March 08, 2010

David Brooks and the Right

David Brooks wrote a suprising column recently in which he suggested that the tea partiers are like the '60s radical left. The most egregious "point" was his saying that because the right is buying Saul Alinksy's book, that means the right wants to use Alinksy's methods. It surprises me that Brooks would make such a dumb connection; I think his dislike of the tea partiers must be clouding his reason. I wonder if he'd agree with William F. Buckley's comment about preferring to be ruled by the first hundred folks in the Boston telephone book than by the Harvard faculty.

Jonah Goldberg opines:
For starters I think he's just wrong about Alinksy. The main reason Alinsky is hot right now with many conservatives is that, thanks to Beck and Horowitz, many are convinced that Obama is an Alinskyite and so many believe that you can't understand Obama without understanding Alinsky.

Second, his Amazon citation is at best selective. I went and checked the "customers also bought" feature for Rules for Radicals and found that customers also bought (in addition to the books David listed): The Constitution of the United States, American Progressivism: A Reader (RJ Pestritto's excellent and purely academic book), A Conflict of Visions by Tom Sowell, The Real Thomas Jefferson, The Road To Serfdom and Common Sense, The Rights of Man and Other Essential Writings of Thomas Paine.

2 comments:

Tom said...

Would Buckley have still said that if Saul's last name were Aalinsky?

TS said...

Funny Tom. I think he would've had his name been Bill Abuckley.