Men of action who successfully
interrupt the mini-dramas of Washington can drive Washington’s insiders nuts,
especially ones as self-consciously cerebral as David Brooks. Edward Snowden
doesn’t prick his conscience. Rather, he inflames his off-the-rack high Tory
prejudices. Here’s a taste from the introduction of his column, The Solitary Leaker:
“From
what we know so far, Edward Snowden appears to be the ultimate unmediated man.
Though obviously terrifically bright, he could not successfully work his way
through the institution of high school. Then he failed to navigate his way
through community college.
“According
to The Washington Post, he has not
been a regular presence around his mother’s house for years. When a neighbor in
Hawaii tried to introduce himself, Snowden cut him off and made it clear he wanted
no neighborly relationships …
“Though
thoughtful, morally engaged, and deeply committed to his beliefs, he appears to
be a product of one of the more unfortunate trends of the age: the atomization
of society, the loosening of social bonds, the apparently growing share of
young men in their 20s who are living technological existences in the fuzzy
land between their childhood institutions and adult family commitments.”
Enough?
Snowden can’t be a hero or
even a serious traitor; he’s not qualified. There’s no way David Brooks would
accept a brown envelope—or a lesson in American civics—from a high-tech,
high school dropout.
Snowden isn’t a "product" of
Yale—one of those mediated
gentlemen that gave us Iraq or the son of one of those team players from
Harvard that gave us Vietnam. He’s the “product” of a Time magazine cover: the atomized society.
If only Snowden had taken off
his designer glasses and hoisted an AK-47. If only he was angry about the IRS
and had a parent in the Tea Party. Then Brooks could have put him to music on
a familiar complaint: the annoying "no-nothings" who don’t appreciate the
imperatives of our complex society.
Brooks, at one point,
graciously submitted to the obvious; the NSA programs that scare Snowden
“could lend themselves to abuse in the future.” For now, however, Brooks has
other worries:
“But
Big Brother is not the only danger facing the country. Another is the rising
tide of distrust, the corrosive spread of cynicism, the fraying of the social
fabric, and the rise of people who are so individualistic in their outlook that
they have no real understanding of how to knit others together and look after
the common good.”
Americans are divided and
individualistic and its politics have been contending with that for well over 2 centuries. Brooks seems to think, however, that the overriding business of
21st-century American politics remains to prove America’s 18th-century critics were wrong.
Of course, whether a "tide of
distrust" is too high, or just right, is always a subject of empirical and
ideological dispute in a gigantic democracy. Personally, I favor a rather high
level of distrust; I just wish it was a little more evenhanded and less
partisan.
The "common good" is also a
moving target—and no longer reliably passed on in the best families or even in
our best institutions. For those reasons, politics are bracingly significant
these days.
Big Brother, however, is
technically feasible today and—without unmediated troublemakers like Edward
Snowden around—will prevail in those solemn bureaucracies dedicated to
serving the COMMON GOOD.
Hear hear. Speaking as an unmediated man, Brooks' article was stark wakeup call.
ReplyDelete