Inbox
Dear Editors:
I have read David Brooks columns for many years. I have listened to David Brooks commentary Friday evenings on PBS. Many times I see eye to eye with Brooks’s somewhat more conservative ideas. Many times I don’t see eye to eye with Brooks. That is what America is about. Considering commentary (sometimes opinion, too), learning and gaining wisdom, and synthesizing into our own thoughts.
There is no way we can always see eye to eye with a person 100% of the time. Whether that person is our spouse or just a friend or acquaintance, we can never be in agreement 100% of the time. That is the way things should be, but they are not, as fascist Republicans use scare tactics to mesmerize the minds with opioid treatment.
With this being said (and extending my message with more words), I now must comment about the commentary, with facts, presented by Mr. Brooks on 2 Nov. 2022. His facts are about a “grim tide of sadness” in the world. He uses facts to demonstrate that the lower portion of society are in the lower sector of society who have seen an increase in sadness. At the same time, those in the upper classes (I shall call the oligarchy) have seen an increase in happiness. In other words, at the expense of the lower classes of people, the upper classes are happier. The lower classes are not as happy. Facts presented as part of his opinion-editorial (op-ed), but I see it more as a commentary with facts, not an opinion. (The media has caused the problems we have by calling these op-eds).
Mr. Brooks discusses such facts from various Asian nations. Communist China is one such nation. The oligarchy in a presumed communist nation (which should NOT have an oligarchy) have experienced this ordeal and an increased wealth among those at the top has been revealed.
This sounds like what has been happening in a presumed capitalist nation like the USA. Reaganomics and supply-side economics, in my humble opinion (I can provide facts, too), are at fault for this happening in the USA. A twisted idea of what capitalism truly is, as we think of capitalism as “supply-side economics,” while Adam Smith (18th Century contemporary to our Founding Fathers) defined capitalism as something to challenge the oligarchy of supposed divine-rights kings and feudal landlord nobles and barons with the idea of SUPPLY AND DEMAND. Balance and not individualism at the top. In this practice, only government can regulate the balance between supply and demand. Reagan claimed “government” is a problem, due to such regulation.
Another side to what Mr. Brooks says harks back to my days of learning from a Christian pastor who embraced the ideas of Deist Thomas Jefferson, that ideas from the Hebrew scriptures regarding creationism do not have to be examples of rejection of evolution and survival of the fittest (Darwinism and atheism). This pastor pointed out that the men who wrote those Hebrew scriptures were merely attempting to come to grips with what God was about in the universe. That seven days in the lives of men could be millions of years in the eyes of God. We cannot be certain about God because human beings did not have the knowledge of God.
Another aspect I learned from this Christian pastor had to do with Darwinism and atheism. This pastor represented survival of the fittest as meaning our human species having dominion over animals, but that Jesus Christ came as the WORD OF GOD (John 1:1) to help dispel such ideas by centering on a love of one another, all human beings.
This means that survival of the fittest is not between “chosen people,” as Israelis contend, or between white and black people, or between Latinx and others, or between straight or gay, or between men and women. It is not a matter of surviving by having control of one human species over another. Rather it is about all human beings having love for one another and working in community, not as selfish and greedy individuals who berate their fellow human beings.
Examples. White supremacists think they are better than black folk. I have heard this crap expressed against former President Obama. On the other hand, black folk who proclaim the election of Obama as being a “first.” White supremacists who have invoked lynch mobs during the era of Jim Crow. They only accept black folks unless they follow the marching orders of white folk (i.e., Thomas or Walker). The males reject females when someone like my mother runs in a Republican primary for a political office and many males say, “they don’t want her to be town supervisor because she is a woman.” The black man who thinks we need to get rid of abortions, for the sake of black folk and no consideration of the entire human race and particular situations where the mother might lose her life (the fetus is more important than the mother, so both must die?) or there is rape or incest involved. In all of these examples, people have thick skulls and don’t allow the elevator to go all the way to the top.
Thus, we get supply-side economics and the development of only the “me, me, me” individualist greedy attitudes which Mr. Brooks addresses in his own way. We are living with the lack of love for one another and no care or consideration for one another, due to individualist “survival of the fittest” attitudes. We don’t think about providing opportunities for all people and many times it’s more about providing handouts instead, although that, too, is objectionable to white supremacists and others.
America HAS been the shining light, compared to Communist China and other sections in the world. For the sake of “survival of the fittest” of the Chinese people, CBS Sixty Minutes report this past Sunday pointed out that the Communist Chinese version of Tik Tok is very controlled so as to EDUCATE their own people. But for the rest of the world, they put it out there in an “anything goes” fashion. It helps the Chinese survive while helping to destroy the education and learning capacities of our Western civilization. The Chinese embrace what Western classical music can do for the brains of people, while our Western people, stupidly, reject it and demonstrate their stupidity and lack of a brain, in the process.
The net result since the Reagan and the birth of supply-side economics, has been several developments in America. (1) we want opinions, not facts; (2) we have big fat pig newspaper publishers who reject good journalism, local investigative reporting, local information and commentary, and do everything by sensationalism; we then wonder why “nobody reads newspapers;” (3) Ronald Reagan, Jr., who identifies himself as being an atheist and one has to wonder whether he supports “survival of the fittest” as being between those in the human species, not between humans and animal species – anything goes, but stop two consenting adults from doing what they wish to do; (4) defense of greed, narcissism, love of money, and lack of caring for one another, due to “survival of the fittest;” (5) love of gladiator-type games and being mesmerized by blood and guts and guns splashed on television screens.
In the 1950s, the character, Perry Mason said just the opposite of what publishers say about newspaper journalism and the facts. Perry Mason: “I don’t want opinions, I want the evidence.”
In the 1980s, the character, J.B. Fletcher said, “I have a theory [not a conspiracy theory] but I need the evidence and facts. All opposite of what is being said today throughout our society when invoking greed and narcissism and validating it with “survival of the fittest.” Then the far left liberals wish to spend all our time protecting the animals with which humans have dominion. That is fine to have such opposition when humans massacre animals for the sake of greed and selfishness. But to protect us from losing our own food stocks, such actions by the far left push the envelope too far. Example.
Killing predators of deer and domestic livestock, we kill off the coyote. Then the deer populate to such a point that they become a nuisance for drivers and for those who maintain gardens for the sake of human needs for consumption. When, in actuality, When in actuality, the “survival” factor could be to have donkeys protect the livestock because they are able to stomp on any coyote which come close to the livestock. Nature working together for the sake of “survival of the fittest” among animal species, but to consider that God does not intend “an eye for an eye” among the human species because Jesus Christ said something contrary to “an eye for an eye….”
Sad to hear the sadness rate increases for “lower class” humans. This should be stopped. An attitude adjustment contrary to survival of the fittest among the human species needs to occur. Balance can be accomplished by regulation of business so as to eliminate the creation of monopolies with the use of supply-side economics. Mr. Brooks only presented the facts, but really did not identify solutions. Thus, I refer to Mr. Brooks and his facts, but also present ideas for solutions, too.
My writing is not a letter to the editor because it is too lengthy. My writing is not an op-ed because it is a commentary with solutions. Really. It is not too lengthy to be an op-ed or a commentary. Thank you, Mr. Brooks, for the facts included in your commentary.
Tioga Herald 
Sadness Rates in the World (and America)
Inbox
Dear Editors:
I have read David Brooks columns for many years. I have listened to David Brooks commentary Friday evenings on PBS. Many times I see eye to eye with Brooks’s somewhat more conservative ideas. Many times I don’t see eye to eye with Brooks. That is what America is about. Considering commentary (sometimes opinion, too), learning and gaining wisdom, and synthesizing into our own thoughts.
There is no way we can always see eye to eye with a person 100% of the time. Whether that person is our spouse or just a friend or acquaintance, we can never be in agreement 100% of the time. That is the way things should be, but they are not, as fascist Republicans use scare tactics to mesmerize the minds with opioid treatment.
With this being said (and extending my message with more words), I now must comment about the commentary, with facts, presented by Mr. Brooks on 2 Nov. 2022. His facts are about a “grim tide of sadness” in the world. He uses facts to demonstrate that the lower portion of society are in the lower sector of society who have seen an increase in sadness. At the same time, those in the upper classes (I shall call the oligarchy) have seen an increase in happiness. In other words, at the expense of the lower classes of people, the upper classes are happier. The lower classes are not as happy. Facts presented as part of his opinion-editorial (op-ed), but I see it more as a commentary with facts, not an opinion. (The media has caused the problems we have by calling these op-eds).
Mr. Brooks discusses such facts from various Asian nations. Communist China is one such nation. The oligarchy in a presumed communist nation (which should NOT have an oligarchy) have experienced this ordeal and an increased wealth among those at the top has been revealed.
This sounds like what has been happening in a presumed capitalist nation like the USA. Reaganomics and supply-side economics, in my humble opinion (I can provide facts, too), are at fault for this happening in the USA. A twisted idea of what capitalism truly is, as we think of capitalism as “supply-side economics,” while Adam Smith (18th Century contemporary to our Founding Fathers) defined capitalism as something to challenge the oligarchy of supposed divine-rights kings and feudal landlord nobles and barons with the idea of SUPPLY AND DEMAND. Balance and not individualism at the top. In this practice, only government can regulate the balance between supply and demand. Reagan claimed “government” is a problem, due to such regulation.
Another side to what Mr. Brooks says harks back to my days of learning from a Christian pastor who embraced the ideas of Deist Thomas Jefferson, that ideas from the Hebrew scriptures regarding creationism do not have to be examples of rejection of evolution and survival of the fittest (Darwinism and atheism). This pastor pointed out that the men who wrote those Hebrew scriptures were merely attempting to come to grips with what God was about in the universe. That seven days in the lives of men could be millions of years in the eyes of God. We cannot be certain about God because human beings did not have the knowledge of God.
Another aspect I learned from this Christian pastor had to do with Darwinism and atheism. This pastor represented survival of the fittest as meaning our human species having dominion over animals, but that Jesus Christ came as the WORD OF GOD (John 1:1) to help dispel such ideas by centering on a love of one another, all human beings.
This means that survival of the fittest is not between “chosen people,” as Israelis contend, or between white and black people, or between Latinx and others, or between straight or gay, or between men and women. It is not a matter of surviving by having control of one human species over another. Rather it is about all human beings having love for one another and working in community, not as selfish and greedy individuals who berate their fellow human beings.
Examples. White supremacists think they are better than black folk. I have heard this crap expressed against former President Obama. On the other hand, black folk who proclaim the election of Obama as being a “first.” White supremacists who have invoked lynch mobs during the era of Jim Crow. They only accept black folks unless they follow the marching orders of white folk (i.e., Thomas or Walker). The males reject females when someone like my mother runs in a Republican primary for a political office and many males say, “they don’t want her to be town supervisor because she is a woman.” The black man who thinks we need to get rid of abortions, for the sake of black folk and no consideration of the entire human race and particular situations where the mother might lose her life (the fetus is more important than the mother, so both must die?) or there is rape or incest involved. In all of these examples, people have thick skulls and don’t allow the elevator to go all the way to the top.
Thus, we get supply-side economics and the development of only the “me, me, me” individualist greedy attitudes which Mr. Brooks addresses in his own way. We are living with the lack of love for one another and no care or consideration for one another, due to individualist “survival of the fittest” attitudes. We don’t think about providing opportunities for all people and many times it’s more about providing handouts instead, although that, too, is objectionable to white supremacists and others.
America HAS been the shining light, compared to Communist China and other sections in the world. For the sake of “survival of the fittest” of the Chinese people, CBS Sixty Minutes report this past Sunday pointed out that the Communist Chinese version of Tik Tok is very controlled so as to EDUCATE their own people. But for the rest of the world, they put it out there in an “anything goes” fashion. It helps the Chinese survive while helping to destroy the education and learning capacities of our Western civilization. The Chinese embrace what Western classical music can do for the brains of people, while our Western people, stupidly, reject it and demonstrate their stupidity and lack of a brain, in the process.
The net result since the Reagan and the birth of supply-side economics, has been several developments in America. (1) we want opinions, not facts; (2) we have big fat pig newspaper publishers who reject good journalism, local investigative reporting, local information and commentary, and do everything by sensationalism; we then wonder why “nobody reads newspapers;” (3) Ronald Reagan, Jr., who identifies himself as being an atheist and one has to wonder whether he supports “survival of the fittest” as being between those in the human species, not between humans and animal species – anything goes, but stop two consenting adults from doing what they wish to do; (4) defense of greed, narcissism, love of money, and lack of caring for one another, due to “survival of the fittest;” (5) love of gladiator-type games and being mesmerized by blood and guts and guns splashed on television screens.
In the 1950s, the character, Perry Mason said just the opposite of what publishers say about newspaper journalism and the facts. Perry Mason: “I don’t want opinions, I want the evidence.”
In the 1980s, the character, J.B. Fletcher said, “I have a theory [not a conspiracy theory] but I need the evidence and facts. All opposite of what is being said today throughout our society when invoking greed and narcissism and validating it with “survival of the fittest.” Then the far left liberals wish to spend all our time protecting the animals with which humans have dominion. That is fine to have such opposition when humans massacre animals for the sake of greed and selfishness. But to protect us from losing our own food stocks, such actions by the far left push the envelope too far. Example.
Killing predators of deer and domestic livestock, we kill off the coyote. Then the deer populate to such a point that they become a nuisance for drivers and for those who maintain gardens for the sake of human needs for consumption. When, in actuality, When in actuality, the “survival” factor could be to have donkeys protect the livestock because they are able to stomp on any coyote which come close to the livestock. Nature working together for the sake of “survival of the fittest” among animal species, but to consider that God does not intend “an eye for an eye” among the human species because Jesus Christ said something contrary to “an eye for an eye….”
Sad to hear the sadness rate increases for “lower class” humans. This should be stopped. An attitude adjustment contrary to survival of the fittest among the human species needs to occur. Balance can be accomplished by regulation of business so as to eliminate the creation of monopolies with the use of supply-side economics. Mr. Brooks only presented the facts, but really did not identify solutions. Thus, I refer to Mr. Brooks and his facts, but also present ideas for solutions, too.
My writing is not a letter to the editor because it is too lengthy. My writing is not an op-ed because it is a commentary with solutions. Really. It is not too lengthy to be an op-ed or a commentary. Thank you, Mr. Brooks, for the facts included in your commentary.
Category:
Commentary, Economics, Regulated Capitalism, Commerce, Education, fascism
Tagged with: