In The Conversation, David Brooks and Gail Collins talk between columns every Wednesday.
Susan Walsh/Associated PressGabrielle Giffords, a moderate in the most immoderate state in the union.
Gail Collins: David, we can’t not talk about the shootings in Tucson. I know you’ve been wanting a more moderate and sane political dialogue. But I am sorry to admit that one of my thoughts is that the aftermath of Tucson proves how moderation doesn’t work.
Think about it. A moderate gun control bill, restricting large ammunition clips like the one used in Tucson, is probably going nowhere because who wants to run afoul of the Darth Vader, which is the NRA, over an ammunition clip?
And despite all the calls for more moderate and sane political dialogue, we’re getting the same crazy rhetoric. It may be overdoing it to suggest that conservatives who called for putting a target on Gabrielle Giffords’s district were encouraging the madness that led to her shooting. But now in response to the outcry, Rush Limbaugh
has been claiming that the Democrats are protecting the Tucson gunman. Because they want to make the right look bad. Or something.
David Brooks: I guess I should try to explain what I think moderation means. In this context, I guess it means restraining your impulses and trying to gather evidence about the crime before rendering a judgment about what it all means. Moderation means understanding that we all have a tendency to exploit events in order to ride our own hobbyhorses, so it’s usually best to try to pause and put aside one’s prejudices and try to look at each event in as neutral a way as a possible.
Moderation is a disposition rather than an agenda. It means calibrating your opinions to the strength of the evidence. It means pausing to look at any event from alternate perspectives.
Do you think that Obama’s much-criticized low-key presidency is an instinctive response to all the stridency around him?”
Gail Collins: O.K., now you’re making moderation sound so desirable you’re making me feel guilty.
David Brooks: If moderation has any substantive meaning, I suppose it is acknowledging that with many issues there are two opposing and partially true points of view, which sit in tension, and that it’s best to try to balance both truths. For example, it is true we should be very hesitant before forcing mentally ill people into treatment against their will. That is an invitation for abuse. On the other hand, many mentally ill people lack the tools to understand their own situation. We have probably shifted too far on the civil libertarian side of this tension, and for the sake of our community we should make it easier for authorities to involuntarily commit those who pose a threat to themselves and others.
Gail Collins: Moderate politicians and moderate tone may be what most Americans want, but the problem is, it isn’t exciting. The need to gin up every discussion to a shriek makes me so weary, and I can only perk myself up by remembering what Grover Cleveland went through. He is, you will remember, one of my favorite presidents mainly because he lived in an era of hyper-insane political rhetoric and still managed to be both successful and boring. Do you think that Obama’s much-criticized low-key presidency is an instinctive response to all the stridency around him?
David Brooks: I do. I actually think he’s the right sort of person to have in office in times like these. In times of warring tribes, it’s good to have a person whose instinct is to step back from the war. I think Obama is the sort of person who would want to look at the evidence on the Tucson case before riding whatever hobbyhorse makes him feel good.
That said, in the heat of the presidency I have seen him get caught up in the passions of the competition. He’s incredibly competitive and if it’s the Bulls against the Knicks and he’s a Bull, he’s going to want to crush the Knicks with all his soul.
Gail Collins: As a Knicks fan, I feel threatened. But about moderation –there’s an obvious political reason why it’s in eclipse. It’s war every day in Washington and why risk your hide for something moderate? By its very definition, even if it happens it won’t change the world. And maybe the saddest part of this is that Giffords was the politician who managed to get herself elected as a moderate in the most immoderate state in the union.
David Brooks: Nobody risks their life for moderation. But people did risk their lives on behalf of George Washington’s vision for the country, which was based on Republican virtue and moderate restraint. They did fight for Lincoln, who infuriated the hard-core abolitionists with his prudence. They did fight under F.D.R. and Eisenhower, who were famously pragmatic, against the extremes of fascism and communism.
Gail Collins: Yeah, but all those presidents were leading us into huge wars. They might have been moderate, but their means to a moderate end involved epic bloodshed.
Moderation means practicing prudence, striking balances and picking an agenda that is right for the moment rather than one that fits some universal, eternal ideological system.
David Brooks: Moderation doesn’t mean picking whatever policies are in the center at any one time. It means practicing prudence, striking balances and picking an agenda that is right for the moment rather than one that fits some universal, eternal ideological system.
Gail Collins: Moderation also doesn’t seem to get you ratings. Or at least, there are very few people on radio or TV who can manage to be both sensible and big media draws. Rush Limbaugh can’t do it. Glenn Beck can’t. If they can’t be hyper, they don’t get paid. Maybe the Tucson shooting wasn’t a result of overwrought partisanship, but it’s a threat to people like that just to suggest that it’s a reminder that everybody ought to tone down.
David Brooks: I’m not so gloomy. There are a few big blowhards who get attention. But go into a bookstore and look at the thousands of books written by sane moderate people. Look at the magazine rack every week. Look at each day’s newspaper. The volume of media produced by the millions of prudent people outweighs the volume produced by a few big screamers.
Gail Collins: Although, our colleague Nick Kristof and I have talked a lot about how whenever he writes about a cosmic tragedy like Darfur, people nod sympathetically, but those columns seldom make the “most e-mailed” list. We all know that the best way to get a lot of e-mailing is to write what Nick and I used to call the “X is a Big Weenie” column, just lacing into some hyper-powerful figure. It’s a tribute to Nick that he keeps writing about Darfur anyway.
David Brooks: Could I just pause to point out that the “most e-mailed” list is a horrible metric for judging a piece of journalism. Getting to the top just means you scratched the pleasure button of about 10,000 readers. I think we all know we should never use it as a measure of anything, and yet it sits there on the Web site, spreading corruption.
Gail Collins: Actually, you may be the only political columnist in America today who is both extremely popular and extremely moderate. What’s your secret?
David Brooks: Sexual charisma.
