The Corner

David Brooks on a Responsible Elite

David Brooks’s advice on leadership has been suspect since he deduced from the crease in Obama’s pants that he would be “a very good president.” His scattershot column today contains some thoughts on society’s leadership class that are no more accurate. The relevant grafs:

It’s important in times like these to step back and get clarity. The truest thing to say is this: We are living in an amazingly fortunate time. But we also happen to be living during a leadership crisis, and a time when few people have faith in elites to govern from the top. We live in a vibrant society that is not being led.

We don’t suffer from an abuse of power as much as a nonuse of power. It’s been years since a major piece of legislation was passed, and there’s little prospect that one will get passed in the next two.

This leadership crisis is eminently solvable. First, we need to get over the childish notion that we don’t need a responsible leadership class, that power can be wielded directly by the people. America was governed best when it was governed by a porous, self-conscious and responsible elite — during the American revolution, for example, or during and after World War II. Karl Marx and Ted Cruz may believe that power can be wielded directly by the masses, but this has almost never happened historically.

First of all, I’m not sure that anyone thinks “power can be wielded directly by the masses” — not even Karl Marx or Ted Cruz!

More important, the reason we suffer from a leadership crisis is not that the public is unwilling to be led by the elite but that our elite is generally unworthy of trust. This is not simply a matter of conspicuous consumption on the part of the rich, as Brooks suggests later in the column. The deeper problem is that we have a post-American elite which views with scorn the patriotic public it presumes to lead. This is largely true regardless of elite disagreement on taxes or foreign policy or other issues. Whatever differences may divide the corporate-oriented right and anti-borders libertarians from ethnic-disapora chauvinists and hard-leftists, they share a post-patriotic, post-national sensibility, the result of what the great Samuel Huntington called the “denationalization of the American elite.” This divergence in values between the public and the elite is most apparent regarding immigration policy, but comes into play in any issue touching on the National Question: bilingualism, multiculturalism, ethnic preferences, and the like. 

The “humble and honest populism” that Senator Sessions has championed is not, as is implicit in Brooks’s column, an anti-intellectual spasm by the ignorant mob. Rather, it’s a demand that America’s elite actually put America and her people first and not act as if it is part of a global collection of citizens of the world who just happened to live here for now. We see the same thing in Europe, where popular resentment against contemptuous elites and their EU project takes different forms depending on cultures and personalities, but all tapping into the public disgust with the elite.

Huntington quotes Sir Walter Scott’s lines on patriotism:

Breathes there the man, with soul so dead, 

Who never to himself hath said, 

This is my own, my native land! 

Whose heart hath ne’er within him burn’d,

As home his footsteps he hath turn’d,

From wandering on a foreign strand!

The Brooks column’s reminder that “privilege imposes duties” and its call for the powerful to “follow a code of public spiritedness” are sound as far as they go. But the problem they seek to address is not that the wealthy give “luxury cars to their college-age kids.” Rather, it’s that much of our elite have souls so dead that they consider themselves to have transcended the atavistic values of the people. Until that changes, our leadership crisis will continue.

Mark Krikorian, a nationally recognized expert on immigration issues, has served as Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) since 1995.

Most Popular

Law & the Courts

The March for Life Is a March for Truth

Pro-lifers are marching today, as they do every year, to commemorate a great evil that was done in January 1973 and to express solidarity with its innocent victims. The Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade eliminated legal protections for unborn children in all 50 states, and did so without any ... Read More
Law & the Courts

The March for Life Is a March for Truth

Pro-lifers are marching today, as they do every year, to commemorate a great evil that was done in January 1973 and to express solidarity with its innocent victims. The Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade eliminated legal protections for unborn children in all 50 states, and did so without any ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Clarence Thomas Speaks

Those who know Justice Clarence Thomas say that any perception of him as dour or phlegmatic couldn't be more off-base. He's a charming, gracious, jovial man, full of bonhomie and easy with a laugh, or so I'm told by people who know him well. On summer breaks he likes to roam around the country in an RV and stay ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Clarence Thomas Speaks

Those who know Justice Clarence Thomas say that any perception of him as dour or phlegmatic couldn't be more off-base. He's a charming, gracious, jovial man, full of bonhomie and easy with a laugh, or so I'm told by people who know him well. On summer breaks he likes to roam around the country in an RV and stay ... Read More
U.S.

Nadler’s Folly

Jerry Nadler must have missed the day in law school where they teach you about persuasion. The House Democrat made a critical error early in the trial of President Trump. He didn’t just say that Republican senators, who voted to begin the proceedings without calling witnesses, were part of a cover-up. He said ... Read More
U.S.

Nadler’s Folly

Jerry Nadler must have missed the day in law school where they teach you about persuasion. The House Democrat made a critical error early in the trial of President Trump. He didn’t just say that Republican senators, who voted to begin the proceedings without calling witnesses, were part of a cover-up. He said ... Read More
White House

On the Bidens, Schiff Opened the Door

You opened the door. Trial lawyers live in fear of that phrase. When a trial starts, both sides know what the allegations are. Both have had enough discovery to know what the adversary will try to prove. Just as significantly, both know what their own vulnerabilities are. A litigator spends his pretrial ... Read More
White House

On the Bidens, Schiff Opened the Door

You opened the door. Trial lawyers live in fear of that phrase. When a trial starts, both sides know what the allegations are. Both have had enough discovery to know what the adversary will try to prove. Just as significantly, both know what their own vulnerabilities are. A litigator spends his pretrial ... Read More