David Brooks Goes for Nobel in Victim Blaming

[Hannah Bell]

We are looking at a prolonged period of high unemployment because economists with degrees from places like Harvard and M.I.T. could not see an $8 trillion housing bubble. The economics reporters who work for outlets like the New York Times, National Public Radio, and the Wall Street Journal all lacked the ability to think independently and largely accepted at face value the assertions from the well-respected economists that there was no problem in the housing market. And the politicians -- well that's not worth mentioning.

So, what does David Brooks tell us in his column?

"This recession has exposed America's social weak spots. For decades, men have adapted poorly to the shifting demands of the service economy. Now they are paying the price. For decades, the working-class social fabric has been fraying. Now the working class is in danger of descending into underclass-style dysfunction."

Of course Brooks is right. Working class men are ill-prepared to deal with the effects of incredible economic mismanagement that has made them its primary victims. It has been conscious policy of David Brooks and his peers to weaken welfare state supports, making income and well-being almost entirely dependent on employment. Now, because David Brooks' highly-educated peers are incompetent economic managers, millions of working class people (disproportionately men) are facing extended periods of unemployment. And, naturally Brooks sees their difficulty in dealing with this crisis as a failure of working class culture.


http://prospect.org/csnc/blogs/beat_the_press_archive?month=02&year=2010&base_name=david_brooks_goes_for_nobel_in#comments

[Enrique]

1. what's the unemployment rate among pundits?

they all seem to still be there.

[DFW]

3. Amazing, isn't it?

Most of these pundits have unimaginative, uninspiring opinions that I might hear in a shopping mall
during the janitors' coffee break, except that the janitors would probably have a better grasp of things,
and formulate their opinions in a more intersting fashion.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

2. Brooks and his kind...

...see starvation as a self-terminating problem.

As long as they give the house staff a $20 gift card to Wal-Mart every winter their conscience is clear.

Bastards.

[Donnachaidh]

4. "the working-class social fabric has been fraying."

The working class has had their *social fabric* torn out from beneath them from the globalists who don't want to pay living wages, decent retirements, etc.

Gawd -- I'd love to push this guy's face into a pile of horse manure! It's the workers fault? Fuck him and the horse he rode in on.....

[Hannah Bell]

7. you echo my desire. i'd love to see one of these overpaid schmucks get what he so eagerly dishes

out to others.

most pundits' commentary isn't worth two cents, let alone the hundreds of thousands they get for regurgitating it.

[My Good Babushka]

5. LOL! Yeah, why is that?

Why are people having such a hard time working variable shift jobs for 1/3 of the salary they used to make and no benefits or pension? Why is that? It's much to difficult for me to figure out.

[OHdem10]

6. I will take Immelt and Volker's analysis. This country cannot be

sustained on Service Based Economy. Our Leaders and Elites
made a mistake in making the change to a Service Based Economy.

For many reasons including National Security we must figure
out a way to return to an economy in which MFG makes up 15%
to 20% GDP.

[brentspeak]

8. Here's Brooks' real doozy: "First, we need to redefine masculinity"

First, we need to redefine masculinity, creating an image that encourages teenage boys to stay in school and older men to pursue service jobs. Evangelical churches have done a lot to show how manly men can still be nurturing. Obviously, more needs to be done, and schools need to be more boy-friendly.

Nothing wrong with encouraging boys to stay in school, but maybe Brooks can quit his job as a corporate brown-noser and apply for a Wal-Mart greeting job if he wants to inspire "older men to pursue service jobs". Apparently, in Brooks' twisted worldview, the male proles out there have a fundamental "masculine" defect for not wanting to accept being subservient slave-wagers. Kind of hard to support a family (let alone, supporting even oneself) making less than $10/hour with no benefits, Brooks you idiot.

[Hannah Bell]

9. his ilk should be strung up by their nuts. see how their "masculinity" fares then.

Jobless communities = purposeless men who have no material basis to take on the care of spouse, children, parents, etc. -- & no material basis for a healthy self-image or "status".

how hard is this to understand?

crap, every unemployed guy on my block could write better social commentary than this flipping twit.

pisses me off today especially since one of my neighbors who's been out of work 1 year -- with wife, 3 kids, great neighbor, we garden together -- has said they're moving back east to their family -- he can't get work, he's behind in his house payments, & his UE is expiring.

another empty house in the neighborhood, another potential meth house.

fuck brooks & all his ilk.