TUESDAY, AUGUST 8, 2023
So says Brooks' dream: It's as we noted yesterday. Way back in May 1962, the extremely young Bob Dylan reported a troubling dream.
At the tender age of 21, Dylan dreamed that he was walking through World War III! He reported the contents of that dream in Talkin' World War III Blues, a song on his breakthrough Freewheelin' album.
As Dylan noted in his song, many people were having that dream back in those frightening years. Briefly, as a point of personal privilege, we offer two recollections:
In July of that same year, as a rising sophomore in high school, we were lucky enough to attend the legendary "greatest track meet of all time"—the two-day US-Soviet track meet held at Stanford Stadium.
We saw the Soviet Union's Valery Brumel set a new world record in the high jump. We saw Bob Hayes and Wilma Rudolph win the men's and women's 100 meters for the United States.
By far most memorably, we saw the Soviet and American athletes circle the track, arm in arm, at the end of the final day of competition, as a crowd of 81,000 stood and watched—and watched, and occasionally wept.
Three months later, in October 1962, the Cuban missile crisis occurred, making Dylan a prophet. For roughly a week, we actually were all having that same crazy dream.
We were all having that horrible dream. We well recall NAME WITHHELD, our school's head cheerleader the following year, coming up to us at school one day and saying this:
"I'm afraid I won't get the chance to grow up."
It was just as Dylan had prophesied only five months earlier:
Well, time passed and now it seems
Everybody's having them dreams.
Everybody sees himself
Walking around with no one else...
Or not walking around at all! People were dreaming that too.
Along with the rest of the world, we survived the missile crisis. Sixty years later, that nuclear war still hasn't taken place.
Still and all, crazy dreams never cease:
As we noted yesterday, we keep having a crazy dream in which Donald J. Trump gets elected again next year. Meanwhile, David Brooks has reported a crazy dream in which we ourselves—we members of the anti-Trump blue tribe—have played a role in creating the politics which could get Trump elected again.
Full disclosure! Tens of millions of our neighbors and friends don't see these things the way we do. They can't wait to vote for Trump, as is their perfect right.
As we noted yesterday, Brooks ran last Friday's column under a crazy headline. The headline went like this:
What if We’re the Bad Guys Here?
What if we're the bad guys here? In effect, Brooks was reporting a dream that's even crazier than our own. In effect, he was reporting a crazy dream in which we anti-Trump blue tribe members have been, and still are, facilitating his possible return to power.
What if we're the bad guys here? How could that possibly be the case?
Yesterday, we showed you the way Brooks started to lay out his crazy thought experiment. As we all know, his dream is utterly nuts. But as he laid out the contents of his dream, it took us the back to the 1960s—to those street-fighting days of yore.
Here's the way it all began, according to Brooks' dream:
BROOKS (8/4/23): We anti-Trumpers often tell a story to explain [how Trump can still be politically viable...
In this story, we anti-Trumpers are the good guys, the forces of progress and enlightenment. The Trumpers are reactionary bigots and authoritarians...
I partly agree with this story, but it’s also a monument to elite self-satisfaction.
So let me try another story on you. I ask you to try on a vantage point in which we anti-Trumpers are not the eternal good guys. In fact, we’re the bad guys.
This story begins in the 1960s, when high school grads had to go off to fight in Vietnam but the children of the educated class got college deferments. It continues in the 1970s, when the authorities imposed busing on working-class areas in Boston but not on the upscale communities like Wellesley where they themselves lived.
The ideal that we’re all in this together was replaced with the reality that the educated class lives in a world up here and everybody else is forced into a world down there. Members of our class are always publicly speaking out for the marginalized, but somehow we always end up building systems that serve ourselves.
Say what? Once again, a point of personal privilege:
Three years after the missile crisis, we ourselves went off to college—with a draft deferment, of course. We also remember, all too clearly, Boston's busing battles in the 1970s—though we were down here in Baltimore then, teaching fifth grade (with a draft deferment!) in the Baltimore City Schools.
Is it possible that we blue tribals have helped create the political world in which Donald J. Trump could get elected again?
At this site, we've long made that same suggestion. Tomorrow, we'll consider those episodes from long ago, then move on through the rest of Brooks' crazy dream.
Bob Dylan dreamed a crazy dream when he had just turned 21. David Brroks is now dreaming a crazier dream:
To what extent could Brooks' dream possibly be somewhat true?
Tomorrow: Creedence Clearwater's dream
The Press sisters were there: The Press sisters, Tamara and Irina, won three events for the Soviets at that greatest meet. For a list of all the winners that weekend, you can just click here.
"Burn the lifeboats."
ReplyDelete----Driftglass
Why, do you suppose, it is so difficult for Brooks to say the Left were right about the Right all along?
ReplyDeleteThe point of track meets and cultural exchanges with the Soviet Union during that time period was to defuse tensions during the Cold War.
ReplyDelete"Well, time passed and now it seems
ReplyDeleteEverybody's having them dreams.
Everybody sees himself
Walking around with no one else..."
Somerby might try to pretend that Dylan is similarly prescient about our times, but he is merely expressing a kind of adolescent angst that is common to most teens and will help him sell records.
The point that sticks with me, about Dylan, is how he stole valuable records from his mentor during high school, taking them with him without permission as he left town, simply because he wanted them. Perhaps Dylan was being literal when he talked about walking around with no one else. He showed little consideration toward someone who had helped him early on, certainly no gratitude. This is the preoccupation of youth with itself, but is it right to attribute that to everyone else? Maybe Dylan did feel a little bit bad about it, since he bothered to be self-justifying. (Everyone else was doing it too, he says in his dream.)
But what does it mean what Somerby identifies with this piece of adolescent alienation and self-preoccupation? Is he really accusing us of being the same, when we on the left are the ones who care about others and are trying to improve conditions for marginalized people. We are the last ones walking around like there is no one else. It just doesn't fit. Perhaps Brooks is trying to justify himself, like Dylan, by assuming that everyone else is a self-satisfied elitist (Somerby's words, Brooks' words). That doesn't make it true about any of the other people they disparage.
Self-satisfied elites: Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, Harlan Crow, the Kochs, etc.
DeleteSo THIS is what sticks to you about Dylan? Seems to me you approach the subject with an idiotic chip on your shoulder.
DeleteIt shows he was a self-centered person, like the elites Brooks describes. Narcissism isn't pretty in the way narcissists tend to use others.
DeleteDylan recently sold his catalog for something like $300,000,000 dollars. He’s like 80 years old. I never got the sense that he was ever very progressive or even engaged politically. His lyrics frequently defy explanation. Anyway, hope he enjoys his mansions.
DeleteAccording to Wikipedia, Dylan idolized Woody Guthrie and wrote and sang protest songs about injustices, such as poor people and incarcerated boxers, but grew to feel manipulated and used by activists, so he stopped writing folk protest songs and became commercial. That suggests to me that he had no strong commitment to progressive values but an idealized notion of following in Woody's footsteps. Somerby also uses Woody Guthrie lyrics here, when it meets his needs. Pete Seeger did the same thing as Dylan, leaving Harvard because he didn't want to sing acapella. But unlike Dylan, Seeger remained connected to progressivism and continue to help labor unions and other causes throughout his equally lengthy career. Unlike Dylan, Seeger's songs make sense because he is trying to communicate with other people, not make money or express his obscure "deepness" and sensitive nature (sarcasm). Notice the difference in the lyrics after Dylan became Christian.
DeleteEverybody has a point of view and the people on the right believe they are correct in theirs, just as we do in ours. That doesn't mean there is no way of deciding who is accurate and who is misguided. There exists an objective reality distinct from the conspiracy theories. That reality can be known with effort.
ReplyDeleteHow many people attended Trump's inauguration? There were competing estimates. Then an enterprising person used a technique of counting how many people were contained in a square inch of the photos and extrapolating from that to the entire area to determine more precisely how many people attended. From that we know that Trump was wildly incorrect in his claims.
We can yell back and forth at each other, or we can use empirical methods to determine who is telling the truth about things. It is called seeking evidence. So far, the left does a lot more of it than the right does.
But beyond that, there are values and the left and right value different things, and also place different weight on the things they value in common. When deciding what is important in our world, the answer to such a question is going to place people in different categories. That is also not a matter of right and wrong because we each have he right to determine what is most important to us individually. Somerby seems to think that we on the left should sacrifice our values in the name of peace and harmony, conflict reduction. That is Somerby expressing his own values. I disagree with him about that, and that is my right. I value change, justice, and the well-being of others far more than I value peace and quiet. It isn't clear to me what Brooks values. But I also value truth and for that reason I cannot go along with anyone who supports Trump, no matter how sincerely they consider themselves the good guys.
The biggest injustice is to those black kids in Baltimore's inner city schools, who were taught by an untrained draft dodger instead of a trained teacher who cared about them. Is it elitist not to care about the others who were harmed by his own selfish behavior? If so, Somerby is still an elitist. But voting for Trump won't absolve him.
ReplyDeleteNo one is entirely a bad guy or a good guy. Brooks' formulation "Are we the bad guys?" is odd. There are good and bad acts committed by diverse people for complex reasons. Somerby hated his mother for forcing him to go to Harvard, but maybe she too just wanted to keep him out of the army and help him have a longer life. He might look back and thank her, instead of identifying with a worm like Brooks.
David Brooks is, to use an overused word, a hack. Bob once regarded him as such. This foolishness that Trump is the lefts fault is what Bob is attracted to here. Yes, it’s hard to believe he is not now on retainer from somewhere as reward for pumping this nonsense into the system.
ReplyDelete“They just sit there and take it!!” Bob once fumed when the Democrats response to the right was too passive. Now it’s what Bob demands.
A question Bob will never ask: aren’t these attacks on Hunter Biden, which Bob has signed off on, about the lowest in partisan mean spiritedness?
The answer to "What if we're the bad guys here?" is: of course you are, along with the other high minded intellectual shills for the republican establishment. It only stands to reason that Somerby finds this kind of pablum so appealing at this point. Birds of a feather.
ReplyDelete"We were all having that horrible dream. We well recall NAME WITHHELD, our school's head cheerleader the following year, coming up to us at school one day and saying this:
ReplyDelete"I'm afraid I won't get the chance to grow up."
This sounds apocryphal. What she said is so trite and has been applied to a variety of situations in the intervening years. Just google it and you will find memes galore centered on that and similar phrases expressed by young people.
The chance that Somerby would be approached by a head cheerleader who just walks up to him and makes a personal confession of fear to him is bizarre. She seems to have had no filters. I didn't know many cheerleaders myself, but no one was walking around saying such stuff to each other, and I was in college during the same time period as Somerby at a somewhat elite school.
This story may have two aims. One is to show that Somerby was on the radar of a head cheerleader. Another might be to show that fear was in everyone's minds, not just his own, as he used a nonprofit and the lives of black children to save his own skin. She may be his projection of his own fear of death.
If we saw such a scene in a film, we would groan. But perhaps Somerby is not mentioning that this occurred right after Kent State, when everyone on a campus was both frightened and angry (is that allowed for cheerleaders?). Somerby isn't good at context.
No, we didn't begin electing Trump in the 60s. Trump was recruited by Russia to get involved in politics in 2011.
ReplyDeleteLike Ronald Reagan, Trump was initially a Democrat but switched to Republican in order to run for office. What does it mean when someone abandoned their long-held political affiliation like that? It implies that those political values were not strongly held, but it also says something about the willingness to abandon values for personal gain. It suggests that Republican voters may be more open to influence by charismatic individuals without principles.
Bob Dylan lyrics say nothing whatsoever about any trend that might lead to Trump in 1960 or now. I don't see any reason why Somerby might have quoted Dylan's song. Nor does Brooks provide an explanation for this phenomenon on the right, where a celebrity is considered qualified for office without any prior experience, and becomes the center of a political cult of personality.
People didn't vote for Reagan because of elites (Reagan was one himself). Trump has done a more direct job of mobilizing resentments to form a political base, so elites do matter. But is it elite to be liberal? The right would like us to think so, but I don't see that at all. Average income of Trump voters is higher than for Democrats. Perhaps Somerby says this because Democrats tend to be better educated, but Democrats are not only those at top schools but those at state schools too, which are not considered elite. And there is the obvious fact that people who acquire money tend to become Republicans. That puts the elites on the right, not the left.
Somerby and Brooks both seem to be working hard to perpetuate a meme that the left is elitist. But that isn't the truth on the ground -- it is a meme that tries to blame the left for what is true of the right. So why is Somerby working with Brooks to take down Biden? In better times, Somerby would have been pointing out Brooks' flawed thinking, not joining him to attack Democratic voters.
“Elite”, in Republican-speak, means “college educated.” It never seems to include the true elites, all the plutocrats, who are by and large right wingers. (Harlen Crow, buyer of Supreme Court justices/justice, comes to mind as a recent example, as noted by a commenter above).
ReplyDelete“Self-satisfied” means “think they are right about the issues.” Anyone with any beliefs at all thinks they are right about the issues, and there are surely some issues that cannot and should not be compromised.
“Self-satisfied elites” means nothing more than “college educated liberals.”
And on the way to electing Trump, “we” elected Clinton and Obama, then defeated Trump with Biden. None of these Democrats were “elite”, all were the product of modest homes and achieved success due to their innate abilities. And when Obama defeated the war hero and the business tycoon, the right wing’s heads exploded.
“We” also stood for civil rights, which LBJ correctly predicted would lose elections for the Democrats.
"Is it possible that we blue tribals have helped create the political world in which Donald J. Trump could get elected again?"
ReplyDeleteNo. Recall that Trump got elected the first time by massively losing the popular vote but winning in the electoral college. There, three states turned to Trump by very small margins (adding up to 70,000 votes in those three states combined). These states could have stayed Democratic and put Hillary into office had not a substantial number of Democrats not voted for Jill Stein or just stayed home, as black and Bernie voters did in too high numbers. This was later found to be the result of a Russia-funded social media campaign targeted at black and progressive voters in exactly those states. But this Russia-funded social media campaign would not have worked had not Comey meddled in the election right before the election (leaving no time to address his interference). Polling shows the size of the dip in Clinton's support due to Comey's statement.
So, this was not a normal election. It is illegal for foreign countries to meddle in elections and it was against regulations for Comey to make is election-turning statement that put Trump into office. Comey was a Republican who was being pressured by Trump supporters within the FBI to do as he did.
All of this was choreographed by Republicans and had nothing to do with perceptions of Democratic elitism of class issues, as Somerby today suggests. In 2020, without such interference, the Democrats won the popular vote by an even larger margin and Trump did not win the electoral college. He was handily defeated by Biden, as will occur in 2024 again because Trump has still not won over the popular vote and Democrats have been addressing issues with the electoral college to prevent another manipulation there. Trump is not making progress in swing states and there is no Comey to come forward and tarnish Biden, despite the right's concerted effort to make Hunter Biden into a campaign issue and create the image of a Biden crime family. That is not gaining any traction except among Trump's existing supporters on the right. They are not sufficient to put Trump into office.
Somerby's suggestion about Trump winning may seem plausible because the left was blindsided by Hillary's loss. That isn't going to happen again because the left is wiser now and because the previous methods used by the Republicans are being blocked. Further, Trump is going to be busy fighting his criminal trials and new ones that will arise between now and Nov 2024, because Trump is a criminal. The more evidence of that seeps into the public awareness, the less likely Trump can pull another stunt to win in 2024. Meanwhile, demographic changes are putting more voters into the Democratic column, among women and younger voters especially. No one is forgetting about abortion and the culture war is becoming an irritation instead of fascination, even among Republicans. Things are not going Trump's way, despite the power of his base to give him the nomination. It takes independents and Democrats to put Trump in office, and Trump does not have those voters, no matter what Somerby says.
So, this is Somerby's pipe dream. It isn't prophetic, it is pathetic. And so far, Somerby has presented no evidence to support his assertions about Trump winning, and nothing to tie Democratic actions to increased Trump votes, nothing at all. I expect that he will repeat his same mantras about us liberals being awful, in the vain hope that repetition alone will convince anyone he is right.
This is about the only topic more boring than MS NAEP scores, but it is obviously what Somerby is being paid to write, so we will get it day after day until Nov 2024 or Somerby decides to take another vacation.
I don't think ordinary liberals are baddies, but I do think liberal politicians are baddies. I blame them for the failure of the War on Poverty. Many trillions of dollars have been spent, yet the underclass seems to be as large as ever. This failure came from policies that were intentionally chosen to not be effective, particularly as regards blacks.
ReplyDeleteAs many have pointed out, blacks today suffer from the effects of slavery and Jim Crow. How do those effects manifest themselves? In part, financially. But, some other groups who were just as poor, such as Jews, Vietnamese, and Chinese, managed to become richer than whites. IMO the effects of slavery and Jim Crow manifest themselves in black culture. The cultures of Jews, Vietnamese and Chinese were somehow more conducive to success in the United States. The best way to help blacks involves their culture.
However, liberal programs were most just aimed at giving stuff to blacks -- money and special privileges. One can argue whether or not blacks were entitled. Either way, giving people stuff is not the way to build self-sufficiency. On the contrary, these give-aways build dependency. Dependency is what Democratic politicians want. It gives them a big, sustainable voting bloc.
In fact, some liberal programs made black culture worse. Exhibit 1 is welfare programs that discourage stable marriages. For Hispanics, there is the disastrous bi-lingual education. This program ensures that Hispanic children will be less fluent in English.
What particularly incites me is that these politicians don't look at actual results. If they did, they would see the failure of some of their approaches. But, for Democratic pols, these programs are not failures. They produce Democratic votes. That's the politicians' measure of success.
"I blame them [liberal politicians] for the failure of the War on Poverty. Many trillions of dollars have been spent, yet the underclass seems to be as large as ever."
DeleteThe war on poverty started with LBJ and reduced poverty significantly. It stopped and the gains were steadily reduced because Republicans didn't want to continue spending the money. The possibility of reducing poverty is illustrated by the reductions happening with the pandemic stipends. Poor people benefitted greatly, many moving out of poverty, even with a simple measure like the child tax credit (which involved giving the deduction applied to taxes to poor people as a monthly amount, instead of waiting until the tax return was filed).
The idea that a one-time investment will permanently reduce poverty makes no sense because new people become poor and because capitalism keeps upending people's jobs and businesses.
One huge contributor to poverty is medical bills. Republicans have consistently oppose efforts to help individuals with catastrophic illness. Huge percentages of homeless people are homeless due to an illness that consumed their financial resources. About half are over 60 and cannot find jobs to earn the money to pay for housing.
When David says "underclass," he means blacks. The system is truly rigged against them, but they are not the only poor people in our country. Dollars to help those suffering poverty are important to ease suffering, but changes in economic policies and business regulation are needed to protect workers from capitalistic practices that create and maintain poverty. Republicans oppose those changes, along with unions and worker protections.
Look at the elderly people who are saying that they cannot afford to retire. Look at businesses who fire older workers (and will not hire them as job applicants) except in marginal and low paying jobs. Social security helps, but Republicans are opposed to it. If families had to assume the total support of their elderly parents and grandparents, their own households would collapse under the burden, because most live paycheck to paycheck and cannot afford another mouth, much less the costs of medical care and things like home nursing or supervision of an aged person. That is how people become poor in the first place. Churches and non-profits cannot cover the amount of need.
If David were truly concerned about poverty instead of using it as an excuse to vote Republican, he might understand why poverty has not disappeared in the face of repeated Republican cuts in funding.
It sounds like David wants to punish blacks for Jim Crow.
DeleteGosh, giving people money to buy food creates a dependency on eating. Who knew?
DeleteFarm subsidies, given largely to white farmers, have created a huge dependency and yet David never speaks against them. Wonder why not?
DeleteThis is David's racist cri de coeur. He is not open to discussing any of this -- it is about blaming black people for their difficulties. It is a waste of time to respond because he doesn't read or think about anything anyone says here.
I read an interesting book recently called "Cheap Land Colorado" by Ted Conover. It is about people living in subdivided areas of the San Luis Valley in CO on plots of land costing about $5000 each, with no infrastructure (no sewers, no streets, no electricity, no water other than wells). The people purchasing that land had largely moved from increasingly unaffordable urban inner city neighborhoods. They live in cars, RVs, improvised shacks and occasionally a finished cabin. Their income was largely from disability, bartered labor, or welfare payments with help from a local non-profit social work agency. These are poor people living a subsistence existence in a rural setting. They like guns and dogs, raise goats and chickens, and many have children. They are nearly all white. Shall we talk about their culture, David?
Delete4:15 please take your BS whining about economic anxiety somewhere else. Everyone knows there's no economic anxiety among Americans. Americans have no reason to complain about their economic situation as has been clearly proven over and over and over again.
Delete4:15. It's true. I guess you haven't heard but Biden has turned the economy around. Have you seen the unemployment numbers? They are the lowest they've ever been.
DeleteAny hogwash about economic anxiety and Americans having any problems at all with the incredible economy that President Biden has bestowed upon us, well that can only be coming from one place. Russia. So put on shopka and eat a potato idiot Russian troll.
Pretty much everywhere you go in America all people talk about is how well the economy is doing. And how well President Biden is doing and how impressive the unemployment numbers are.
DeleteBiden has turned the economy around, preventing a predicted recession due to covid. It hasn’t helped everyonebut Biden deserves more credit than he has gotten.
DeleteI thought David might be less harsh on black poor people if he understood that white people are poor too without anyone suggesting that their culture is to blame, including MAGAs.
Okay, cool. You were just pointing out his racism. For a second there I thought you were going to pretend like there was some sort of economic anxiety in the country which of course, as we all know very well, is couldn't be farther from the truth!
DeleteThere is simply no way, in today's America, in Biden's America with the economy that Biden has brought us and the incredible lack of inflation that we are all now experiencing, that any politician could possibly make a broad economic appeal towards average Americans and have any kind of response that is genuine and not really racism! That would just be impossible. I'm glad we agree.
If there are two things that are absolutely and fundamentally true they are that there is no economic anxiety in this country now, the economy is roaring, unemployment is at an all-time low and American citizenry are just tickled pink about the situation! And second is that Americans have faith in their institutions now more than ever. Why would they not? Certain clown politicians come along and make appeals to voters about our institutions and how they treat us, but those are really just dog whistles for racism! Right? I'm glad we agree on all this.
DeleteIf someone is feeling economic anxiety, their best bet is to vote Democratic.
DeleteAs Democrats, I think we all need to continue to call out racism! It is the biggest problem we have. But speaking to voters about class issues and economic anxiety, what are you crazy? That would just be total bs. And we are not bs, they are.
DeleteGod bless president Joseph R. Biden and God bless America.
What are you completely insane? Who would complain about economic anxiety? Why would you even say that? Who would have any complaint about that? Look at the unemployment numbers. Have you not seen them? They are at an all- time low.
DeleteTell me the truth, can you name one person you know anywhere in your family or at work that has any complaints at all about how well the economy is doing? Tell the truth.
All my friends and family are talking about how great the economy is and how low prices have become relative to their wages. The excitement is palpable. Most of the people I talk to are worried about racism. And lack of feminine hygiene products and high school boys bathrooms. Let's get real.
DeleteI don't want to hear one more goddamn word about economic anxiety from any of you people. Economy is booming. Basta.
DeleteRacism is certainly the biggest problem racial minorities have. If you care about living up to American ideals, it will be your problem too. I get it that there are others who think asserting white supremacy is job 1. But that’s why there is polarization, not Biden’s economic progress.
DeleteWhatever your intentions with this trolling, you point is not getting through. I suspect you are just here to annoy people.
The passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, gave us the modern Republican Party. The modern Republican Party, in turn, gave us Trump.
Delete