHour. You and Mark Shields are a great pair.
But this "lesson" clearly missed the mark for me and left me cold. Try harder.
11
All those wonderful words and no mention of the words that might be the only solution irreconcilable differences, and divorce.
Not long ago we had Czechoslovakia and now we have Slovakia and the Czech Republic. Now that America has abandoned its leadership role maybe it's time for two state or multi state solution. All the kindness in the world will not hide the contempt.
The debate is ancient but dogma and empiricism are incompatible.
1
@Montreal Moe The Czechs and Slovaks are two different ethnic groups, not one group who decided to split up. But, good point anyway, thanks.
1
@lechrist
Thank you.
Here in Canada we are multiethnic and we are free to determine if we are to remain a single country. America's philosophical divisions date back thousands if not millions of years before we were even homo erectus.
Here in Quebec I have watched our society evolve from a long established patriarchal hierarchy to what seems to be an emerging meritocracy tending towards matriarchy and democracy.
I understand the desire to cling to power even when the environment changes and what were strengths become weakness.
Our species have gone from rural to urban without the biological sociological or psychological evolution necessary for success.
We have gone from 6% urban to over 80% urban in two centuries and a large section of America refuse to adapt the ethics and values necessary for survival.
I hear survival of the fittest confused with Darwinism. I don't know how to explain the problem in 1500 characters but I do remember my history and the GOP is now William Jennings Bryan socialist and christianist populism of the late 19th and early 20th century and today it is insanity. I don't know how to explain conservatism cannot work when you go from teams of oxen to cities of millions.
I understand conservatism but in 2019 it is suicide.
4
Kindness is an instinct - a desirable quality - not necessarily a skill.
6
@Lawrence H It is also a skill that can be developed. Practice kindness.
3
@Lawrence H
Happily, I beg to differ. Spend time in a kindergarten and listen to children who have had the example of a teacher who models kindness every day, has strong beliefs in expecting and showing respect to all, is long to listen and fair in action. Point being, at the end of the year those children will have have been given a gift of immense, even lifelong value. They were taught the skill of being kind to their peers.
15
Why is the last word "Sad"? Why is it "emotional advice"? It is advice to objectively examine how we communicate. No emotions, just communicate.
12
Shared reality is not that easy to come by these days.
3
I’ve been reading your columns for a while and you strike me as a guy who believes that everybody is good, just misunderstood. And if we strive to understand each other then all will be okay.
That to me is the longing of a frightened child.
Everybody is not good. And sometimes, when you really strive to understand somebody, you understand that they are not good.
In response, you have to be strong. Donald Trump on one side and the social justice left on the other: these are all violent babies who need boundaries and correction, not coddling and what some call empathy.
We need adults, not this whiny nonsense.
12
Another dispatch from La La Land. I get it that showing contempt for Trump supporters is not helpful so I bite my tongue. David fails to appreciate the aggressive and even malevolent ignorance of the average Trump voter. It is a willful blindness to the suffering of desperate immigrants that justifies the kidnapping of their children as a necessary deterrence. It is the face of vile white Christian supremacy that can't be cured with kindness. We have to mobilize and beat them at the polls. Mueller has it exactly right in his single-mindedly hounding of the criminals that lead the deluded mob to prison where they belong.
50
When neighbor's of ours had a gathering, they always put a little sign on their front door. "Before entering please leave your politics and religion outside."
It worked!
4
@cherrylog754
Perhaps consider that not allowing or tolerating political discussion is allowing Trump voters to live in a bubble where they consider him normal or acceptable. Another way of looking at this is that everyone has a moral duty to be able to point out that lies, adultery, removing kids from their parents, refusing to welcome the stranger, allowing influence peddling, profiting from government in your family business ALL are wrong.
The ability to discuss these issues can educate and enlighten and change minds. Maybe repressive regimes need to have awake citizens who are free to express their views to their social circle. That goes for religion too! Why shouldn't people be able to discuss, defend, compare and contrast their beliefs. Personally I would not go to dinner to that home.
It seems unlikely that any contemporary woman would be comfortable being so overly self effacing as to say to any man “I know I’m a piece of work, but I’m trying to do better, and I hope you can help me out.” David your piece has effective guidelines for negotiations, but kindness is simply a way of being in the world. It is a way of responding to a fellow human with generosity and respect
23
Kindness is a skill the current GOP knows nothing about.
30
This is interesting. David Brooks as a Unitarian-Universalist. Perhaps there is hope after all.
5
Honest question: would Brooks write a piece for, say, the National Review, sympathetically explaining exactly why liberals so despise Trump? Are there intrepid Fox News reporters sitting in Brooklyn coffee shops, talking to plain folks who think Trump is an evil autocrat?
I just googled “how to talk to a Trump hater” and got zero tips. Is there honestly no curiosity from the “other side” about what liberals think of Trump? Why must we be endlessly exhorted to understand people who have zero interest in understanding us?
61
@Mercury S
Good point. I'd love to see him practice what he preaches.
4
@Mercury S
" Is there honestly no curiosity from the “other side” about what liberals think of Trump?"
So you think there is a shortage of writing or reporting on this subject? No media exposure? Believe me, they know. What liberals think of Trump is repeated, endlessly. Generally served with a side of contempt.
@Mercury S, What would you want to say? Really. You have a category called "trump hater." so you start off asking someone to define him/herself in your terms. I think even the most virulent "trump hater" would be unwilling to be called that as a perceived insult. It would be perceived that way, as assuredly as "deplorables."
Starting off with a chip on your shoulder will not make for easy conversation. If you want to know why people have negative feelings about Trump, you can certainly get that answered by reading these comments – all the way from reasoned analysis to overt rage. What else do you want to know. If you want to talk about the wall, or the Russia investigation, or anything else, are you prepared to listen? Or do you hope to make someone feel as though their ideas are bad? Most people want to talk, and many of us are just as curious about Trump supporters, and are prepared to listen. I know what I would ask. Why do you believe that he cares about America? Why do you choose to ignore his bad behavior? Most of all, what do you hope for in your life as a result of Trump being President? How do you think that will happen?. You could reply until the comment section closes. I'm really interested.
2
So many folks I know don't seem to understand "kindness" when they observe or receive it. Of late, "kindness" appears to have been redefined -- now a sign of weakness and a misguided proof of stupidity. Are we witnessing a simultaneous extension of Realpolitik as well?
7
Loved it! "The truest crowns are given, not taken." -Momer Love
2
Thank you.
2
1. Try wisely to do no harm.
2. Watch your speech.
When I was a young cop--going to Yoga classes to get rid of a pit full of angst, an old teacher offered this formula.
It worked for my blue-collar level of intellect and I think it would work for brainy folks as well. It's just really hard to do. But it feels like a way to do kindness.
62
Poor David Brooks (not in the financial sense). He has carried the water of right-wing politics for so long, and can't openly admit how damaging those policies have been to the country, so he flounders for some topic to write about and discovers "kindness." The party he has supported for so long (hey, it pays well) has no idea what that word means. Millions of American children will suffer because of no affordable health care, resulting from the politicians whose party Brooks supports. Yes, from Brooks, they get the unkindest cut of all.
87
I think the “sad,” refers back to the opening statement “I went into journalism to cover politics but now find myself in national marriage therapy.” So instead of rational political discussion your attention is now drawn to mediating angry and divisive political relationships. Believe me, Mr. Brooks, I am weary too. The wasted years dominated by hateful words, images and ideology. It’s been said here before, but I am hopeful that some day you may own your party’s role in this horrible union. I feel like I am trapped in the worst possible never ending nightmare of a marriage. Sad indeed.
12
F Scott Fitzgerald's opening lines in "The Great Gatsby" continue to provide the best definition of kindness that I know. It's simple, really, a recognition and respect for the other. A parent could do worse than to give the same advice to his/her children as Nick Carraway's father gave to him:
Whenever you feel like criticizing anyone, he told me, just remember that all the people in this world haven't had the advantages that you've had.'
13
Nice job Mr. Brooks, great practical and compassionate advice, with a very welcome dash of humor. Thank you for this.
4
This reads a bit like marriage counseling tips. But that is different from kindness.
Kindness emanates from within and can exist apart from any expectations of others. Kindness is what one puts forward in all settings, however informal, small or large. Kindness is not political or otherwise identity-oriented.
Kindness is the most fundamental good we can offer one another. The place to start is identifying just what it even is.
50
@NM: Yes. And it's a quality, not a 'skill.'
7
@NM -- esteemed daughter...
Kindness was one of the many characteristics that defined Barack Obama. His grace, class, erudition, scholarly bearing and empathy are sorely missed by many Americans.
Today, our country is in the throes of a bloody carnage which was foretold by the current president when he was sworn into the office for which he was woefully unsuited. A kinder, gentler America is not what this president wanted.
Kindness was not evident in Charlottesville, nor in the packaged bombs mailed to prominent Democrats last year, nor in the 35 day government shutdown or the one the president promises to visit on the country again if he doesn't have his way.
"Kindness is the most fundamental good we can offer one other". Your words would not resonate with this president.
21
@Anne
I think kindness is behavior. If it’s inconvenient for me to help someone but I bite my tongue and help anyway, I think my action is more important than my quality or skill.
What works in a marriage works in life. Mutual respect, an open mind, faking it when necessary.
12
I wish David Brooks' thoughtful, insightful and heart-felt column could make a difference in this world.
But we are no longer in the old-fashioned world where thoughtful, insightful and heart-felt words spoken by respected pundits occupying privileged perches might have made a difference.
Instead, we are in a world where non-stop, wall-to-wall, multi-faceted, click and rating obsessed media are dividing us, ever-faster, into narrow-minded tribalism driven by fear/hatred of those not part of "my" tribe. In other words, into a world where the worst of our nature, which used to be sublimated and 'managed' by elite pundits and institutions, is given free reign. (e.g., to denigrate brown people from south of the border as "rapists" and "drug dealers;" Muslims as "radical Islamic terrorists" gets you elected President of the United States).
We need a RADICAL solution to our current dilemma. And, unfortunately, pundits pontificating from privileged perches pushing old-fashioned remedies ain't going to do it. To my mind, the only thing that might is someone who pushes our fear/tribal/atavistic buttons so hard that we have no choice but to turn our critical gaze inward and realize that we are ALL part of the problem.
6
I am so appreciative of your columns because they hold down the barraged fort of civility. Thank you for lifting up kindness and keep up the good work.
19
You've softened Mr. Brooks and this is good advice. I would be much more accepting of it, if it came from someone who did not, for so many years, support the party of meanness. There is nothing that these feel good exercises will do to bring them to the table, as we saw during Obama's administration. Decency and kindness have been swept aside in Washington and now we have fallen to the lowest common denominator of out culture: the reality television show. On reality tv, conflict is encouraged, alliances are formed to oust the other side, and the object above all is to win. Subtlety has no place, because we must appeal to the 'base'. In Trumpian times, the 'base' is baser, appealing to fear, hatred and ignorance. I don't see Republicans coming to a kumbaya moment any time soon.
126
@thewriterstuff,
With due respect, the New York Times explained in a column that 'Kumbaya' is a wailing song. Mr. Richard Luettgen, one of our top commentators would use it on occasion to describe a comforting gathering around a camp fire, and this is to say that his 'contrary' voice is missed because he always brought something of interest to the forum.
1
@thewriterstuff, Yes, no one of us should be suckered by Brooks' "softening". He's likely just trying to tamp down his opposition while he's in an inferior setting. When the GOP again rises, you'll again see his true colors: justifications of wealth imbalance and the need for safety net reductions.
1
No, it’s a virtue.
9
@josephppopp But as Aristotle argued, virtues are skills, acquired via a long process of habit-formation. That's one reason wise child-rearing makes a difference.
2
David;
A good start.
Might I suggest that you send a copy of this list to the head of your chosen Party, the guy who bulldozes his way through every conversation and who's favorite opening gambit is assigning a derogatory, childish moniker to every one who does not agree with his contrarian views?
266
@two cents
Hm. I wonder if jumbling the chairs before a meeting would help Donald Trump be kind?
2
Surprisingly--Pelosi did presume the good on Trump. She could've gloated the "I told you"-she didn't. Not backing him further into the corner was brilliant--part kindness-part shrewdness. Amazing how kindness actually prevents major stupid moments--Tom Brokaw could use some kindness.......
44
Well now
Just not sure.?..
.. how does one .."fight a culture of savagery" ?
and just who are these people..?
meeting with one another ?
with that agenda of those newest social "event experiences" for them to participate in....??
The thing that must be reformed..!
Is governmental processes themselves...
No more !! ..Would shutting down the government...
be ALLOWED !..period !
Much more could be done to legislatively correct the lack
of real interaction between the 2 major parties that make
up our government ..
2
As the flames reach higher and our American democracy burns on its right-wing funeral pyre, Lord Brooks wants us to play Mister Rogers with the Grand Old Pyromaniacs.
Be nice to the lunatics, and common ground will magically emerge.
In 2016, Monarch Mitch McConnell unilaterally suspended the US Constitution and told the President who was elected once by a margin of nine million votes and a second time by five million votes that his Presidency didn't count.
McConnell said: "The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice"... completely ignoring the American people's votes and voices from 2008 and 2012.
McConnell also said this to a cheering crowd of right-wing tyrants : “One of my proudest moments was when I looked at Barack Obama in the eye and I said, ‘Mr. President, you will not fill this Supreme Court vacancy.’”
Since then, a criminal Impostor-In-Chief rigged his way into office via Jim Crow laws, FBI hi jinks, Kremlin assistance and a stunning three-million popular vote deficit and he and Monarch McConnell are rigging their right-wing courts with Robber baron sock puppet judges and frat boy friends with a giddy reckless abandon that this country hasn't witnessed since the release of the movie Animal House.
You don't reason with tyrants, terrorists and a demonstrated criminal political syndicate and their cult members.
You fight like the devil to wipe the worst generation of Republicans off the face of the political map.
918
@Socrates
One of your best ever takedowns, and that’s saying something.
129
@Socrates
If takedowns solved problems we would have no problems.
As always, such comments fail to address the content of the column (other than indirectly showing its wisdom). The ability to turn the discussion of any intellectual or newsworthy issue into a repetition of a given day's political talking points is directly reminiscent of the writing at Fox News. The popularity of these repetitive screeds shows why Fox News and its left wing imitators continue to attract viewership.
18
@Socrates Thank you. You always say what I want to say but in a much nicer, albeit more cutting, way.
27
Sounds like dancing with a mop.
16
I read the title of this and immediately assumed, perhaps wrongly but based on strong and repeated precedent, that David will ruminate about his most recent readings on cultural divisiveness and will, at some point, mention that both sides engage in savagery. As I start to read it, I hope I am proven mistaken and that David is finally conceding that there are MANY large and small instances of savagery in some form that both sides do NOT engage in.
14
@B.R Experience triumphs over hope once again.
Mr. Brooks - I liked this on kindness. You walked by so fast on M street I could not offer my umbrella fast enough. I presumed you were deep in thought and didn’t notice my meager offer to protect your head from the snow/rain. I too sometimes am not in the NOW, but try to be always. Thank you for this lovely piece.
5
This seems tossed off. I don’t get it. And, “Sad”? What does that mean in this context?
109
@Jay,
Perhaps Mr. Brooks was thinking of Trump who often uses the word 'Sad' when addressing the Nation, or tweeting lonely at night.
4
@Jay That last word changed the tone of the whole column didn't it. I've read that David doesn't read the comments for his columns, but using Trump's language to take a subtle dig at his readers makes me wonder. I'm beginning to feel a little crazy for continuing to read DB's columns. He continues to wax nostalgic for some fantasy of the "morally superior systems" of the past. While his readers for the most part are begging for him to step up to the reality of the present and take some responsibility for his part in how his avowed political party got us here. But he never does, and yet we read him. Sad, indeed.
5
Nice advice which I put at least partly into practice.
Now a big if.
Try being nice and polite with a troll, let alone a die hard Trump supporter, let alone Trump.
Sometimes there's no there there.
Your rules of thumb assume the other side has a hand to reach out, some degree of goodwill
68
Everyone has to *want* civil discourse.
17
Keep pushing that boulder up the mountain, David. One of these days, it may not come back down.
12
You rigidify tribal identity every time you make a request that contains a hint of blame. You make that identity less inflamed every time you lead with weakness: “I know I’m a piece of work, but I’m trying to do better, and I hope you can help me out.”
How does David see himself as a piece of work?
2
When I got to the end of your column, I was disappointed. What I read was a guide on how to win friends and influence people. Thank you Dale Carnegie II. But I don't see how any of what you wrote, which does not even include the word kind, has anything to do with genuine kindness.
334
Because David loves to preach to the great unwashed — i.e. what he imagines as “those liberals.” A day without heavy moralizing is to him a day without sunshine. If he can’t get away with it in a column, which under this frightful administration will increasingly be the case, he’ll slip it into the headline.
Admitting my narrative will never win is toughest for me. Of course I think I'm right, who doesn't? I get it though. I'll try harder.
6
Yeah, well, advice from one of the reactionary pundits that caused the problem in the first place.
Mr. Brooks and his ilk have spent a lifetime disparaging government as an evil that seeks to rob the “people”, or at least people that look like him, of their liberty. Now, after decades of propaganda, he is alarmed that a substantial number of people agree with him.The problem apparently is that his disciples have taken his rhetoric much too seriously and have ignored his pleas to backs off a bit. Well, conservatives always have difficulty adapting to a changing environment.
35
"Practical tips for fighting a culture of savagery."
Perhaps a pro tip would be don't elect a savage as president. Followed by, don't allow your party (GOP) to support a savage who wreaks havoc on our country.
Leadership sets the tone in this country. They are not kind.
547
Exactly who is this addressed to?
79
@DW
It's a mystery.
20
@DW,
Perhaps we will find out, by reading Mr. Brooks' work entitled 'The Road to Character'. We are beyond Politics in America at this time in history.
3
"As you were reading this list, you might have thought the real problem was other people’s obnoxiousness, not your own. But take an honest look at yourself. You just read all the way to the end of a piece of emotional advice written by a newspaper columnist.
Sad."
Great article...wish I had had some of these tools during my last horrible work experience. But I do not understand the final paragraphs. I did not think other people's obnoxiousness was the problem, why would the author suggest some people think this...and what's sad about reading all the way to the end of an article? Is this final "sad" another political reference to the current leader of the US? Gee I hate feeling dim.
11
This reminds me of a Kurt Vonnegut quote: We are healthy to the extent our ideas are humane.
Right now, as a country, we are not very healthy.
75
Yes, Mr. Brooks, “kindness is a skill,” and it’s more likely to benefit another when the act is spontaneous, not deliberated beforehand so that one is elevated by the deed as its own reward.
Early on in Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina, the smitten and shamelessly theatrical Count Vronsky, in an attempt to impress Madame Karenina, made a great show of bestowing a few rubles into the hand of a widow whose husband had only moments before fallen under the wheels of a train in the station. He knew that the object of his affections would be watching from her coach. She was, and she knew the planned scene was for her, and she despised him for it.
Your ideas for re-instituting kindness into the public square are so much therapeutic gobbledygook. Want some examples of kindness? Do you remember Barack Obama? It seems a thousand years ago when his wisdom and compassion and gentleness and, yes, kindness, graced us daily for eight years. All you and your lodge brothers and sisters on the Right could do was to criticize his every word and sentence; every political initiative; every executive order when a recalcitrant Congress stood in the George Wallace schoolhouse door, saying “No!”
His kindness to the parents of the slain at both Sandy Hook and at Charleston. His office demanded and dictated his presence at those two sad venues, but no one doubted the kindness at the depths of his mind, heart and soul. And your Right hated him for that.
And who succeeded him? Kindness? Goodness? Virtue?
739
@Red Sox, '04, '07, '13, ‘18,
I miss Him more each day. We must be in purgatory, or a very bizarre Reality TV Show.
123
yes @Red Sox, '04, '07, '13, ‘18,
beautifully put.
61
@Red Sox, '04, '07, '13, ‘18,
This is so true.
56
"Sad"
What do you mean?
17
Another appeal for humanity, humility, and kindness from the rank and file while excruciating trench warfare seems to be the only way to move the needle at the ballot box.
It would be nice to be nicer and more considerate to one another, we all agree: but haven't you noticed that there's a war on, Mr. Brooks?
21
@Seth W.
Are you sure that it's self-righteous anger that is winning the war? It's hard to believe that anger is convincing anybody. Trump is slowly losing the war all by himself. All the anger in the world hasn't changed anybody's mind. And that anger will still be there when Trump fizzles out. What will we do then? If Trump loses in 2020, will all of our problems be solved?
I like the idea of a possibility conversation (instead of a problem/looking backwards conversation). However, both parties need to be on board or there is no beginning. For instance, when McConnell said he would do everything in his power to thwart anything Obama tried to do.
44
@Boggle
It wasn't McConnell who said that, but it was said, in 2010, after the GOP recaptured Congress. In 2019, after another Congressional reversal, the Democrats were not willing to give an inch on the President's top priority, and were willing to see the government shut down for a month to make that point. What's the difference? Aren't we encouraging Pelosi to thwart anything Trump tries to do?
If your reply is that the difference is we're good and they're bad, don't bother answering.
@Tom, I must have missed something, I was unaware of a month long shutdown in 2010, but I was distracted by other things that year. Anyway, to reply this is the first time the government was shut down by a president who refused to sign a bill passed by both houses and he had already agreed to until a couple of talk show hosts told him he shouldn't. That's one difference. This is probably the first time a president said he would do something, and then blamed the party who had not taken power yet. That's another difference. This is the first time that a president, in the midst of a shutdown, ordered furloughed employees back to work so that oil and gas leases wouldn't be delayed. There are three differences. The fact that they're all bad is probably coincidental.
7
@Tom
I don't agree that Speaker Pelosi would try to thwart anything he tries to do... just the ridiculous, nonsensical, counterproductive things he tries to do, which includes the wall.
4
If kindness is a skill, then every issue of the NY Times for the past 2 years, filled with unkind words about President Trump, suggests a lack of skill.
Mr. Brooks has the opportunity, over the next 2 years, to show some skill - by counter-balancing the overwhelming weight of the opinion writers of the NY Times, by simply finding kinder words, less volatile words, less sharp-edged words about the ways in which President Trump has performed.
Starting now.
3
@Maurice Gatien what has trump done to deserve respect or kindness? He's a bully and a brute. As you reap so shall you sow, I hear.
19
@Maurice Gatien
Objection noted. However, we observe that you lob this one in from the safety of Canada. Unfortunate that you
did not provide some examples of "sharp-edged words"
We who live in America, under the whims of King Donald,
have simply run out of words to describe him that are not
sharp-edged.
2
@Maurice Gatien
A newspaper reflects the world at large. A kinder President would find kinder responses. Are the Canadian papers kinder to our Prime Minister because their words are a reflection of his?
This list assumes there are adults in the room. Currently, when other nations deal with the US, they are wondering where the adults are.
50
“ Kindness doesn’t cost a penny, but can be priceless “. I think that’s original to me, but keep it quiet. I don’t want to spoil my reputation. Just saying.
18
David, I know you pay attention to Christianity these days. You shd realize there is a role in our spiritual lives for healthy anger. For instance, look at how angry Jesus felt at the money changers in the temple.He demonstrated a somewhat righteous anger. In Ephesians 4:26 it reads "Be angry yet do not sin." There is a healthy and deserving cause for so many of us to be angry at Trump and his administration. For the most part, being kind to him won't work. But we can be constructive in how we handle our outrage.
96
I really enjoyed reading this. On top of that, I had my annual review today, and one of your recommendations gave me insight about a major work conflict in my last role that ultimately affected my rating this year. Thanks, Mr. Brooks!
4
It's a great list, and would work 99% of the time for any confrontation, however there are 2 loopholes. (problems that I can point out)
1. What if some of the party refuse to go into the room?
2. What if once in the room, part of the party decides to change the rules on a whim?
These are the problems facing many confrontations in the world, and in particular in the United States. (I will speak only of the U.S.)
If you have a government that is supposed to be made of the people (or at least representative of), then it must be all that are represented and not just all of one kind.
Once they get to the seat of government, then there should be a set a rules for debates and votes that all understand, and not a changing of them to suit one particular side. (whether they are in or out of power)
If out of power, then there is an expectation that the majority will govern, and not be brought to a standstill, or leverage brought to bear on a 3rd party so that the out of power faction can dictate all terms.
This is what has been going on now for almost a generation (or longer) as people are voted into power and not allowed to govern, and when out of power are disregarded altogether. You can call that tribe or whatever you want, but don't call it a rearranging of the chairs.
Call it a spoiled child demanding all of the gifts - every time.
153
Should we require members of congress to have lunch with a different member of the other party at least once a week? Maybe they should not be allowed to talk about politics during their lunch break.
22
@norv blake Paintball is probably more their style;-)
2
Actually, it's not sad, because it's what leadership is supposed to be about, getting people to agree and act together.
17