You never heard him say anything like this in 30 years, or did you?
If he did, he was lying back then.
Is he lying now?
You decide.
He cites Ernest Renan. Take a look at Renan, Wikipedia.
Rather hard to believe that Brooks would make such a reference knowingly regarding Renan as an ideal for his (Brooks') nationalism.
Here's a tip: Brooks'American nationalism is Brooks' American globalism.
he confesses he has made an exzzxtensive study of how americans feel. What does it show?
There is virtually no national feeling here whatsoever.
The vast majority of Americans apparently identify with their local area.
He doesn't tell you how many identify with humanity in general (maybe his code word for his globalism), but given that the vast majority of Americans, as he himself admits, identify locally, not even nationalistically, the whole situation is pretty goddamned pathetic any way nyou think you mwant to turn it.
So Brooks, even if he were a nationalist, would be a fish out of water in localist populist America.
Perhaps Professor Kaiser can regale us with his views on this most treacherous of topics....
No comments:
Post a Comment