To the Editor:
Re “Trump’s Strength Is His Greatest Weakness,” by David Brooks (column, April 25):
Mr. Brooks is overthinking once more. In his column, he praises President Trump’s vitality, and implicitly compares him to the navy grand strategists Solar Tzu and Carl von Clausewitz.
A extra apt comparability for Mr. Trump’s habits in his first 100 days as president this time period can be with gamers of violent video video games, by which the problem is just to slaughter as many opponents as potential as shortly as potential.
It’s you in opposition to the enemy. No grey space. Shoot immediately and transfer on. In any other case, you’re destroyed, and the sport is over.
Mr. Trump’s unprecedented onslaught in opposition to so many opponents doesn’t outcome from one thing he possesses however from one thing he lacks: a conscience, which is superfluous to online game warfare.
From this angle, Mr. Trump’s supposedly astounding “vitality” is unremarkable. Many people might have completed the identical — if we lacked a conscience, if we didn’t debate whether or not or not it was really in one of the best pursuits of our nation to undermine the ability of the judiciary, to encourage tyranny overseas or to hazard the well being of the world financial system.
Mr. Trump’s singular accomplishment is just not “verve,” as Mr. Brooks places it, however the utter absence of an ethical compass.
Bruce Lilly
Bloomington, Ind.
To the Editor:
David Brooks’s insightful evaluation of the Trump administration could have overestimated the diploma to which the present momentum may be attributed to any private power of Donald Trump’s.
Having surrounded himself with a coterie of flattering ideologues, Mr. Trump is free to occupy himself with plans for retribution and better fame whereas the enablers slide a steady stream of government orders throughout the Resolute Desk for his signature.
As soon as they’ve outfitted him with the requisite 20-word sound chew on the most recent regressive maneuver, they’ll transfer on to a brand new stack of orders, whereas Mr. Trump preps himself for the following episode of White Home theater.
Peter Muller
Wilmington, Del.
To the Editor:
I respect David Brooks’s thought-provoking column about President Trump’s drive. However I’d add that it’s at all times simpler to tear down and destroy than it’s to create, construct and increase.
I additionally consider that if it weren’t for Elon Musk and his DOGE wrecking crew and Venture 2025’s ready-to-go government-obliterating blueprint, such fast harm, chaos and hurt wouldn’t have occurred as quick nor maybe on the widespread scale that it has.
Sally Jorgensen
Santa Cruz, Calif.
Reducing Rules
To the Editor:
Re “Behind the Rush to Discard Rules and Reshape Life” (entrance web page, April 17):
If the Trump administration succeeds within the efforts described on this article, a horrifying future awaits. President Trump and Elon Musk’s newest undertaking is an government order designed to intestine the system of safeguards upon which Individuals rely.
Many years-old guidelines may very well be on the chopping block, regardless of how basic they’re to the well being and wellness of our society. Our office security, clear air and water, civil rights and extra are at speedy danger. Firms and the rich can have almost free rein to chop corners, cheat shoppers and pad their pockets.
Coral Davenport’s reporting says the administration is already at work compiling its so-called kill record of laws. And since it is aware of that this will probably be deeply unpopular with the general public, it’s making an attempt to entirely skip the general public discover and remark course of that’s required by legislation.
Even worse, it intends to say no to implement the general public protections that stay on the books. The bitter irony of calling this a “kill record” is that the administration’s try to intestine safeguards is prone to hurt and kill individuals.
Lisa Gilbert
Washington
The author is a co-president of Public Citizen.
A Venture for Democrats
To the Editor:
Re “Don’t Be Afraid of a Fight” (Spherical Desk, Opinion, April 25):
On this dialogue, Elaine Kamarck, a senior fellow on the Brookings Establishment and a former adviser to President Invoice Clinton, appropriately affirms that the Democratic Celebration wants to have interaction in an inner battle to find out its future path.
Each struggle wants an enviornment, and on this case Democrats want one the place celebration members of each stripe can work out their variations, choose shared objectives, articulate particular insurance policies and put together for the restoration of a real democracy.
I don’t know who the host group is likely to be — a basis? a assume tank? a really courageous college? — however I do have an acceptable title for the hassle: Venture 2029, anybody?
Daniel Okrent
New York
The author was the general public editor of The Instances from 2003 to 2005.
A Common’s Name to Arms
To the Editor:
Re “Be Not Afraid,” by Stanley McChrystal (Opinion visitor essay, April 18):
Common McChrystal so articulately expresses ideas that exemplify the foundations upon which our nation has rested since its beginning, and but it now teeters fearfully.
Ethical rectitude appears to have misplaced its that means for many individuals. I worry that, whereas I hear the final’s name to arms clearly, it isn’t obvious to me that others are as attuned to this clarion name.
Could all of us take braveness from one who has not forgotten his oath and responsibility.
Kathleen Mylotte
Buffalo
To the Editor:
Stanley McChrystal’s essay was sensible, informative and insightful. How I want, although, that he had not used a impartial voice, referring to “our leaders” reasonably than naming the corrosive cultivator of worry within the Oval Workplace. Is it an indication of our occasions that he declined to place a reputation to the person and his motion?
Simply to be clear, I imply Donald Trump and MAGA.
Peter Greiff
Madrid
How one can Age Nicely
To the Editor:
“How to Be a Happy 85-Year-Old (Like Me),” by Roger Rosenblatt (Opinion visitor essay, nytimes.com, April 13), made me pause and smile.
I flip 50 subsequent yr. As that milestone approaches, I’ve been pondering extra about ageing, not with dread however with gratitude.
I bear in mind being a child and pondering my mom was historical when she turned 30. Now, approaching 50 looks like a present. I don’t draw back from sharing my age. I’ve misplaced too many mates who didn’t get the prospect to stay thus far. Day-after-day I get up, I’m grateful to nonetheless be right here.
Mr. Rosenblatt’s piece places life into perspective. His reminders, particularly that “no person’s excited about you,” are liberating and grounding. His reflections assist me deal with what really issues: kindness, presence and the enjoyment of nonetheless being alive and capable of study.
I hope I’m fortunate sufficient to make it to 85. And if I do, I hope to hold the identical readability, humor and knowledge.
Don C. Sawyer III
Hamden, Conn.
To the Editor:
I’ve learn Roger Rosenblatt’s sensible set of recommendations on learn how to be comfortable at 85. They’re a certain recipe for having enjoyable, and they need to be given to all octogenarians on their birthday.
Being about to show 100 in a couple of months, I’ve just one tip I’d add: Care for your legs. So long as you’re nonetheless cell, the whole lot else is only a stroll within the park.
Bob Neighbour
Toronto
