Q+A: David Brooks
As the Republican Party seeks to regain political control after the last election, some conservatives are calling for a new image.
"As Republicans sort out the reasons for their defeat, they likely will overlook or dismiss the gorilla in the pulpit," Kathleen Parker wrote for The Washington Post. "To be more specific, the evangelical, right-wing, oogedy-boogedy branch of the GOP is what ails the erstwhile conservative party and will continue to afflict and marginalize its constituents if reckoning doesn't soon cometh."
Evangelicals make up about a quarter of the electorate, and about 62 percent of them identify themselves with the Republican Party. David Brooks spoke with Christianity Today in Wheaton, Illinois, about how evangelicals can change their image.
Do you see evangelicals as the core of the Republican Party or as weighing on the neck?
I see them as the core of the party. Just sheer numbers, politically, the party would be dead without evangelical voters, or without a lot of evangelical voters. But even more seriously, spiritually, … the moral core of the party is provided by social conservatives. Without that core, it would just be a party of tax cuts, and that wouldn't be a very inspiring party. I think social conservatives will always be the core of the Republican Party.
Can Christian conservatives repackage certain issues?
Life issues will always be center — life and death issues will always be central. I guess what I would think is the core issue — which is possible [issue] around which to build bridges — is the family, issues about family togetherness, reducing divorce rates, helping kids do missionary work or aid work in Africa. All that stuff should come from the core pro-life community to a broader community.
How does religion make a difference in the Republican Party, as opposed to just promoting conservative values?
Religion connects you to a set of moral principles that are more than just conserving the past or the free market. Americans like the free market, they like capitalism, but it's not that inspiring. To really inspire people and inspire young people, you've got have a more serious moral mission. So I think social conservatives at their best provide that. As long as it's not a social conservatism that is about how sinful everybody else is.
Is there anything that evangelicals can do to repair their image?
It comes and goes. I understand [that] Rick Warren's not the leader, but I think people like him have a positive effect. There are a lot of people all around the country less famous than he is that don't have churches with thousands of people but who do that on [a] day-to-day basis. The more those people are in public life, the more familiar the country gets with them. I thought, to be honest, Jerry Falwell did damage, and frankly I think James Dobson does damage sometimes. His work on psychology and family is very sophisticated and very productive, but a lot of his observations on politics are crude and ill-informed. I sometimes think he says things that are too angry.
I know you mentioned that you like Mike Gerson, President Bush's former speechwriter. Are there other evangelicals you would like to see more of?
I liked Mike Huckabee's campaign. There [are] a bunch of governors who are committed Christians as well as very modern, sophisticated politicians like Bobby Jindal in Louisiana. The people will naturally emerge, I think.
Obama has promoted the faith-based initiatives again recently.
I think he's sincere about that. I'd hate to see the faith-based initiatives cut off. Obviously, there's this issue of whether or not you can discriminate in your hiring and keep your core mission. That's the political fight. But I'm glad we have a President who is a Democrat who is very sincere, and not only sincere but very comfortable talking about religion in public life.
Do you think the faith-based initiatives office is a good result of that?
I think when you're trying to get somebody over drug addiction, you can tell them, "Hey, you shouldn't do drugs because it's wrong," or you can transform their life through evangelical work. The latter is just more powerful and more effective.
Copyright © 2009 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.
Related Elsewhere:
The Latest in Movie News, May 20, 2013

Star Trek Into Darkness

(on articles open to the public, you must at least register for a free account).












Comments
Displaying 13 of 13 comments
See all comments
DJE
David Brooks is no leader of the conservatives. In fact his boy crush on Obama was down right embarrassing "Obama is a mountain." Please! Brooks is a weak kneed moderate. Have you ever watched him on the Jim Lear Report on PBS in the evening? He never stands up to his liberal counterpart Mark Shields. I can't even watch it anymore. When Paul Gigot was in that slot he was strong and stood his conservative ground. No conservative could support Obama like Brooks did during the election. He is a joke.
vrob125
No mention of the party leader--Rush Limbaugh. I would have like to see David Brook's views on that particular representative. And I am finding it unbelievable that this triple married, cursing representative is in the forefront of the Republican Party. It is unbelievable that the "social conservatives" are a part of this combination. Very embarrassing.
JohnS
This is of course exactly the wrong kind of commentary. Why is it assumed that Christians must be the core or the base of the REPUBLICAN party? Why is the party of war, torture, and tax cuts for the wealthy somehow the natural home for the followers of Jesus? I don't get it. Democrats aren't perfect, no human party is, but certainly they are more concerned with "the least of these" than the Republicans. And I seriously doubt Jesus would be a big fan of Gitmo or "black" CIA torture prisons. David Brooks is a fairly moderate Republican, but the point of this article seems to be how can we get the Repubs back in power. Maybe, just maybe, it's time to take a look at the alternative.