Extremists Are All The Same

David Brooks’ WaPo column today makes some interesting observations:

Democracy, the argument goes, will eventually calm extremism. Members of the Tea Party may come into office with radical beliefs, but then they have to fix potholes and worry about credit ratings and popular opinion. Governing will make them more moderate.

Those who emphasize substance, on the other hand, argue that members of the Tea Party are defined by certain beliefs. They reject pluralism, secular democracy and, to some degree, modernity. When you elect fanatics, they continue, you have not advanced democracy. You have empowered people who are going to wind up subverting democracy. The important thing is to get people like that out of power, even if it takes a coup.

Ha ha, fooled ya. Replace “Tea Party” with “Muslim Brotherhood” and you’ll have what Brooks actually wrote. But I ask you, how different are these two extremist movements, except by degrees? For example, check out this news story, also from today’s WaPo:

IkhwanOnline, the official Web site of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, posted an article on Thursday asserting that the country’s new interim president, Adly Mansour, is secretly Jewish. The article, since taken offline, suggested that Mansour was part of an American and Israeli conspiracy to install Mohamed ElBaradei, a former U.N. official and Egyptian opposition figure, as president.

Sound familiar? Maybe Mansour can produce his birth certificate and clear this whole thing up. LOL.

This isn’t the first column to make me wonder if David Brooks hasn’t a touch of senility. The problem isn’t radical Islam, it’s radicalism, period. And to throw potshots at the radicals in one part of the world while embracing the ones at home defies logic.

5 Comments

Filed under David Brooks, ideology, Media, Washington Post

5 responses to “Extremists Are All The Same

  1. Yeah, it worked so well with slavery. Holding office moderated that right into the Civil War. And those North Korean office holders are so much more moderate than they were before.
    .
    David Brooks has a touch of stupidity. It’s a progressive illness among oligarchs.

  2. jazzbumpa

    Please don’t tell me you expect anything that might even be mistaken for logic by a simpleton to come from David Brooks.

    He’s a shill and a hack. IOKIYAR is all that really matters.

    lo siento,
    JzB

  3. Mike G

    It’s not Conservatively Correct to call the radical teatards radicals and compare the many similarities between tribal American Christian fundamentalists and tribal Muslim fundamentalists. Brooks knows he’d be run out of the establishment on a rail if he uttered such truths, and that his high position depends on denying the unpleasant and flattering the power centers of American politics.

  4. democommie

    Brooks like the rest of the rats on the exercise reward wheel of the KKKoch Suckers has found that being batshit once a week or so, on deadline, will guarantee and endless supply of rat pellets.

    • GregH

      OMG – I go off the Boy Scout camp for a week and return to this comment! Holy batshit, Batman!