Did anyone read David Brooks piece in The Atlantic?

[D. Spaulding]

Pretty powerful call to action against the damage of what Trump's doing, and to think, it had to come from someone who identifies as a conservative.

"Although Trump’s actions across these various spheres may seem like separate policies, they are part of one project: creating a savage war of all against all and then using the presidency to profit and gain power from it. Trumpism can also be seen as a multipronged effort to amputate the higher elements of the human spirit—learning, compassion, science, the pursuit of justice—and supplant those virtues with greed, retribution, ego, appetite. Trumpism is an attempt to make the world a playground for the rich and ruthless, so it seeks to dissolve the sinews of moral and legal restraint that make civilization decent."

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2025/11/autocracy-resistance-social-movement/684336/

[usonian]

1. Read it? I just posted as much as DU allows.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100220721582

[GoneOffShore]

2. He's been simping for the Republicans for the last 10 years. And now he's worried?

[summer_in_TX]

7. Not sure this take of David Brooks is on the nose.

He's been simping for the Republicans for the last 10 years.

David Brooks grew up and was educated in a conservative tradition, but not the version of today which isn't conservative at all. He was a Republican for decades, just not the reactionary type exemplified by Pat Buchanan and Trump. He was quite critical of W, especially in his second term and he's yet more critical of MAGA and Trump. From his books and columns, that's when he became much more independent.

He voted for Obama. Not sure about in 2012, but definitely in 2008.He voted for Biden. Dunno about Hillary but wouldn't be surprised. I'm quite sure he voted for Kamala. He saw what Trump is long ago, and has been one of the first calling for people to take to the streets.

He still leans conservative, but he votes for the candidate he views as best for the nation. I love his writing, and find a lot of food for thought there. I agree with him as often as I disagree.

[GoneOffShore]

9. I've always found him to be intellectually dishonest with just a hint of misogyny.

[Cosmocat]

12. He is an arrogant halfwit

Spent the 90s and early 2000s trying to not smash my TV whenever he was on with his elitist right wing "intellectual" bullshit.

DT didn't just pop up out of thin air and take over that party.

For decades the David Brooks of the world softened up the "middle" of the country with the simple ass bullshit about "small government" "lower taxes" no matter how wrong they always were.

[CTyankee]

17. Yeah, my memory of him was that he once was obnoxious and pompous. He's better now but I don't know if I trust him.

I like to see him with Capehart who gives him the "look" when he is being even slightly pompous. Capehart won't let him off the hook, ever. I root for Capehart, a gay black man who has learned a lot from life. But I do credit David with at least showing up and enduring the smackdowns by Capehart!

[LAS14]

3. Thank you, David Brooks!!!!! nt

[BaronChocula]

4. Back of the line, David

Now that white somewhat moderate conservative elites are being targeted AMERICA NEEDS A MASS MOVEMENT NOW?

Hey, bro. The people who have been behind movements in America are talking. Sit down.

[Hekate]

5. Yes I read it earlier today, and there are people complaining loudly about Brooks who have not ...

I’ve had some issues with David Brooks over the many years, but he is intelligent and well meaning — and I gladly give him credit for having seen the light. I do not insist that all pundits agree with me, and true conservatives don’t give me heartburn — much.

He’s okay.

[D. Spaulding]

6. Couldn't agree more.

Well said.

[Abolishinist]

8. Thank you, a great read.

"If you think Trumpism will simply end in three years, you are naive. Left unopposed, global populism of the sort Trumpism represents could dominate for a generation. This could be the rest of our lives, and our children’s, too."

And for those who hit a paywall,

https://archive.ph/UcNjG

[hatrack]

10. Years late, billions short . . .

My attention budget re. David Brooks has been zeroed out for quite some time now.

[librechik]

11. Yes indeed. Still proud of David for his eloquence on this subject.

Wish he had spoken out sooner.

[Cosmocat]

14. Correct

He spent decades helping to push the country to the edge of the cliff and now that we are over it he wants to be the voice of reason?

[GusBob]

13. DU comments on threads like these make me wonder sometimes

So many 'blame the messenger and ignore the message' comments

I get it, it was long article, and maybe a bit too cerebral for breakfast? can we make it a tik-toc video or something?

I think its intellectually dishonest to trash it because of the byline

To the point: a couple of days ago there was neat article about robotics in China how folks were surprised about about the rise of dark factories. Well many months ago Thomas Friedman wrote an in depth fascinating article in the NYTimes about the subject posted here.
Because it was he, and the NYT was out of favor at the time for some reason, the writer and paper were roundly mocked while the subject matter was world-changing, and the textual information was not addressed in any of the comments

It was a great article and bookmarked, thanks or posting

[Cosmocat]

15. its tough for anyone who called bullshit on the likes of Brooks and Friedman

in the 90s and early 2000s,. who spent decades and built their brands normalizing the horrible policies and positions of the right wing that softened up the country to take the steps toward the cliff we are now over, to praise them for playing the violins now that we are in free fall.

[CTyankee]

18. I see your point. I feel like saying "Oh, NOW you are complaining? Where have you BEEN?!!!

[wiggs]

16. Correct. The vast pools of money in various places proved too much of a temptation for those

who saw a way to acquire them...and they recognized that the only way was through autocracy and cruelty and recognized that there was an easily controlled con man who could be the catalyst within a vulnerable system.

the world generates, saves, and spends ungodly amounts of money and the bosses want more of a taste than they were getting. Enough to put them out of reach of laws, voting, environmental collapse, courts, resistance, etc..

[peggysue2]

19. Better late than never

I confess, I've always thought David Brooks was a pompous ass ready and willing to defend the indefensible.

But . . .

This is a damn fine essay with a fierce point of view, well-placed and accurate historical references and a reminder that the American experiment has always been messy. The Republic is not over yet unless we allow the continuing degradation through our silence, our fear, our unwillingness to push back in whatever way we can.

And yes, Saul Alinsky was right--ridicule is a mighty weapon, a seasoned tool of resistance. In fact, I just read that a group in Portland is handing out inflatable costumes for Saturday's No Kings March. The frogs and their companions will be out in force. The giraffe may have been arrested but it's not stopping other protesters.

Well worth the read.