FORWARD: …Brooks acknowledges that we live in contradiction between these two natures, since to build a résumé you cultivate your strengths, while to build a moral core you must confront your weaknesses. But he doesn’t call for balance. Instead, he makes a persuasive argument that we live in a time that rewards the striving, utilitarian Adam 1 while ignoring and even demeaning those who seek the moral clarity and sturdy inner life associated with Adam 2…
Humility — Brooks said that was also a contender for the book’s title — is what he most admires in leadership and what he finds almost universally missing today. President Obama is a man of “good character,” not greedy or scandalous, “but I would not call him humble. He’s probably the most self-confident person I’ve ever met.” Humility is also missing in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who must be “the center of the room. I don’t think he has wrestled with his own weaknesses. He has trouble keeping those close to him. [George C] Marshall was a hero to those who knew him well. Not true for Bibi.”…
“Much of our character talk today is individualistic, like all our talk, but character is formed in community,” he writes. And that crucial observation is then left unexplored. This is where — for this reader, anyhow — his thesis suffers from the same critique he lodges against contemporary society: It’s all about me. Character is forged by the inner journey and shaped by family and other primary influences, but larger forces play a role here, too. Our worship of materialism and self-satisfaction isn’t just a personal character flaw; it’s embedded in our tax structure, public spending priorities and national policies. The lack of empathy that Brooks decries is reinforced by politicians who disdain government and any sort of public sacrifice. I’d even go so far as to say that the prevailing tropes in many religious denominations, by emphasizing personal growth and satisfaction and de-emphasizing communal responsibility, have contributed to legitimizing “me” over “we.” … (more)
EDITOR: This is another article that requires being read in its entirety. Then perhaps re-read.
I’ve followed the ramblings of Mr. Brooks for many years. H. L. Mencken would have a field day with this clown. I’ll try anyway: if a journalist can also be a spineless jellyfish encased in crisco it would be David Brooks. He constantly shows up on public radio and national television news spouting opinions on various subjects and the only impression he leaves is well, he must be the voice of the idiots and idiots have opinions too.