10/16/2006 8:27 AM
Aaron wrote:
Again with the social fabric. Good lord, he's flailing. Perhaps if Brooks didn't make such a sport of self-aggrandizement ("...if only the world learn from wise men such as myself and Adam Smith...") it might occur to him that he has staked his entire career on saying absolutely nothing of substance or practical value.
The notion of "social traditionalism" is absurd. People who espouse this position have always depended on the lie that this or that new social norm threatens the cultural/moral fabric/is dangerous for our children etc., when it is clear from history that standards change, have always changed, and often change for the benefit of many people. Marriage, for example, has for many societies and for most of recorded history been an institution mostly concerning property and family alliances, with women farmed out to the most "suitable" man with or without consent. That was a "fabric" that NEEDED tearing. Yet Brooks and his antecedents will insist they know what is good for society. And they will also insist that only THEIR chosen values matter. Affirmative action? That's misguided (or even harmful) "social engineering." But using governmental power to encourage marriage? That's "protecting the social fabric." How must it feel to owe one's identity and sense of moral pride to such verbal sleights of hand? Reply to this
Leave a comment
Copyright . http://TODAYSLIES.COM. All rights reserved.
