CAMPOS: To the manner born

By Paul Campos, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published January 28, 2009 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size

More Opinion Columns & Blogs

I once heard a recording of a BBC broadcast announcing the birth of Queen Elizabeth II of England's son. The announcer intoned, "Her Majesty has given birth to . . . a prince."

This struck me as a particularly stark illustration of how one's place in the world can be determined by the accident of birth. At least, I thought, I live in a country where it's never announced that someone has given birth to an electrical engineer or a pastry chef or an under secretary for East Asian affairs.

America, after all, is a meritocracy, not an aristocracy. We have no princes of the royal blood, and whatever position a person enjoys in life must be earned.

This, indeed, is the basis for one of the most common criticisms of affirmative action: that it represents a return to bestowing social benefits on the basis of one's status, rather than one's talents and achievements.

On the other hand, you have the career of William Kristol. Kristol, the son of neo-conservative doyen Irving Kristol, was just fired by The New York Times, for which he had been cranking out an opinion column since last January (technically, his contract wasn't renewed).

A few months ago, my blogging colleague Robert Farley pointed out that "in the modern configuration of the conservative media machine, Kristol occupies an unparalleled central position of power . . . Right-wing journalism and punditry is absurdly nepotistic; everything depends on relationships, (and) Kristol always seems to be" at the center of these relationships.

Farley went on to observe that this central position made Kristol difficult for other conservatives to attack, "even though Kristol played an important role in many of the most disastrous elements" of the George W. Bush administration and the John McCain campaign.

Nothing illustrated Kristol's influence and importance better than the Times' decision to add him to their Op-Ed page. As his previous stint at Time magazine had already demonstrated, Kristol was a horrible columnist. His writing was boring, he made a lot of factual errors and his point of view was invariably about as surprising as that of a member of Stalin's Politburo.

His work was, in the cruel but fair judgment of Salon's Glenn Greenwald, "sloppy, error-plagued and incomparably hackish."

So how did he end up with such a sweet gig? (Especially given that the Times already employed an incomparably more talented conservative columnist in the person of David Brooks.)

The answer goes back to Farley's observation about the extreme nepotism of the contemporary right-wing media machine. Kristol may be an utter mediocrity, but he's an extraordinarily well-connected utter mediocrity. (Indeed, as this column went to press it was announced that the Washington Post Writers Group had hired Kristol.)

Which brings me to this charming vignette, courtesy of blog commenter Harry Hopkins:

"I remember back in the late 1990s, when Ira Katznelson, an eminent political scientist at Columbia, came to deliver a guest lecture. Prof. Katznelson described a lunch he had with Irving Kristol during the first Bush administration.

"The talk turned to William Kristol, then Dan Quayle's chief of staff, and how he got his start in politics. Irving recalled how he talked to his friend Harvey Mansfield at Harvard, who secured William a place there as both an undergrad and graduate student; how he talked to Pat Moynihan, then Nixon's domestic policy adviser, and got William an internship at the White House; how he talked to friends at the RNC [Republican National Committee] and secured a job for William after he got his Harvard Ph.D.; and how he arranged with still more friends for William to teach at Penn and the Kennedy School of Government.

"With that, Prof. Katznelson recalled, he then asked Irving what he thought of affirmative action. 'I oppose it,' Irving replied. 'It subverts meritocracy.' "

Paul Campos is a professor of law at the University of Colorado. He can be reached at paul.campos@colorado.edu.

Subscribe to the Rocky Mountain News

Comments

January 28, 2009

5:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

ItsJustme writes:

What a childish column. You, sir, are a boor.
January 28, 2009

6:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

taoistblockhead writes:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_UwGg...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8KwUS...

The 60 Minutes report on growing West Bank settlements

The Jerusalem Post today reports that, according to a newly released study by Peace Now, "the number of new structures in the West Bank settlements and outposts increased by 69 percent in 2008, compared to 2007" and "the settler population grew from 270,000 in 2007 to 285,000 in 2008." Earlier this week, the leading candidate to be Israel's next Prime Minister, Likud's Benjamin Netanyahu, said that while he "has no intention of building new settlements in the West Bank," he "would let Jewish settlements expand in the West Bank if he's elected prime minister."

When it comes to explanations about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, Americans are typically inundated with reports about the indiscriminate, civilian-targeting violence engaged in by Palestinian religious fanatics and other extremists who oppose the very existence of Israel. But they hear little about their Israeli counterparts -- the religious extremists and radical nationalists who, with the tacit and sometimes active support of the Israeli Government and military (funded and armed by the U.S.), continue to take over more and more land in the West Bank, imposing ever-harsher and more oppressive conditions on West Bank Palestinians. All of that is making a two-state solution increasingly difficult to envision, if not close to impossible.

Continuing the clear and positive trend of finally having a more balanced discussion of Israel in the U.S. media, 60 Minutes' Bob Simon, on Sunday night, broadcast a very good report focusing on how this settlement expansion occurs, the destructive mentality of the Israeli settlers, the devastating impact which settlement expansion has on the lives of Palestinians, and the ways in which settlement expansions -- by design -- are making a Palestinian state increasingly inconceivable.

Every issue written about here -- civil liberties, restoration of the Constitution, imposing limitations on our virtually limitless surveillance state, decreasing the extent to which our government and political culture are so militarized -- depends, in large part, upon our extricating ourselves from these endless Middle East conflicts. The 12-minute 60 Minutes segment, which is highly recommended for those who haven't seen it, conveys a very clear sense of how difficult that task is going to be and how the blame for this conflict is hardly confined to one side.
January 28, 2009

6:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

Mike_In_Hartsel writes:

taoistblockhead - any reply that cites web sources is an indicator the writer is a moron. And what has the Israeli conflict got to do with this article? TBH you need to check your medication levels again; they are not right.

Campos - Ted Kennedy isn't an American Prince? He only became a Senator because he knew how to tread water, doesn't that fit?
January 28, 2009

7:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

taoistblockhead writes:

It's all about apartheid there MIH - Whether practiced by America for 200+ years, South Africa, Israel, the PNAC, AIPAC, or the religious bigots of Abrahamic Monotheism.

The truth is you can't handle the truth - but keep waving your jingoist flag in honor of the broken Roman Empire in North America.
January 28, 2009

7:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

Bmac writes:

Does Campos mean that people on the left don't use people they know to move up - give me a break. I wonder who's butt Campos kissed to get on this newspaper! Hey blockhead - how about sticking to the article doofus.
January 28, 2009

7:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

VVVV writes:

The only problem I see is that people still actually believe the ideals that created the American experiment are still alive and well. It may not have had the drama of Julius Caesar, but we are following the history of the Roman Empire fairly well. The good news is that we probably have about 200 years for the bureaucracy to become so bloated that the empire fizzles out into rebellion and barbarian invasion. That is, assuming modern time does not pass exponentially faster than history.
January 28, 2009

7:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

taoistblockhead writes:

Once ex-President Cheney and ex-Lapdog Bush are found guilty of war crimes and treason against the Constitution of the United States (along with their minions Rice, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, Addington, Yoo, et al), they can be transferred to Gitmo to live out their days.

People from all over the world can travel to see these criminals crouching in orange jumpsuits behind barbed wire fence, baking in the hot sun. Call it the Zoo for the New American Century, charge admission and use the money to help tear down the Pentagram of Death, aka the Pentagon.
January 28, 2009

8:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

bagwan writes:

To quote Paul Campos: "His writing was boring, he made a lot of factual errors and his point of view was invarialbly as surprising as that of a member of Stalin's Politburo. His work was, in the cruel but fair judgment of Salon's Glenn Greewald, sloppy , error-plagued and incompararably hackish."
Does anyone else see the irony here?
January 28, 2009

8:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Achilles writes:

Why would the RMN publish this personal attack piece? There's nothing in this column but hatred for another columnist. Campos did not offer us any evidence of Kristol's "factual errors" nor did he offer us any specific Kristol writing that he deemed inferior.

This reminds me of a previous hit-piece Campos did where he suggested that some obscure football scout was a racist because Campos did not agree with his scouting reports. Only later was it discovered that Campos selectively ignored the multitude of favorable reviews of black athletes by the scout.

Campos is shameless.
January 28, 2009

10:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

RegLib writes:

Kristol has been a reliable political weathervane for years. Whatever he says will happen, you can be certain that the exact opposite will happen.
January 28, 2009

10:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

Faux_Noise writes:

J2,

Have you noticed that Vince Carroll's columns are regularly personal attack pieces against the NY Times?
January 28, 2009

10:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

Achilles writes:

No, I rarely read his column. But what is your point? How can he make "personal attack pieces" against the NY Times? The NY Times is not a person.
January 28, 2009

10:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

Ted_in_Vegas writes:

Nepotism is the path to success as a right-wing pundit? That's Dumb! Rush Limbaugh's father was a right-wing pundit? Ann Coulter's? Sean Hannity's? Nope, Nope and Nope.

On the other hand, Caroline Kennedy thought she was in the running to be Senator from New York because of her stellar political career? Nope again; it is her bloodline that had her in the running, sort of.

Once again Campost twists facts and ignores others to take shots at the right.
January 28, 2009

11:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

peterpi writes:

taoisblockhead, please tell me what Israeli settlers, Palestinian inhabitants, George Bush, Richard (to please the mindless cybernannny) Cheney, et al., have to do with the merits, or lack thereof of either Irving Kristol or Paul Campos?
John_II, Campos is an opinion columnist. He can attack or praise any person, institution, idea, object he feels like.
Maybe it was a really slow news day, Paul Campos' mind went blank, and he learned Irving Kristol touted the virtues of dieting.
January 28, 2009

11:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

malis writes:

C’mon folks. The sole reason for this column was to give Campos a chance to tell that final and very funny anecdote (ending “'I oppose it,' Irving replied. 'It subverts meritocracy.'”

MiHartsel, Campos would probably agree with you that Ted Kennedy is an ‘American Prince[cess]” of politics…as are George Bush, Mitt Romney, Caroline Kennedy, Hillary Clinton (married royalty); GHW Bush and Al Gore (sons of Senators); John McCain (3rd generation military royalty); Ronald Reagan/Arnold Schwarzenegger (celebrity royalty, and I’ll add Al Franken if he wins); etc., etc., etc.

All else being equal, I prefer to make my choices from among the non-royalty…folks who made it on their own abilities like Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Sarah Palin.

But simply as one isolated case, I agree with Campos on William Kristol. Facile and clever but shallow and prone to ‘obvious profundities’ in his writing. Certainly among the many examples of someone who would never have made it to his current position if not for his heredity.
January 28, 2009

12:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

Achilles writes:

"John_II, Campos is an opinion columnist. He can attack or praise any person, institution, idea, object he feels like." - peterpi

Obviously. But what is the point of RMN publishing a pointless ad hominem attack on another man? There was no substance there. Why not write your column as an argument against something Kristol wrote instead of simply writing that Kristol does not deserve to be where he is based on merit? Even if Campos was correct in his assumption that Kristol is successful because of who he knows instead of his own merit, so what? Is that such a big deal? Is this anything new? There's an old saying, "It's not who you are but who you know." There are plenty of ways to get ahead in life, having good connections is one of them.

What are we supposed to conclude from this column; that some guy named William Kristol became successful because he has good connections? Ok, now what? What should we do? Protest against Kristol? Egg his house?

Again, why would the RMN feel that this is something Coloradans would be interested in?
January 28, 2009

1:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

peterpi writes:

John_II, I don't know. It's their paper.
They run occasional drivel from Mike Rosen (also known to engage in ad hominem attacks), maybe they feel the need to occasionally run drivel from Paul Campos to add balance.
January 28, 2009

1:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

Achilles writes:

Well, I'm glad you agree that this Campos column is drivel. Although I have never known Rosen to engage in ad hominem attacks. He always seems to me to attack a position or argument rather than a person.
January 28, 2009

9:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

WestminsterJ writes:

John_II- Although I have never known Rosen to engage in ad hominem attacks. He always seems to me to attack a position or argument rather than a person.

Got any other knee-slappers? You really are living in an alternate reality.
January 28, 2009

10:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Achilles writes:

WestminsterJ,

Rosen's columns are archived on this site. If I am wrong, you can prove it by quoting from one of his columns.
January 29, 2009

9:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Debunkin8tor writes:

Campos lost all credibility when he wrote (in a previous hit piece) that he would rather shake the hand of a pornographer than Bill Kristol. Having revealed his passionate hatred of Kristol, his viewpoint on Kristol's writing ability is suspect. Even more laughable is his extrapolation that all successful conservative pundits must have arrived because of "extreme nepotism of the contemporary right-wing media machine." N=1 does not a valid statistical sample make. Does Campos have even one more example? Limbaugh, Will, Hannity, Hewitt, Sowell, Malkin, Ingrahim, Steyn, Dsouza, Goldberg - these are all blue bloods? Campos is lucky to have tenure, because he would be laughed out of court, Statistics 101, and a high school debate if he tried to actually prove anything. Law school professor apparently requires less.
January 29, 2009

1:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

jay writes:

campos has a point about kristol's influence among modern conservatives. (rush doesn't really count as he's an entertainer).

the problem with kristol is one of willful ignorance. he regularly chooses to refuse to acknowledge politically inconvenient facts in order to try to make a weak point.

john, it's not as if said information about rosen is hard to find, aside for those who are intellectually lazy or dishonest that is...

http://colorado.mediamatters.org/issu...
January 29, 2009

3:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Achilles writes:

jay, your link was completely irrelevant to my comment. I asked WestJ for evidence of ad hominem attacks. That website merely listed policy disagreements with Rosen's show.

Is there a single Rosen column that is strictly a personal attack on an individual? What do you say, WestyJ? Where did Rosen spend an entire column solely for the purpose of attacking someone personally?
January 30, 2009

8:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

me_eq_ccm writes:

At least it is apparent that Mr. Campos wasn't born to manners...
February 1, 2009

5:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

Shadow writes:

I think Campos wrote the hit piece just because he is jelouse of Kristol. Even though Kristol will no longer write for the New York rag, which by the way is still going under despite the infusion of money from Mexico. Kristol is more read, respected, and earns more, (earns more is the key) then Campos ever will. So Campos in typical compost fashion wrote this hit piece to try and say that he is still writing and Kristol is not.

However Kristol is still writing and making more money , is more influencial and more factually acurate then Campos ever will be.

Home › Opinion › Opinion Columns & Blogs

CAMPOS: To the manner born

By Paul Campos, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published January 28, 2009 at 12:05 a.m.

More Opinion Columns & Blogs

Share

Comments

Featured

Columns & Blogs