Well, "clubbable" is a ridiculous word, and it took me a few seconds to even hazard a guess as to what Brooks meant by it, but apparently it's a very old and real word, and I was right about its definition. Brooks pokes some interesting holes in our notions of meritocracy, but I think his claims get progressively weaker until the last one, where he begins to scare me. "Society is too transparent," he says, arguing that transparency makes people less trusting of government, because it exposes the ugly truth. Well, no duh. Is he saying he'd prefer a shadowy elite? No, "this is not to say" that, Brooks clarifies. Then what IS it to say? He offers only a poorly worded, lazy non-suggestion in the last sentence.

Brooks is good at identifying some of the problems with "elites" today, but in his comparison he fails to point out how problematic it was in the past. His conclusion isn't followed up with actionable advice.

This is an example of the common genre of the opinion piece that lays out and analyze assertions believed to be widely accepted, without a shred of proof for any assertion. Well this one has a shred but that's it. The insights are worthwhile, but some of the assertions would be fodder for hours of debate.

Brooks' has a nostalgic view of the "Protestant Establishment". You know, back when people knew their place. Still, his critic of merit is worthy of discussion.

Yes. Strong opinion and provocative perspective based on fact. However, Brooks omits a major reason for lower trust in the power elites -- lack of accountability. Whether business, government, journalism, law, medicine, nonprofits or other institutions, leaders who screw up are not always held sufficiently and publicly accountable. Result: No trust.

Brooks on the inverse trends of diversification and effectiveness in cultural/governmental/financial leadership. "It is less necessary to be clubbable. It is more important to be smart and hard-working." "[A]mass[ing] technical knowledge[ . . . ] is only marginally related to the skill of being sensitive to context." Diminished social connectedness (in geographical context).