On the TV obits he’s referred to constantly as “the father of modern conservatism”. I think it would be more apropos to call him, at best, “the grandfather of modern conservatism”, not an age crack but a reference to the new generation (really more than one) to have taken power since Buckley-an conservatism. He was a devout Catholic but wasn’t really responsible for the Christian Right Reagan> conservatism that exercises “family values” social policies over fiscal responsibility.
In some ways he’s less the ancestor than some sort of uncle whose offspring didn’t vanish like Australopithecus exactly but did form a smaller gene pool.
Australopithecus, or at least one species from that Genus, is an ancestor of us. I know what you’re saying, but since we’re addressing WFB here, I figured it would be OK to be pedantic. 
Even 20 years ago, well into the Reagan Morning, SPY magazine could say that “people care less about his writing than about the fact that his clothes are covered with dog hair.”
Certainly it’s a small mercy that he died before living to see the horror of a member of a non-advanced race become president
-WFB
What a Fuckin’ Bastard?
Seriously, though, could you tell me where that’s from? I’m guessing it’s pretty old.
I really liked Buckley, especially on Firing Line, and when he used to do team debates on PBS, with Michael Kinsley.
I’d like to see the context of that quote, please.
Let’s keep in mind a few things - Buckley had a very long career, publishing a book in the early 1950s and writing continuously since. And since he never shied away from being provocative, you can find lots of shocking things, and things that became more shocking with time.
I’m not going to stay in this thread if it becomes “defend Buckley.” I won’t defend everything he wrote, and can’t - but I will say the country is better for having him around.
Yea, sorry, I should’ve put a date on it, I didn’t mean to give the impression it was a recent comment. It’s from a 1957 editorial.
Still, if we can praise him for being smart because he learned Spanish at age 6, I think damming him for being stupid because he was a racist at 35 is fairgame
1957 was just the time when opposing civil rights could do the most harm and supporting them could do the most good. As Maxwell Smart might say, if only he had used his genius for niceness instead of evil.
Wasn’t around then, but I doubt coming out in favor of segregation was particularly shocking in 1957.
Fair enough, I don’t mean to turn this into a debate of Buckley’s legacy. Just wanted to point out that its at best a mixed legacy. Also I think there’s an idea floating around that Buckley is a “true conservative” that the current crop of conservatives have fallen from (post #6 is an example of what I’m talking about), so I just wanted to point out that Buckley’s generation of conservatives proscribed to many ideas that, frankly, modern conservatism is far better off without.
As a conservative, I’ll forgo any anatomical references and say I hope you realize that a non-conservative’s unqualified declaration about “the true meaning of conservatism” is nugatory.
My favorite memory of “Firing Line” is from a panel discussing the separation of church and state. The camera was on Alan Dershowitz who was saying “If Abraham were to attempt to sacrifice Isaac today the way he did in the Bible, I’d swear out a warrant against him for attempted murder!” Buckley, off-camera, quickly said, “But would you defend him?” That got a big laugh. Dershowitz said, “Well…”, and the laughter got louder. (Dershowitz then said under the laughter, “Probably.”)
It sounds like what might charitably be called “enlightened superiority”. It’s very jarring to read that in 2008, but I suspect it didn’t sound too out of place in 1957. It would be interesting to hear what he had to say on the subject in 1967.
One can be great without being perfect. I’m bemused by the dismissive attitude toward someone who accomplished so much by people who, as far as I can tell, have accomplished nothing of significance.
Anyway, his vocabulary was really … really … good.
I’ll provide the cite- I myself read it in NR &, at the time, it didn’t seem like that extreme an idea. It was certainly better than the Quarantine suggestions.
I now see that a 2005 one has been linked- I remember reading the mid-80s one.
Funny, I might make the same statement about conservatives who profess to know the true meaning of “liberalism”.
Sorry, folks, but a challenge demands an answer.
Carry on.
We may’ve shared an Alma Mater, but I nivver liked th’ man. Nossir.
[http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/business/media/27cnd-buckley.html?_r=1&ref=obituaries&oref=slogin](William F Buckley has died at the age of 82.
He laid the groundwork for modern conservatism; he cast the anti-Semites and racists out of the right wing. He made conservatism respectable and worthy of government, and he seemed to have fun doing it.
George Will noted in 1980:
“All great biblical stories begin with Genesis, and before there was Ronald Reagan, there was Barry Goldwater, and before there was Barry Goldwater there was National Review, and before there was National Review there was Bill Buckley …”
On another part of the internet people are posting favorite comments made by Mr. Buckley here is one;
In a series of television debates in '68 with Gore Vidal, Vidal called Buckley a “proto- or crypto-Nazi”, to which Buckley replied, “Now listen, you queer, stop calling me a crypto-Nazi or I will sock you in your goddamn face, and you will stay plastered.”
He loved words and often wrote on the correct use of grammar and vocabulary to express meaning. He served briefly in the Central Intelligence Agency and wrote a creditable series of spy novels in addition to his thousands of newspaper articles over 1,500 appearance on Firing Line and his more important books and work on National Review.
There is simply nobody in American public life who can replace him.
Link:
[url)
]There is simply nobody who can replace him.
I am very liberal in my views. Very.
But I adored William Buckley. Without him, I might never have known that conservatives could be intelligent. I didn’t pay any attention to them at alll until he came along.
There are two conservative sources that I will pay some mind to as reliable sources: the National Review is one of them.
It’s not that I agreed with Buckley anymore than I agree with any other conservative. It’s just that Buckley made it possible for me to sit still and listen.
His pompousness was part of the fun. It was his schtick. That combined with his wit, his use of the language, his logic and his timing were mentally seductive. I had rather listen to a William F. Buckley debate than go to the theater or a concert.
I do not believe that he held the same beliefs about race that he did in the Fifties and Sixties. Even then he did not claim that the “advanced race” was inherently so and he did indicate that his accessment was only “for the time being.” I doubt that he would have found it a “horror” at all to have a non-white president.
Don’t try to paint him as if he had not grown at all in the last forty or fifty years.There won’t be another like him and I will miss knowing he’s around. It’s a shabbier world without him.
I can’t prevent you, and I wouldn’t even if I could. But allow me to offer you my invitation and encouragement to do so.
For me at least, no apology necessary. But as far as I can tell, it was not I who made such a challenge. Permit me, then, to make, not really a challenge, just a tiny request: kindly show us all what you perceive as a challenge. Perhaps my original post was too mordacious.
Buckley was prolific and he had a good vocabulary.
That’s pretty much all you can say about him.
I mean, come on. Spy novels? Opinionating? I’m sure he acted as some kind of morale-booster for the upper echelons of the conservative movement, but surely nothing they couldn’t have lived without. There’s nothing substantial in that legacy. The one key difference between Buckley and Vidal is that between bouts of bloviating, Vidal actually produced a small number of works of real literature.
I’m sure he was liked by many and will be missed by some, but had there never been a Buckley, there would have been no loss to American society or culture.