If you’ve spent any time reading the New York Times opinion pages over the last decade, you’ve probably noticed a recurring theme. It’s a bit of a dance, really. On one side, you have David Brooks, the quintessential moderate conservative who loves talking about "civic virtue" and "localism." On the other, you have Bernie Sanders, the Vermont senator who basically made "democratic socialism" a household term in America.
They don't like each other's ideas. Like, at all.
Honestly, the friction between David Brooks and Bernie Sanders is about way more than just two guys with big platforms. It’s a clash between two completely different ways of seeing the world. One sees a country that needs to rediscover its soul through small-town community building; the other sees a country that needs to tax billionaires into oblivion to fix a rigged system.
The "Danish Dream" and the Great Disconnect
Back in 2016, Brooks wrote a column titled "Livin' Bernie Sanders's Danish Dream." It was... spicy. He essentially argued that the European-style social democracy Sanders loves so much wouldn't work here because America is built on a different kind of "dynamism." Brooks suggested that Sanders was selling a fantasy that would stifle innovation and leave us with a "legion of eternal students."
🔗 Read more: Thomas Matthew Crooks Dead: What We Actually Know About the Butler Shooting
Sanders supporters didn't take that sitting down.
Critics, including those at Truthout and Jacobin, were quick to point out that Brooks seemed to be ignoring some pretty basic facts. They argued that "American dynamism" hadn't exactly been great for the middle class over the last forty years. While Brooks talked about the beauty of the US capitalist system, Sanders was pointing at stagnant wages and the skyrocketing cost of college.
This is the core of their beef. Brooks views Sanders’ populism as a "corrosive" force—something that divides people into "us versus them." He once described Sanders’ leadership style as a cocktail of "rage" and "ideological purity." To Brooks, this is the opposite of the "reasonableness" and "intellectual humility" that he believes makes a democracy work.
🔗 Read more: Winnipeg Weather 14 Day Outlook: What the Models Actually Mean for Your Commute
Is it Populism or Just Reality?
One of the most interesting critiques Brooks leveled against Sanders—especially during the 2020 primary—was the idea of the "organizing myth." Brooks argued that Sanders relies on a narrative of "anti-elite populism" to gather followers. He compared this to the way Donald Trump operates, which, as you can imagine, went over like a lead balloon with the Sanders camp.
But here is where it gets nuanced.
In a 2020 piece, Brooks talked about visiting neighborhoods in Compton and seeing people "gathering" to fix their own schools and housing. He noted that there wasn't much "us vs. them" talk there. He used this to argue that the real work of repairing America happens locally, not through massive federal revolutions.
The counter-argument? It’s hard to "gather" and "repair" when your neighborhood has been systematically underfunded for fifty years. Sanders’ whole point is that you can’t have "civic virtue" if people are too stressed about medical bills to show up to a PTA meeting.
What Brooks gets wrong (and right) about the Sanders movement:
- The "Illiberal" Label: Brooks often paints Sanders as "illiberal" or "totalitarian." But as many have pointed out, Sanders has a long record of defending civil liberties—even for people he hates, like Ann Coulter.
- The Power of Institutions: Brooks is right that institutions matter. He worries that Sanders-style populism burns institutions down. Sanders argues the institutions are already on fire and he's just the one holding the hose.
- The Elitist Blind Spot: There is a frequent criticism that Brooks writes for the "9.9 percent"—the comfortable upper-middle class who think the system just needs a "tune-up." For the people Sanders represents, a tune-up isn't enough; they need a new engine.
The 2026 Context: Bipartisan Weirdness
Fast forward to right now, in early 2026. The world looks a little different, but the ideological divide is still there. Interestingly, we’ve seen Sanders doing things that might make an old-school conservative's head spin. He recently teamed up with Republican Josh Hawley to push for a 10% cap on credit card interest rates.
That is a classic Sanders move: find the "us" (the working class) and the "them" (the big banks) and go for the throat.
Brooks, meanwhile, continues to worry about the "moral rot" in politics. He’s spent a lot of time lately talking about "civic virtue" and how we’ve lost the ability to have a conversation. It’s a very high-level, philosophical concern. But when you look at the Sanders-Hawley alliance, you see a different kind of "gathering." It’s not the polite, tea-and-crumpets conversation Brooks dreams of; it’s a raw, populist demand for economic relief.
Why you should care about this debate
You might think this is just "inside baseball" for political junkies. It’s not. This debate determines how your tax dollars are spent and whether you can afford to go to the doctor.
📖 Related: Age to be President of USA: What Most People Get Wrong
Brooks represents the "Quiet America" view—that if we just become better neighbors and strengthen our local churches and clubs, the country will heal. Sanders represents the "Structural America" view—that no amount of neighborliness can fix a system where three people own more wealth than the bottom half of the country.
Actionable Insights for the "Middle" Voter:
- Look for the "Third Way": You don't have to choose between Brooks’ localism and Sanders’ federalism. Some of the best policy ideas combine both—like federal funding for locally-controlled community health centers.
- Verify the "Populist" Label: When a pundit calls someone a "populist," ask if they are using it to describe "inciting hate" or "addressing popular grievances." There’s a big difference.
- Check the Math: Brooks often talks about "American dynamism" without citing the decline in social mobility. Sanders talks about "free" programs without always detailing the tax implementation. Read the white papers, not just the op-eds.
- Engage Locally: Brooks is right about one thing—local participation is at an all-time low. Whether you love Bernie or not, showing up to a city council meeting does more than tweeting about a billionaire.
The clash between David Brooks and Bernie Sanders is the perfect window into the soul of modern American politics. One man is looking for a lost moral compass; the other is looking for a sledgehammer to break a glass ceiling. Both think they are saving the country. Usually, the truth is buried somewhere in the messy middle.