The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenters to FollowHide Excerpts
By Authors Filter?
Andrei Martyanov Andrew J. Bacevich Andrew Joyce Andrew Napolitano Boyd D. Cathey Brad Griffin C.J. Hopkins Chanda Chisala Eamonn Fingleton Eric Margolis Fred Reed Godfree Roberts Gustavo Arellano Ilana Mercer Israel Shamir James Kirkpatrick James Petras James Thompson Jared Taylor JayMan John Derbyshire John Pilger Jonathan Revusky Kevin MacDonald Linh Dinh Michael Hoffman Michael Hudson Mike Whitney Nathan Cofnas Norman Finkelstein Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Paul Craig Roberts Paul Gottfried Paul Kersey Peter Frost Peter Lee Philip Giraldi Philip Weiss Robert Weissberg Ron Paul Ron Unz Stephen J. Sniegoski The Saker Tom Engelhardt A. Graham Adam Hochschild Aedon Cassiel Ahmet Öncü Alexander Cockburn Alexander Hart Alfred McCoy Alison Rose Levy Alison Weir Anand Gopal Andre Damon Andrew Cockburn Andrew Fraser Andy Kroll Ann Jones Anonymous Anthony DiMaggio Ariel Dorfman Arlie Russell Hochschild Arno Develay Arnold Isaacs Artem Zagorodnov Astra Taylor Austen Layard Aviva Chomsky Ayman Fadel Barbara Ehrenreich Barbara Garson Barbara Myers Barry Lando Belle Chesler Beverly Gologorsky Bill Black Bill Moyers Bob Dreyfuss Bonnie Faulkner Brenton Sanderson Brett Redmayne-Titley Brian Dew Carl Horowitz Catherine Crump Charles Bausman Charles Goodhart Charles Wood Charlotteville Survivor Chase Madar Chris Hedges Chris Roberts Christian Appy Christopher DeGroot Chuck Spinney Coleen Rowley Cooper Sterling Craig Murray Dahr Jamail Dan E. Phillips Dan Sanchez Daniel McAdams Danny Sjursen Dave Kranzler Dave Lindorff David Barsamian David Bromwich David Chibo David Gordon David North David Vine David Walsh David William Pear Dean Baker Dennis Saffran Diana Johnstone Dilip Hiro Dirk Bezemer Ed Warner Edmund Connelly Eduardo Galeano Ellen Cantarow Ellen Packer Ellison Lodge Eric Draitser Eric Zuesse Erik Edstrom Erika Eichelberger Erin L. Thompson Eugene Girin F. Roger Devlin Franklin Lamb Frida Berrigan Friedrich Zauner Gabriel Black Gary Corseri Gary North Gary Younge Gene Tuttle George Albert George Bogdanich George Szamuely Georgianne Nienaber Glenn Greenwald Greg Grandin Greg Johnson Gregoire Chamayou Gregory Foster Gregory Hood Gregory Wilpert Guest Admin Hannah Appel Hans-Hermann Hoppe Harri Honkanen Henry Cockburn Hina Shamsi Howard Zinn Hubert Collins Hugh McInnish Ira Chernus Jack Kerwick Jack Rasmus Jack Ravenwood Jack Sen James Bovard James Carroll James Fulford Jane Lazarre Jared S. Baumeister Jason C. Ditz Jason Kessler Jay Stanley Jeff J. Brown Jeffrey Blankfort Jeffrey St. Clair Jen Marlowe Jeremiah Goulka Jeremy Cooper Jesse Mossman Jim Daniel Jim Kavanagh JoAnn Wypijewski Joe Lauria Johannes Wahlstrom John W. Dower John Feffer John Fund John Harrison Sims John Reid John Stauber John Taylor John V. Walsh John Williams Jon Else Jonathan Alan King Jonathan Anomaly Jonathan Rooper Jonathan Schell Joseph Kishore Juan Cole Judith Coburn K.R. Bolton Karel Van Wolferen Karen Greenberg Kelley Vlahos Kersasp D. Shekhdar Kevin Barrett Kevin Zeese Kshama Sawant Lance Welton Laura Gottesdiener Laura Poitras Laurent Guyénot Lawrence G. Proulx Leo Hohmann Linda Preston Logical Meme Lorraine Barlett M.G. Miles Mac Deford Maidhc O Cathail Malcolm Unwell Marcus Alethia Marcus Cicero Margaret Flowers Mark Danner Mark Engler Mark Perry Matt Parrott Mattea Kramer Matthew Harwood Matthew Richer Matthew Stevenson Max Blumenthal Max Denken Max North Maya Schenwar Michael Gould-Wartofsky Michael Schwartz Michael T. Klare Murray Polner Nan Levinson Naomi Oreskes Nate Terani Ned Stark Nelson Rosit Nicholas Stix Nick Kollerstrom Nick Turse Noam Chomsky Nomi Prins Patrick Cleburne Patrick Cloutier Paul Cochrane Paul Engler Paul Nachman Paul Nehlen Pepe Escobar Peter Brimelow Peter Gemma Peter Van Buren Pierre M. Sprey Pratap Chatterjee Publius Decius Mus Rajan Menon Ralph Nader Ramin Mazaheri Ramziya Zaripova Randy Shields Ray McGovern Razib Khan Rebecca Gordon Rebecca Solnit Richard Krushnic Richard Silverstein Rick Shenkman Rita Rozhkova Robert Baxter Robert Bonomo Robert Fisk Robert Lipsyte Robert Parry Robert Roth Robert S. Griffin Robert Scheer Robert Trivers Robin Eastman Abaya Roger Dooghy Ronald N. Neff Rory Fanning Sam Francis Sam Husseini Sayed Hasan Sharmini Peries Sheldon Richman Spencer Davenport Spencer Quinn Stefan Karganovic Steffen A. Woll Stephanie Savell Stephen J. Rossi Steve Fraser Steven Yates Sydney Schanberg Tanya Golash-Boza Ted Rall Theodore A. Postol Thierry Meyssan Thomas Frank Thomas O. Meehan Tim Shorrock Tim Weiner Tobias Langdon Todd E. Pierce Todd Gitlin Todd Miller Tom Piatak Tom Suarez Tom Sunic Tracy Rosenberg Virginia Dare Vladimir Brovkin Vox Day W. Patrick Lang Walter Block William Binney William DeBuys William Hartung William J. Astore Winslow T. Wheeler Ximena Ortiz Yan Shen
Nothing found
By Topics/Categories Filter?
2016 Election 9/11 Academia AIPAC Alt Right American Media American Military American Pravda Anti-Semitism Benjamin Netanyahu Blacks Britain China Conservative Movement Conspiracy Theories Deep State Donald Trump Economics Foreign Policy Hillary Clinton History Ideology Immigration IQ Iran ISIS Islam Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jews Middle East Neocons Political Correctness Race/IQ Race/Ethnicity Republicans Russia Science Syria Terrorism Turkey Ukraine Vladimir Putin World War II 1971 War 2008 Election 2012 Election 2014 Election 23andMe 70th Anniversary Parade 75-0-25 Or Something A Farewell To Alms A. J. West A Troublesome Inheritance Aarab Barghouti Abc News Abdelhamid Abaaoud Abe Abe Foxman Abigail Marsh Abortion Abraham Lincoln Abu Ghraib Abu Zubaydah Academy Awards Acheivement Gap Acid Attacks Adam Schiff Addiction Adoptees Adoption Adoption Twins ADRA2b AEI Affective Empathy Affirmative Action Affordable Family Formation Afghanistan Africa African Americans African Genetics Africans Afrikaner Afrocentricism Agriculture Aha AIDS Ain't Nobody Got Time For That. Ainu Aircraft Carriers AirSea Battle Al Jazeera Al-Qaeda Alan Dershowitz Alan Macfarlane Albania Alberto Del Rosario Albion's Seed Alcohol Alcoholism Alexander Hamilton Alexandre Skirda Alexis De Tocqueville Algeria All Human Behavioral Traits Are Heritable All Traits Are Heritable Alpha Centauri Alpha Males Alt Left Altruism Amazon.com America The Beautiful American Atheists American Debt American Exceptionalism American Flag American Jews American Left American Legion American Nations American Nations American Prisons American Renaissance Americana Amerindians Amish Amish Quotient Amnesty Amnesty International Amoral Familialism Amy Chua Amygdala An Hbd Liberal Anaconda Anatoly Karlin Ancestry Ancient DNA Ancient Genetics Ancient Jews Ancient Near East Anders Breivik Andrei Nekrasov Andrew Jackson Androids Angela Stent Angelina Jolie Anglo-Saxons Ann Coulter Anne Buchanan Anne Heche Annual Country Reports On Terrorism Anthropology Antibiotics Antifa Antiquity Antiracism Antisocial Behavior Antiwar Movement Antonin Scalia Antonio Trillanes IV Anywhere But Here Apartheid Appalachia Appalachians Arab Christianity Arab Spring Arabs Archaic DNA Archaic Humans Arctic Humans Arctic Resources Argentina Argentina Default Armenians Army-McCarthy Hearings Arnon Milchan Art Arthur Jensen Artificial Intelligence As-Safir Ash Carter Ashkenazi Intelligence Ashkenazi Jews Ashraf Ghani Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians ASPM Assassinations Assimilation Assortative Mating Atheism Atlantic Council Attractiveness Attractiveness Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Austro-Hungarian Empire Austronesians Autism Automation Avi Tuschman Avigdor Lieberman Ayodhhya Babri Masjid Baby Boom Baby Gap Baby Girl Jay Backlash Bacterial Vaginosis Bad Science Bahrain Balanced Polymorphism Balkans Baltimore Riots Bangladesh Banking Banking Industry Banking System Banks Barack H. Obama Barack Obama Barbara Comstock Bariatric Surgery Baseball Bashar Al-Assad Baumeister BDA BDS Movement Beauty Beauty Standards Behavior Genetics Behavioral Genetics Behaviorism Beijing Belgrade Embassy Bombing Believeing In Observational Studies Is Nuts Ben Cardin Ben Carson Benghazi Benjamin Cardin Berlin Wall Bernard Henri-Levy Bernard Lewis Bernie Madoff Bernie Sanders Bernies Sanders Beta Males BICOM Big Five Bilingual Education Bill 59 Bill Clinton Bill Kristol Bill Maher Billionaires Billy Graham Birds Of A Feather Birth Order Birth Rate Bisexuality Bisexuals BJP Black Americans Black Crime Black History Black Lives Matter Black Metal Black Muslims Black Panthers Black Women Attractiveness Blackface Blade Runner Blogging Blond Hair Blue Eyes Bmi Boasian Anthropology Boderlanders Boeing Boers Boiling Off Boko Haram Bolshevik Revolution Books Border Reivers Borderlander Borderlanders Boris Johnson Bosnia Boston Bomb Boston Marathon Bombing Bowe Bergdahl Boycott Divest And Sanction Boycott Divestment And Sanctions Brain Brain Scans Brain Size Brain Structure Brazil Breaking Down The Bullshit Breeder's Equation Bret Stephens Brexit Brian Boutwell Brian Resnick BRICs Brighter Brains Brighton Broken Hill Brown Eyes Bruce Jenner Bruce Lahn brussels Bryan Caplan BS Bundy Family Burakumin Burma Bush Administration C-section Cagots Caitlyn Jenner California Cambodia Cameron Russell Campaign Finance Campaign For Liberty Campus Rape Canada Canada Day Canadian Flag Canadians Cancer Candida Albicans Cannabis Capital Punishment Capitalism Captain Chicken Cardiovascular Disease Care Package Carl Sagan Carly Fiorina Caroline Glick Carroll Quigley Carry Me Back To Ole Virginny Carter Page Castes Catalonia Catholic Church Catholicism Catholics Causation Cavaliers CCTV Censorship Central Asia Chanda Chisala Charles Darwin Charles Krauthammer Charles Murray Charles Schumer Charleston Shooting Charlie Hebdo Charlie Rose Charlottesville Chechens Chechnya Cherlie Hebdo Child Abuse Child Labor Children Chimerism China/America China Stock Market Meltdown China Vietnam Chinese Chinese Communist Party Chinese Evolution Chinese Exclusion Act Chlamydia Chris Gown Chris Rock Chris Stringer Christian Fundamentalism Christianity Christmas Christopher Steele Chuck Chuck Hagel Chuck Schumer CIA Cinema Civil Liberties Civil Rights Civil War Civilian Deaths CJIA Clannishness Clans Clark-unz Selection Classical Economics Classical History Claude-Lévi-Strauss Climate Climate Change Clinton Global Initiative Cliodynamics Cloudburst Flight Clovis Cochran And Harpending Coefficient Of Relationship Cognitive Empathy Cognitive Psychology Cohorts Cold War Colin Kaepernick Colin Woodard Colombia Colonialism Colonists Coming Apart Comments Communism Confederacy Confederate Flag Conflict Of Interest Congress Consanguinity Conscientiousness Consequences Conservatism Conservatives Constitution Constitutional Theory Consumer Debt Cornel West Corporal Punishment Correlation Is Still Not Causation Corruption Corruption Perception Index Costa Concordia Cousin Marriage Cover Story CPEC Craniometry CRIF Crime Crimea Criminality Crowded Crowding Cruise Missiles Cuba Cuban Missile Crisis Cuckold Envy Cuckservative Cultural Evolution Cultural Marxism Cut The Sh*t Guys DACA Dads Vs Cads Daily Mail Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Dalliard Dalton Trumbo Damascus Bombing Dan Freedman Dana Milbank Daniel Callahan Danish Daren Acemoglu Dark Ages Dark Tetrad Dark Triad Darwinism Data Posts David Brooks David Friedman David Frum David Goldenberg David Hackett Fischer David Ignatius David Katz David Kramer David Lane David Petraeus Davide Piffer Davos Death Death Penalty Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Debt Declaration Of Universal Human Rights Deep Sleep Deep South Democracy Democratic Party Democrats Demographic Transition Demographics Demography Denisovans Denmark Dennis Ross Depression Deprivation Deregulation Derek Harvey Desired Family Size Detroit Development Developmental Noise Developmental Stability Diabetes Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders Dialects Dick Cheney Die Nibelungen Dienekes Diet Different Peoples Is Different Dinesh D'Souza Dirty Bomb Discrimination Discrimination Paradigm Disney Dissent Diversity Dixie Django Unchained Do You Really Want To Know? Doing My Part Doll Tests Dollar Domestic Terrorism Dominique Strauss-Kahn Dopamine Douglas MacArthur Dr James Thompson Drd4 Dreams From My Father Dresden Drew Barrymore Dreyfus Affair Drinking Drone War Drones Drug Cartels Drugs Dry Counties DSM Dunning-kruger Effect Dusk In Autumn Dustin Hoffman Duterte Dylan Roof Dylann Roof Dysgenic E.O. 9066 E. O. Wilson Eagleman East Asia East Asians Eastern Europe Eastern Europeans Ebola Economic Development Economic Sanctions Economy Ed Miller Education Edward Price Edward Snowden EEA Egypt Eisenhower El Salvador Elections Electric Cars Elie Wiesel Eliot Cohen Eliot Engel Elites Ellen Walker Elliot Abrams Elliot Rodger Elliott Abrams Elon Musk Emigration Emil Kirkegaard Emmanuel Macron Emmanuel Todd Empathy England English Civil War Enhanced Interrogations Enoch Powell Entrepreneurship Environment Environmental Estrogens Environmentalism Erdogan Eric Cantor Espionage Estrogen Ethiopia Ethnic Genetic Interests Ethnic Nepotism Ethnicity EU Eugenic Eugenics Eurasia Europe European Right European Union Europeans Eurozone Everything Evil Evolution Evolutionary Biology Evolutionary Psychology Exercise Extraversion Extreterrestrials Eye Color Eyes Ezra Cohen-Watnick Face Recognition Face Shape Faces Facts Fake News fallout Family Studies Far West Farmers Farming Fascism Fat Head Fat Shaming Father Absence FBI Federal Reserve Female Deference Female Homosexuality Female Sexual Response Feminism Feminists Ferguson Shooting Fertility Fertility Fertility Rates Fethullah Gulen Fetish Feuds Fields Medals FIFA Fifty Shades Of Grey Film Finance Financial Bailout Financial Bubbles Financial Debt Financial Sector Financial Times Finland First Amendment First Law First World War FISA Fitness Flags Flight From White Fluctuating Asymmetry Flynn Effect Food Football For Profit Schools Foreign Service Fourth Of July Fracking Fragrances France Francesco Schettino Frank Salter Frankfurt School Frantz Fanon Franz Boas Fred Hiatt Fred Reed Freddie Gray Frederic Hof Free Speech Free Trade Free Will Freedom Of Navigation Freedom Of Speech French Canadians French National Front French Paradox Friendly & Conventional Front National Frost-harpending Selection Fulford Funny G G Spot Gaddafi Gallipoli Game Gardnerella Vaginalis Gary Taubes Gay Germ Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Gaza Flotilla Gcta Gender Gender Gender And Sexuality Gender Confusion Gender Equality Gender Identity Disorder Gender Reassignment Gene-Culture Coevolution Gene-environment Correlation General Intelligence General Social Survey General Theory Of The West Genes Genes: They Matter Bitches Genetic Diversity Genetic Divides Genetic Engineering Genetic Load Genetic Pacification Genetics Genetics Of Height Genocide Genomics Geography Geopolitics George Bush George Clooney George Patton George Romero George Soros George Tenet George W. Bush George Wallace Germ Theory German Catholics Germans Germany Get It Right Get Real Ghouta Gilgit Baltistan Gina Haspel Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Global Terrorism Index Global Warming Globalism Globalization God Delusion Goetsu Going Too Far Gold Gold Warriors Goldman Sachs Good Advice Google Gordon Gallup Goths Government Debt Government Incompetence Government Spending Government Surveillance Great Depression Great Leap Forward Great Recession Greater Appalachia Greece Greeks Greg Clark Greg Cochran Gregory B Christainsen Gregory Clark Gregory Cochran Gregory House GRF Grooming Group Intelligence Group Selection Grumpy Cat GSS Guangzhou Guantanamo Guardian Guilt Culture Gun Control Guns Gynephilia Gypsies H-1B H Bomb H.R. McMaster H1-B Visas Haim Saban Hair Color Hair Lengthening Haiti Hajnal Line Hamas Hamilton: An American Musical Hamilton's Rule Happiness Happy Turkey Day ... Unless You're The Turkey Harriet Tubman Harry Jaffa Harvard Harvey Weinstein Hasbara Hassidim Hate Crimes Hate Speech Hatemi Havelock Ellis Haymarket Affair Hbd Hbd Chick HBD Denial Hbd Fallout Hbd Readers Head Size Health And Medicine Health Care Healthcare Heart Disease Heart Health Heart Of Asia Conference Heartiste Heather Norton Height Helmuth Nyborg Hemoglobin Henri De Man Henry Harpending Henry Kissinger Herbert John Fleure Heredity Heritability Hexaco Hezbollah High Iq Fertility Hip Hop Hiroshima Hispanic Crime Hispanic Paradox Hispanics Historical Genetics Hitler HKND Hollywood Holocaust Homicide Homicide Rate Homo Altaiensis Homophobia Homosexuality Honesty-humility House Intelligence Committee House M.d. House Md House Of Cards Housing Huey Long Huey Newton Hugo Chavez Human Biodiversity Human Evolution Human Genetics Human Genomics Human Nature Human Rights Human Varieties Humor Hungary Hunter-Gatherers Hunting Hurricane Hurricane Harvey I.F. Stone I Kissed A Girl And I Liked It I Love Italians I.Q. Genomics Ian Deary Ibd Ibo Ice T Iceland I'd Like To Think It's Obvious I Know What I'm Talking About Ideology And Worldview Idiocracy Igbo Ignorance Ilana Mercer Illegal Immigration IMF immigrants Immigration Imperial Presidency Imperialism Imran Awan In The Electric Mist Inbreeding Income Independence Day India Indians Individualism Inequality Infection Theory Infidelity Intelligence Internet Internet Research Agency Interracial Marriage Inuit Ioannidis Ioannis Metaxas Iosif Lazaridis Iq Iq And Wealth Iran Nuclear Agreement Iran Nuclear Program Iran Sanctions Iranian Nuclear Program Iraq Iraq War Ireland Irish ISIS. Terrorism Islamic Jihad Islamophobia Isolationism Israel Defense Force Israeli Occupation Israeli Settlements Israeli Spying Italianthro Italy It's Determinism - Genetics Is Just A Part It's Not Nature And Nurture Ivanka Ivy League Iwo Eleru J. Edgar Hoover Jack Keane Jake Tapper JAM-GC Jamaica James Clapper James Comey James Fanell James Mattis James Wooley Jamie Foxx Jane Harman Jane Mayer Janet Yellen Japan Japanese Jared Diamond Jared Kushner Jared Taylor Jason Malloy JASTA Jayman Jr. Jayman's Wife Jeff Bezos Jennifer Rubin Jensen Jeremy Corbyn Jerrold Nadler Jerry Seinfeld Jesse Bering Jesuits Jewish History JFK Assassination Jill Stein Jim Crow Joe Cirincione Joe Lieberman John Allen John B. Watson John Boehner John Bolton John Brennan John Derbyshire John Durant John F. Kennedy John Hawks John Hoffecker John Kasich John Kerry John Ladue John McCain John McLaughlin John McWhorter John Mearsheimer John Tooby Joke Posts Jonathan Freedland Jonathan Pollard Joseph Lieberman Joseph McCarthy Judaism Judicial System Judith Harris Julian Assange Jute K.d. Lang Kagans Kanazawa Kashmir Katibat Al-Battar Al-Libi Katy Perry Kay Hymowitz Keith Ellison Ken Livingstone Kenneth Marcus Kennewick Man Kevin MacDonald Kevin McCarthy Kevin Mitchell Kevin Williamson KGL-9268 Khazars Kim Jong Un Kimberly Noble Kin Altruism Kin Selection Kink Kinship Kissing Kiwis Kkk Knesset Know-nothings Korea Korean War Kosovo Ku Klux Klan Kurds Kurt Campbell Labor Day Lactose Lady Gaga Language Larkana Conspiracy Larry Summers Larung Gar Las Vegas Massacre Latin America Latinos Latitude Latvia Law Law Of War Manual Laws Of Behavioral Genetics Lead Poisoning Lebanon Leda Cosmides Lee Kuan Yew Left Coast Left/Right Lenin Leo Strauss Lesbians LGBT Liberal Creationism Liberalism Liberals Libertarianism Libertarians Libya life-expectancy Life In Space Life Liberty And The Pursuit Of Happyness Lifestyle Light Skin Preference Lindsay Graham Lindsey Graham Literacy Litvinenko Lloyd Blankfein Locus Of Control Logan's Run Lombok Strait Long Ass Posts Longevity Look AHEAD Looting Lorde Love Love Dolls Lover Boys Low-carb Low-fat Low Wages LRSO Lutherans Lyndon Johnson M Factor M.g. MacArthur Awards Machiavellianism Madeleine Albright Mahmoud Abbas Maine Malacca Strait Malaysian Airlines MH17 Male Homosexuality Mamasapano Mangan Manor Manorialism Manosphere Manufacturing Mao-a Mao Zedong Maoism Maori Map Posts maps Marc Faber Marco Rubio Marijuana Marine Le Pen Mark Carney Mark Steyn Mark Warner Market Economy Marriage Martin Luther King Marwan Marwan Barghouti Marxism Mary White Ovington Masha Gessen Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Mate Choice Mate Value Math Mathematics Maulana Bhashani Max Blumenthal Max Boot Max Brooks Mayans McCain/POW Mearsheimer-Walt Measurement Error Mega-Aggressions Mega-anlysis Megan Fox Megyn Kelly Melanin Memorial Day Mental Health Mental Illness Mental Traits Meritocracy Merkel Mesolithic Meta-analysis Meth Mexican-American War Mexico Michael Anton Michael Bloomberg Michael Flynn Michael Hudson Michael Jackson Michael Lewis Michael Morell Michael Pompeo Michael Weiss Michael Woodley Michele Bachmann Michelle Bachmann Michelle Obama Microaggressions Microcephalin Microsoft Middle Ages Mideastwire Migration Mike Huckabee Mike Pence Mike Pompeo Mike Signer Mikhail Khodorkovsky Militarized Police Military Military Pay Military Spending Milner Group Mindanao Minimum Wage Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study Minorities Minstrels Mirror Neurons Miscellaneous Misdreavus Missile Defense Mitt Romney Mixed-Race Modern Humans Mohammed Bin Salman Moldova Monogamy Moral Absolutism Moral Universalism Morality Mormons Moro Mortality Mossad Mountains Movies Moxie Mrs. Jayman MTDNA Muammar Gaddafi Multiculturalism Multiregional Model Music Muslim Muslim Ban Muslims Mutual Assured Destruction My Lai My Old Kentucky Home Myanmar Mysticism Nagasaki Nancy Segal Narendra Modi Nascar National Debt National Differences National Review National Security State National Security Strategy National Wealth Nationalism Native Americans NATO Natural Selection Nature Vs. Nurture Navy Yard Shooting Naz Shah Nazi Nazis Nazism Nbc News Nbc Nightly News Neanderthals NED Neo-Nazis Neoconservatism Neoconservatives Neoliberalism Neolithic Netherlands Neuropolitics Neuroticism Never Forget The Genetic Confound New Addition New Atheists New Cold War New England Patriots New France New French New Netherland New Qing History New Rules New Silk Road New World Order New York City New York Times Newfoundland Newt Gingrich NFL Nicaragua Canal Nicholas Sarkozy Nicholas Wade Nigeria Nightly News Nikki Haley No Free Will Nobel Prize Nobel Prized Nobosuke Kishi Nordics North Africa North Korea Northern Ireland Northwest Europe Norway NSA NSA Surveillance Nuclear Proliferation Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Null Result Nurture Nurture Assumption Nutrition Nuts NYPD O Mio Babbino Caro Obama Obamacare Obesity Obscured American Occam's Razor Occupy Occupy Wall Street Oceania Oil Oil Industry Old Folks At Home Olfaction Oliver Stone Olympics Omega Males Ominous Signs Once You Go Black Open To Experience Openness To Experience Operational Sex Ratio Opiates Opioids Orban Organ Transplants Orlando Shooting Orthodoxy Osama Bin Laden Ottoman Empire Our Political Nature Out Of Africa Model Outbreeding Oxtr Oxytocin Paekchong Pakistan Pakistani Palatability Paleoamerindians Paleocons Paleolibertarianism Palestine Palestinians Pamela Geller Panama Canal Panama Papers Parasite Parasite Burden Parasite Manipulation Parent-child Interactions Parenting Parenting Parenting Behavioral Genetics Paris Attacks Paris Spring Parsi Paternal Investment Pathogens Patriot Act Patriotism Paul Ewald Paul Krugman Paul Lepage Paul Manafort Paul Ryan Paul Singer Paul Wolfowitz Pavel Grudinin Peace Index Peak Jobs Pearl Harbor Pedophilia Peers Peggy Seagrave Pennsylvania Pentagon Perception Management Personality Peru Peter Frost Peter Thiel Peter Turchin Phil Onderdonk Phil Rushton Philip Breedlove Philippines Physical Anthropology Pierre Van Den Berghe Pieter Van Ostaeyen Piigs Pioneer Hypothesis Pioneers PISA Pizzagate Planets Planned Parenthood Pledge Of Allegiance Pleiotropy Pol Pot Poland Police State Police Training Politics Poll Results Polls Polygenic Score Polygyny Pope Francis Population Growth Population Replacement Populism Pornography Portugal Post 199 Post 201 Post 99 Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Post-Nationalism Pot Poverty PRC Prenatal Hormones Prescription Drugs Press Censorship Pretty Graphs Prince Bandar Priti Patel Privatization Progressives Project Plowshares Propaganda Prostitution Protestantism Proud To Be Black Psychology Psychometrics Psychopaths Psychopathy Pubertal Timing Public Schools Puerto Rico Punishment Puritans Putin Pwc Qatar Quakers Quantitative Genetics Quebec Quebecois Race Race And Crime Race And Genomics Race And Iq Race And Religion Race/Crime Race Denialism Race Riots Rachel Dolezal Rachel Maddow Racial Intelligence Racial Reality Racism Radical Islam Ralph And Coop Ralph Nader Rand Paul Randy Fine Rap Music Raqqa Rating People Rationality Raul Pedrozo Razib Khan Reaction Time Reading Real Estate Real Women Really Stop The Armchair Psychoanalysis Recep Tayyip Erdogan Reciprocal Altruism Reconstruction Red Hair Red State Blue State Red States Blue States Refugee Crisis Regional Differences Regional Populations Regression To The Mean Religion Religion Religion And Philosophy Rena Wing Renewable Energy Rentier Reprint Reproductive Strategy Republican Jesus Republican Party Responsibility Reuel Gerecht Reverend Moon Revolution Of 1905 Revolutions Rex Tillerson Richard Dawkins Richard Dyer Richard Lewontin Richard Lynn Richard Nixon Richard Pryor Richard Pryor Live On The Sunset Strip Richard Russell Rick Perry Rickets Rikishi Robert Ford Robert Kraft Robert Lindsay Robert McNamara Robert Mueller Robert Mugabe Robert Plomin Robert Putnam Robert Reich Robert Spencer Robocop Robots Roe Vs. Wade Roger Ailes Rohingya Roman Empire Rome Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Rooshv Rosemary Hopcroft Ross Douthat Ross Perot Rotherham Roy Moore RT International Rupert Murdoch Rural Liberals Rushton Russell Kirk Russia-Georgia War Russiagate Russian Elections 2018 Russian Hack Russian History Russian Military Russian Orthodox Church Ruth Benedict Saakashvili Sam Harris Same Sex Attraction Same-sex Marriage Same-sex Parents Samoans Samuel George Morton San Bernadino Massacre Sandra Beleza Sandusky Sandy Hook Sarah Palin Sarin Gas Satoshi Kanazawa saudi Saudi Arabia Saying What You Have To Say Scandinavia Scandinavians Scarborough Shoal Schizophrenia Science: It Works Bitches Scientism Scotch-irish Scotland Scots Irish Scott Ritter Scrabble Secession Seduced By Food Semai Senate Separating The Truth From The Nonsense Serbia Serenity Sergei Magnitsky Sergei Skripal Sex Sex Ratio Sex Ratio At Birth Sex Recognition Sex Tape Sex Work Sexism Sexual Antagonistic Selection Sexual Dimorphism Sexual Division Of Labor Sexual Fluidity Sexual Identity Sexual Maturation Sexual Orientation Sexual Selection Sexually Transmitted Diseases Seymour Hersh Shai Masot Shame Culture Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Shanghai Stock Exchange Shared Environment Shekhovstov Sheldon Adelson Shias And Sunnis Shimon Arad Shimon Peres Shinzo Abe Shmuley Boteach Shorts And Funnies Shoshana Bryen Shurat HaDin Shyness Siamak Namazi Sibel Edmonds Siberia Silicon Valley Simon Baron Cohen Singapore Single Men Single Motherhood Single Mothers Single Women Sisyphean Six Day War SJWs Skin Bleaching Skin Color Skin Tone Slate Slave Trade Slavery Slavoj Zizek Slavs SLC24A5 Sleep Slobodan Milosevic Smart Fraction Smell Smoking Snow Snyderman Social Constructs Social Justice Warriors Socialism Sociopathy Sociosexuality Solar Energy Solutions Somalia Sometimes You Don't Like The Answer South Africa South Asia South China Sea South Korea South Sudan Southern Italians Southern Poverty Law Center Soviet Union Space Space Space Program Space Race Spain Spanish Paradox Speech SPLC Sports Sputnik News Squid Ink Srebrenica Stabby Somali Staffan Stalinism Stanislas Dehaene Star Trek State Department State Formation States Rights Statins Steny Hoyer Stephan Guyenet Stephen Cohen Stephen Colbert Stephen Hadley Stephen Jay Gould Sterling Seagrave Steve Bannon Steve Sailer Steven Mnuchin Steven Pinker Still Not Free Buddy Stolen Generations Strategic Affairs Ministry Stroke Belt Student Loans Stuxnet SU-57 Sub-replacement Fertility Sub-Saharan Africa Sub-Saharan Africans Subprime Mortgage Crisis Subsistence Living Suffrage Sugar Suicide Summing It All Up Supernatural Support Me Support The Jayman Supreme Court Supression Surveillance Susan Glasser Susan Rice Sweden Swiss Switzerland Syed Farook Syrian Refugees Syriza Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Tale Of Two Maps Taliban Tamerlan Tsarnaev TAS2R16 Tashfeen Malik Taste Tastiness Tatars Tatu Vanhanen Tawang Tax Cuts Tax Evasion Taxes Tea Party Team Performance Technology Ted Cruz Tell Me About You Tell The Truth Terman Terman's Termites Terroris Terrorists Tesla Testosterone Thailand The 10000 Year Explosion The Bible The Breeder's Equation The Confederacy The Dark Knight The Dark Triad The Death Penalty The Deep South The Devil Is In The Details The Dustbowl The Economist The Far West The Future The Great Plains The Great Wall The Left The Left Coast The New York Times The Pursuit Of Happyness The Rock The Saker The Son Also Rises The South The Walking Dead The Washington Post The Wide Environment The World Theodore Roosevelt Theresa May Things Going Sour Third World Thomas Aquinas Thomas Friedman Thomas Perez Thomas Sowell Thomas Talhelm Thorstein Veblen Thurgood Marshall Tibet Tidewater Tiger Mom Time Preference Timmons Title IX Tobin Tax Tom Cotton Tom Naughton Tone It Down Guys Seriously Tony Blair Torture Toxoplasma Gondii TPP Traffic Traffic Fatalities Tragedy Trans-Species Polymorphism Transgender Transgenderism Transsexuals Treasury Tropical Humans Trump Trust TTIP Tuition Tulsi Gabbard Turkheimer TWA 800 Twin Study Twins Twins Raised Apart Twintuition Twitter Two Party System UKIP Ukrainian Crisis UN Security Council Unemployment Unions United Kingdom United Nations United States Universalism University Admissions Upper Paleolithic Urban Riots Ursula Gauthier Uruguay US Blacks USS Liberty Utopian Uttar Pradesh UV Uyghurs Vaginal Yeast Valerie Plame Vassopressin Vdare Veep Venezuela Veterans Administration Victor Canfield Victor Davis Hanson Victoria Nuland Victorian England Victorianism Video Games Vietnam Vietnam War Vietnamese Vikings Violence Vioxx Virginia Visa Waivers Visual Word Form Area Vitamin D Voronezh Vote Fraud Vouchers Vwfa W.E.I.R.D. W.E.I.R.D.O. Wahhabis Wall Street Walter Bodmer Wang Jing War On Christmas War On Terror Washington Post WasPage Watergate Watsoning We Are What We Are We Don't Know All The Environmental Causes Weight Loss WEIRDO Welfare Western Europe Western European Marriage Pattern Western Media Western Religion Westerns What Can You Do What's The Cause Where They're At Where's The Fallout White America White Americans White Conservative Males White Death White Helmets White Nationalist Nuttiness White Nationalists White Privilege White Slavery White Supremacy White Wife Why We Believe Hbd Wikileaks Wild Life Wilhelm Furtwangler William Browder William Buckley William D. Hamilton William Graham Sumner William McGougall WINEP Winston Churchill Women In The Workplace Woodley Effect Woodrow Wilson WORDSUM Workers Working Class Working Memory World Values Survey World War I World War Z Writing WTO X Little Miss JayLady Xhosa Xi Jinping Xinjiang Yankeedom Yankees Yazidis Yemen Yes I Am A Brother Yes I Am Liberal - But That Kind Of Liberal Yochi Dreazen You Can't Handle The Truth You Don't Know Shit Youtube Ban Yugoslavia Zbigniew Brzezinski Zhang Yimou Zika Zika Virus Zimbabwe Zionism Zombies Zones Of Thought Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
Nothing found
All Commenters • My
Comments
• Followed
Commenters
All Comments / By Matthew Richer
 All Comments / By Matthew Richer
    “In every town large enough to have two traffic lights there is a bar at the back of which sits the local Donald Trump, nursing his fifth beer and innumerable delusions.” So wrote George Will in his attack on Donald Trump for having the temerity to threaten the legacy of William F. Buckley. [“Donald Trump...
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @War for Blair Mountain
    The larger issue is that the COLD WAR ANTI-COMMIE Crusade was a death sentence for the Historic Native Born White American Majority. First came the integration of the US Military....Afterwards, school busing, and the 1964 Civil Rights Act...all three social policies...are a direct consequence of The Cold War...We had to show that we were morally superior to the RUSSKIES.

    Of course, the passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act was a direct consequence of the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act for Blacks. If the 1965 Immigration Reform Act had not been passed, Barack Obama would not have had a snowballs chance in Hell of ever being elected POTUS in 2008 and 2012...And Native Born White Americans would still be a 90 percent racial majority in the US in 2016. In fact, if America had not gone into Cold War mode against Russia, Barack Obama's Kenyan father would never have been allowed into the US. Barack Obama's father was allowed into the US through a NATO foreign student program. This is also the reason why the Turks own all our gas stations in the US...They are the chain migration beneficiares through the Turkish science,math..engineering grad students who were allowed into US Universites in the 1970s through the same NATO Scholars Program.

    The Soviet Union-Russia was not an existential threat to millions of Native Born White Americans. JFK and the reprobate Kennedy Family was the number one existential threat to the continued existence of The Historic Native Born White American Majority.

    The passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act was Teddy's permanent monument of demographic annihilation of The Historic Native Born White American Majority to his War Criminal brother JFK.

    God Bless the late Russian Naval Commander Vitali Akhipov!!!..For he saved The Historic Native Born White American Majority from the Irish Catholic Monstrosity JFK.

    This is the proper context in which William F Buckley and the NR should be understood in terms of.

    Wow. Where to begin with this, Groovy Battle poster? Maybe a simple question- how does JFK not qualify for the seemingly sacrosanct “Historic Native Born White American Majority”? He seems to hit all necessary criteria, unless “Historic” is to be read as no familial immigration history. But, then, such a reading would be a pretty large disqualifier for most in that “Majority”, no? As for the article itself, this is a well written if confusing rant- who really cares whether or not George Will is qualified to speak about whether others are paying proper homage to the legacy of William F. Buckley? If the author wants to position Trump as the true heir to the immigration principles WFB once stood for, great. But I do not think Trump actually cares whether or not such a link can be made. The fact that he shares such close-mindedness with a now fading memory of an outspoken rabble rouser (intellectual or not) matters little in 2016. As abundantly clear within these comments, the issue is whether or not Trump’s rhetoric has found root in the dangerous categorizations such as the unwieldly and ultimately self-defeating “Historic Native Born White American Majority” tag spun above. To me, the rights recognized in the Constitution as to “all men” being created equal and having equal rights is paramount. Others (and I’m looking at you, Groovy Battle for Blair Moutain [sic])seem to think that it is more important to still decry the integration of the US armed forces. God help us.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Priss Factor
    Taboos maintain the walls of power and privilege. Trump weakens taboos, therefore threatens vested interests. He opens up the narrative and inspires others to say and do like him. Power is maintained not only by what is said but by fearsome rules of what cannot be said. After all, glastnost and the overton window/wall in the USSR undermined communism in the USSR of the 1980s.

    Trump isn't open borders on immigration but open borders on the narrative. His style and brashness are like 'barbarians at the gates' for the ruling Jewish elites. He is like the uppity Negro who finally looks in the eyes of his massuh and says NO. Jewish massuhs cannot tolerate the white man looking directly in the eye and saying NO to them. Jews cannot stand uppity whites. Chutzpah is reserved for them only. Ironically, Trump is like Jack Johnson, and he keeps knocking out all these 'great goy hopes' put forth by Jews. Romney is the latest one of the 'hopes'.

    As for genteel respectable gentile conservatives, they lost all legitimacy since they lacked the balls to speak the truth about globalism and its threat to Americans. Just like German upper class sold their souls to Hitler to keep their status, gentile conservative elites sold their souls to Jewish globo tyrants to keep theirs. Respectability with integrity and courage is worthless. It is all look, no substance.

    Respectability is only as good as the real face it is masking. Conservative Establishment wears a respectable mask but lacks integrity and principles. It's all about lobbying for privilege for themselves without any regard for nation as a whole.

    Well as a response to all your obvious hatred of ‘the jews’ – you do realize/know that many, many Europeans are actually of Jewish origin, because the Jewish peoples of hundreds of years ago shelved their Jewish identity and absorbed themselves into the host community – ‘disappeared’ themselves for survival, even went as far as Scotland to escape persecution, so many of us actually have strong jewish roots – my own family via 2 grandparents were jews, which I had no idea about until 5 years ago – many, many Europeans have the exact same history – hah – that is so amusing – so maybe you will relax a little and realize you are just another human with a motley background and MAY discover to your total discomfort that you also have the ‘dreaded genes’ – a very comical story surfaced recently of a leader of an anti-semite mid-western kkk group was discovered to be half-jewish and the group threw him out – I fell over laughing !!!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • BTW, I liked National review in the 1980′s and 1990s but WFB’s column’s in the back were usually the dullest part of the magazine.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • NR’s smear of Buchanan as an “antisemite” in 1992 was the first step in the collapse of the magazine.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Adam Minsky
    I appreciate the criticisms med of Buckley in this article. Yet, there is a little troll in my head, that keeps arguing that conservatism today needs another WFB. For years Buckley hosted "Firing Line", an in depth hour long exploration of a particular issue. To compare "Firing Line" to what is currently offered on Fox News is to compare Chesterton to Joel Osteen.
    There may have been a certain ugliness to the way in which certain figures were read out of the conservative movement at WFB's initiative. But the question remains: Could an influential movement include the likes of Welch, Rand, or Murray Rothbard.? Conservatism attracts its share of kooks and cranks, a certain level of self-policing is necessary.
    At the end of the day, Buckley was articulate, erudite, and kind (for evidence on the last pioint read the column Joe Sobran wrote immediately after Buckley's death). It is a shame that this generation of conservatives doesn't seem capable of producing a comparable personality.

    ” Conservatism attracts its share of kooks and cranks, a certain level of self-policing is necessary.”

    I appreciate your defense of Bill Buckley, and I agree with many of your observations, but I must take exception to the line above. You seem to equate politics with religion, which is exactly what the neoconservatives did to the Republican Party, those formerly very liberal, even Trotskyite “conservatives” who held no principles even remotely close to traditional conservative positions dictating to a people that had no relationship to what constituted a “true conservative.” Really ludicrous when you stop and think about it. It would be like me assuming the right to dictate to the Catholic Church what a “true Catholic” should be, when my only connection to the R.C. Church was that my ex-wife was a Catholic (and not an especially good one in my wholly secular opinion fwiw).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Unapologetic White Man
    The demise of NR is well deserved, and a long time coming.

    I don't know who owns it, but I'm sure they must have taken a pretty good hit in subscription cancellations over the past month. And yes, their comments sections are blood-stained.

    I hope Trump become POTUS, and I hope Rich Lowry is lucky to get a gig at a community newspaper after NR becomes a historical footnote, if that. The man is no conservative, and he has real gaul posing as one.

    As for Goldberg, Donaldson, and Ponnoru, they are all self-important dickheads, and not half as smart as they imagine.

    Well, I must say, William Buckley did remain loyal to traditional conservative principles when he appointed Rich Lowry as his successor at NR. Supposedly, he is reputed to have said that appointing David Brooks to that position was out of the question in light of the fact that he was Jewish. Upon hearing that report, Brooks is supposed to have been upset. I imagine he must have regretted abandoning his deep felt socialist principles back in his 20′s and only getting a free ride on Buckley’s expensive yacht in exchange. (According to an obituary in Slate: “Christian piety and anti-communism were Buckley’s twin pillars, the former to such an extent that Buckley ruled out David Brooks, his onetime protégé, as a possible editor of National Review on the grounds that Brooks was Jewish. Buckley wasn’t willing to sacrifice National Review’s identity as a publication whose mission was at least partly theological.” http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/obit/2008/02/william_f_buckley_rip.html)
    I find it highly ironic that his treasured icon, “The National Review,” was taken over by a Jewish sect, neoconservatism, after he relinquished the reins.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • this generation doesnt have any conservatives. just neos for war and greed and cruelty.
    earlier conservatives were christian. today’s crop of neos are the opposite. they are every sin and proud of it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I appreciate the criticisms med of Buckley in this article. Yet, there is a little troll in my head, that keeps arguing that conservatism today needs another WFB. For years Buckley hosted “Firing Line”, an in depth hour long exploration of a particular issue. To compare “Firing Line” to what is currently offered on Fox News is to compare Chesterton to Joel Osteen.
    There may have been a certain ugliness to the way in which certain figures were read out of the conservative movement at WFB’s initiative. But the question remains: Could an influential movement include the likes of Welch, Rand, or Murray Rothbard.? Conservatism attracts its share of kooks and cranks, a certain level of self-policing is necessary.
    At the end of the day, Buckley was articulate, erudite, and kind (for evidence on the last pioint read the column Joe Sobran wrote immediately after Buckley’s death). It is a shame that this generation of conservatives doesn’t seem capable of producing a comparable personality.

    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    " Conservatism attracts its share of kooks and cranks, a certain level of self-policing is necessary."

    I appreciate your defense of Bill Buckley, and I agree with many of your observations, but I must take exception to the line above. You seem to equate politics with religion, which is exactly what the neoconservatives did to the Republican Party, those formerly very liberal, even Trotskyite "conservatives" who held no principles even remotely close to traditional conservative positions dictating to a people that had no relationship to what constituted a "true conservative." Really ludicrous when you stop and think about it. It would be like me assuming the right to dictate to the Catholic Church what a "true Catholic" should be, when my only connection to the R.C. Church was that my ex-wife was a Catholic (and not an especially good one in my wholly secular opinion fwiw).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Ace
    Iffen, my services as a Jewish apologist do not come cheap. If you must know, I demanded -- and got -- a nickel a word and four new snow tires.

    Good. Nice to know that you set a good price and didn’t let them Presbyterian you down.

    Absolutely an excellent comment, Unz should put it as the #1 comment in every section for a while.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @iffen
    Will you tell us exactly how much the Jews paid you to write this piece of propaganda?

    Iffen, my services as a Jewish apologist do not come cheap. If you must know, I demanded — and got — a nickel a word and four new snow tires.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Good. Nice to know that you set a good price and didn't let them Presbyterian you down.

    Absolutely an excellent comment, Unz should put it as the #1 comment in every section for a while.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cagey Beast
    Two quick points:

    1) That's all fine as long as the Americans really do know better than the rest of us how to run our own countries.

    2) Whatever purpose these Cold War, postwar arrangements served in the past, they're now being used by one political faction to nail their rivals, even back in America:


    From Trump to Merkel: how the world is divided between fear and openness
    The Republican candidate and German chancellor are polar opposites in the key struggle of our age

    Two major concepts define the political struggle in the west today. One can be termed “globalism”, which is currently most prominently represented by the German chancellor, Angela Merkel. The other is “territorialism”, a view that the very likely Republican candidate for the US elections in November, Donald Trump, represents.
     

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/06/donald-trump-angela-merkel-territorial-global-ulrich-speck

    Notice the author of the piece is a German think-tanker of the Carnegie, Euro-Atlantic, "senior guest fellow chair" sort. The term "blowback" has been overused but it may fit here. Perhaps it fits but I don't think that's the best way to understand this. I think instead we're now being presented with this clear distinction between globalists and patriots that has existed for at least the last century. I also think Bill Buckley and his National Review had as a core function the job of throwing smoke on this distinction. I think he was doing this on behalf of the globalist faction and at the expense of American patriots. By the way, by "globalists" I do not mean "Jews". If I meant that I'd say it.

    I didn’t mean to imply that Americans know better than the rest of us how to run anyone’s country.

    In fact, when in Vietnam I thought it strange that I was an “adviser” to my Vietnamese counterparts when I really knew very little about how my own country was run. Of course, adviser mean military adviser though issues of local politics got mixed in with military matters. Regardless of that experience, I just cannot understand any American official now purporting to instruct foreigners on how to live. To be honest, I do have many thoughts about what would make the Muslim world a better place but have zero interest in trying to persuade any Muslim on how to live. I just want them out of MY country where they presume to tell ME how to live. If they bristle at American sanctimony where THEY live I understand completely. Folks are going to do what they’re going to do regardless, as 14 years after 2001 and billions of seemingly fruitless warnings about Islam and immigration attest.

    I agree completely with your point about Cold War, postwar arrangements. The realities of all Western nations have been starkly revealed after we could all step away from the Cold War. It was a worthy endeavor but some seriously diseased thinking took root over the course of the entire century. Exactly what are the realities of the West today occupies the attention of a great many smart people. Suffice it to say that attempting to come to grips with, at a minimum, the deliberate, conscious betrayal of Germany and Europe by Merkel necessarily involves an examination of her behavior with insights from the study of paranoia, schizophrenia, and megalomania.

    Diana West’s book, American Betrayal, is a noble effort to pull back our blinders on the extent of communist penetration of the U.S. government, which is ongoing. (Her criticism of our COIN strategy in Afghanistan is also dead on, which is relevant to my points above about our instructing the world.)

    The Guardian article makes me bristle as “openness” and “interconnectedness” are terms that are indicative of egregious intellectual dishonesty. Neither of these was absent from modern Western history and nationalists do not reject these out of hand. That said, “globalism” is a useful shorthand for “non nationalist” and hence indicates lunacy. It is not self evident that sacrificing sovereignty is ipso facto a great good. The opposite of the term, “nationalism,” points to the true intent of the globalists– destruction of nations and their peoples in favor of “pure wind” to borrow a phrase from Orwell. Globalism is “not nationalism,” it is an empty and dishonest term, and it is intended to destroy centuries and centuries of laws and customs painstakingly built up/

    Buckley’s actions may have facilitated the globalists but I think the idea that Buckley craved being a social somebody makes the most sense. His excommunication of Sobran was premised on the latter’s supposed anti-Semitism. Buckley’s rambling, vague essay on the subject was just odd and suggests he was alarmed by having NR associated with Sobran’s supposed anti-Semitism. To what extent Buckley reacted as he did as a preemptive matter or because of Jewish pressure of some I do not know and cannot say. He was undeniably running scared on that issue. How this might have improved his social standing isn’t clear to me. Not my issue.

    Agreed that “globalism” is not a Jewish phenomenon. A great many people have been cheerleaders for surrender of sovereignty, debasement of citizenship, multiculturalism, diversity, mass immigration, a borderless world, and cheap wages for foreigners who are, supposedly, to save our Western retirement systems from imploding and causing us a spot of bother.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • It was learning that back in the 60s WFB was palling around with Norman Mailer, as vile a cretin as ever oozed into American public life, that ended my respect for him. That and the appointment of Richard Lowry as editor. It was not just that it was a betrayal of the cause of the historic American nation, but that the magazine became palpably more boring, predictable, typical.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I was never a fan of Buckley — the needlessly pompous language (“incorporealization not being a human characteristic ….” Was one I remember) and the need o be considered among the cultural elite of the NYC crowd seemed more important to him than any principals he may have had. I recall a 1970 playboy interviewing which Buckley said being one of Nixon’s confidants was “a sensual experience Playboy readers should know about.”
    It seemed to me that WFB and others — like his brother in law Brent Bozell –tried to promote the R. Catholic Church as the official religion of the conservative movement.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Matthew Kelly
    Excellent essay. One note, per your comment:

    ...the scathing dissents regularly left in the comments section of National ReviewOnline are any indication.
     
    Any more, NRO ferociously censors their commentary, as bad as--if not worse than--say, HuffPo or NYT. I.e., if anyone goes snooping around NRO to find this "scathing dissent", they will come up lacking. All of my polite dissents have been scrubbed from NRO memory (though not from my Disqus account). Just like with any other left-wing publication, the naif who wanders over there will believe everyone agrees with their POV.

    You’re exactly right. I am automatically scrubbed from any Disqus posts on NRO, i.e., no dissents allowed at all. I now refuse to even read it. During the mid 1980s I had a paper subscription to NR.
    That was then. This is now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Ace
    Covert CIA funding is always assumed to "taint" the recipient but there it is not certain that funds are only paid to writers on condition that they contort their opinions. In Aaron's case his writings seemed excellent on their face and if CIA funds were allegedly paid to him and he thereby became more independent that was a good thing.

    Covert funding is always subject to being revealed and when it is the recipient will always be behind the power curve in trying to argue that his opinions were not dictated by the (per se nefarious, infamous, execrable, demonic) CIA, say. The fact of covert funding becomes the "taint" even though there is not necessarily an actual purchase of a change of opinion.

    That disposes, I believe, of the earlier problem of CIA funding of propaganda. Whether there is an ongoing propaganda war financed by the Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie foundations is an interesting area for exploration. Similarly, we have the problem of extraordinary media concentration in six giant entities. The supposed distortions of the CIA pale in significance compared to what is being sluiced into the public mind through these six sewers.

    In the wake of the uproar instigated by Sen. Church, I believe the CIA decided no longer to support journalists. That was a healthy reform though bear in mind that whatever had gone on before should be seen in the context of massive Soviet efforts to have its propaganda planted around the world by willing journalists. Personally, I'm not inclined to reach for my smelling salts at the discovery that the CIA fought fire with fire. Would that the American government today showed some willingness to combat communism and socialism. Those were different times and the danger posed by the Soviets was not something that could be ignored.

    If the topic of subornation of opinion and politics is on the table, and it should always be, it would be interesting to ask:

    1. Hillary what in particular in each of her recent speeches could be worth a quarter of a million a pop,

    2. the Democrat Party what it promised in return for the 1996 contribution by James Riady of Djakarta,

    3. Newt Gingrich what he promised in return for Sheldon Adelson's support in 2014,

    4. Marco Rubio what, if anything, he has received from Sheldon Adelson and, if something, what he promised in return for Adelson's support, and

    5. the LDP of Japan why it supported Craig Spence who was discovered to be running a "call boy" ring patronized by civilian and military officials in Washington in the 1980s.

    Even though the transfers of money were,are, or will presumably matters of public record (with the exception of no. 5 perhaps) the fact of transparency does not dispose of the problem of subornation. And nos. 1 and 3 are as fresh as the morning dew.

    Finally, there is sometimes an assumption that readers of opinion that are disadvantaged by not knowing the existence or extent of support that a writer enjoys. That may be true if one reads a few sources not knowing about funding that has distorted the opinion of the author. But no serious student of a certain topic can reasonably base his or her opinion on a limited number of sources. On crucial points, even questionable works have to cite evidence for what the author argues and competing views can be, and will have to be, considered for the reader to form his or her own opinion.

    The problem with our media today is that they are so uniform in their opinions and the volume of questionable opinion is so great that superior ideas are just overwhelmed by the tidal wave of propaganda. From the western German border all the way to San Diego there is a remarkable unanimity of opinion on the wonderfulness of immigration and the inevitability of foreigners assimilating into any and all Western countries.

    Two quick points:

    1) That’s all fine as long as the Americans really do know better than the rest of us how to run our own countries.

    2) Whatever purpose these Cold War, postwar arrangements served in the past, they’re now being used by one political faction to nail their rivals, even back in America:

    From Trump to Merkel: how the world is divided between fear and openness
    The Republican candidate and German chancellor are polar opposites in the key struggle of our age

    Two major concepts define the political struggle in the west today. One can be termed “globalism”, which is currently most prominently represented by the German chancellor, Angela Merkel. The other is “territorialism”, a view that the very likely Republican candidate for the US elections in November, Donald Trump, represents.

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/06/donald-trump-angela-merkel-territorial-global-ulrich-speck

    Notice the author of the piece is a German think-tanker of the Carnegie, Euro-Atlantic, “senior guest fellow chair” sort. The term “blowback” has been overused but it may fit here. Perhaps it fits but I don’t think that’s the best way to understand this. I think instead we’re now being presented with this clear distinction between globalists and patriots that has existed for at least the last century. I also think Bill Buckley and his National Review had as a core function the job of throwing smoke on this distinction. I think he was doing this on behalf of the globalist faction and at the expense of American patriots. By the way, by “globalists” I do not mean “Jews”. If I meant that I’d say it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ace
    I didn't mean to imply that Americans know better than the rest of us how to run anyone's country.

    In fact, when in Vietnam I thought it strange that I was an "adviser" to my Vietnamese counterparts when I really knew very little about how my own country was run. Of course, adviser mean military adviser though issues of local politics got mixed in with military matters. Regardless of that experience, I just cannot understand any American official now purporting to instruct foreigners on how to live. To be honest, I do have many thoughts about what would make the Muslim world a better place but have zero interest in trying to persuade any Muslim on how to live. I just want them out of MY country where they presume to tell ME how to live. If they bristle at American sanctimony where THEY live I understand completely. Folks are going to do what they're going to do regardless, as 14 years after 2001 and billions of seemingly fruitless warnings about Islam and immigration attest.

    I agree completely with your point about Cold War, postwar arrangements. The realities of all Western nations have been starkly revealed after we could all step away from the Cold War. It was a worthy endeavor but some seriously diseased thinking took root over the course of the entire century. Exactly what are the realities of the West today occupies the attention of a great many smart people. Suffice it to say that attempting to come to grips with, at a minimum, the deliberate, conscious betrayal of Germany and Europe by Merkel necessarily involves an examination of her behavior with insights from the study of paranoia, schizophrenia, and megalomania.

    Diana West's book, American Betrayal, is a noble effort to pull back our blinders on the extent of communist penetration of the U.S. government, which is ongoing. (Her criticism of our COIN strategy in Afghanistan is also dead on, which is relevant to my points above about our instructing the world.)

    The Guardian article makes me bristle as "openness" and "interconnectedness" are terms that are indicative of egregious intellectual dishonesty. Neither of these was absent from modern Western history and nationalists do not reject these out of hand. That said, "globalism" is a useful shorthand for "non nationalist" and hence indicates lunacy. It is not self evident that sacrificing sovereignty is ipso facto a great good. The opposite of the term, "nationalism," points to the true intent of the globalists-- destruction of nations and their peoples in favor of "pure wind" to borrow a phrase from Orwell. Globalism is "not nationalism," it is an empty and dishonest term, and it is intended to destroy centuries and centuries of laws and customs painstakingly built up/

    Buckley's actions may have facilitated the globalists but I think the idea that Buckley craved being a social somebody makes the most sense. His excommunication of Sobran was premised on the latter's supposed anti-Semitism. Buckley's rambling, vague essay on the subject was just odd and suggests he was alarmed by having NR associated with Sobran's supposed anti-Semitism. To what extent Buckley reacted as he did as a preemptive matter or because of Jewish pressure of some I do not know and cannot say. He was undeniably running scared on that issue. How this might have improved his social standing isn't clear to me. Not my issue.

    Agreed that "globalism" is not a Jewish phenomenon. A great many people have been cheerleaders for surrender of sovereignty, debasement of citizenship, multiculturalism, diversity, mass immigration, a borderless world, and cheap wages for foreigners who are, supposedly, to save our Western retirement systems from imploding and causing us a spot of bother.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Many people have complimented me on correctly predicting last April that Donald Trump would run for President—and run on patriotic immigration reform. So let me make another prediction: If Donald Trump is elected President in 2016 it will mark the permanent end of National Review’s influence over the conservative movement in America.

    I submit even if Trump doesn’t become President NR, under Lowry’s leadership, will become irrelevant to the Conservative movement. It has already happened.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Ace
    Covert CIA funding is always assumed to "taint" the recipient but there it is not certain that funds are only paid to writers on condition that they contort their opinions. In Aaron's case his writings seemed excellent on their face and if CIA funds were allegedly paid to him and he thereby became more independent that was a good thing.

    Covert funding is always subject to being revealed and when it is the recipient will always be behind the power curve in trying to argue that his opinions were not dictated by the (per se nefarious, infamous, execrable, demonic) CIA, say. The fact of covert funding becomes the "taint" even though there is not necessarily an actual purchase of a change of opinion.

    That disposes, I believe, of the earlier problem of CIA funding of propaganda. Whether there is an ongoing propaganda war financed by the Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie foundations is an interesting area for exploration. Similarly, we have the problem of extraordinary media concentration in six giant entities. The supposed distortions of the CIA pale in significance compared to what is being sluiced into the public mind through these six sewers.

    In the wake of the uproar instigated by Sen. Church, I believe the CIA decided no longer to support journalists. That was a healthy reform though bear in mind that whatever had gone on before should be seen in the context of massive Soviet efforts to have its propaganda planted around the world by willing journalists. Personally, I'm not inclined to reach for my smelling salts at the discovery that the CIA fought fire with fire. Would that the American government today showed some willingness to combat communism and socialism. Those were different times and the danger posed by the Soviets was not something that could be ignored.

    If the topic of subornation of opinion and politics is on the table, and it should always be, it would be interesting to ask:

    1. Hillary what in particular in each of her recent speeches could be worth a quarter of a million a pop,

    2. the Democrat Party what it promised in return for the 1996 contribution by James Riady of Djakarta,

    3. Newt Gingrich what he promised in return for Sheldon Adelson's support in 2014,

    4. Marco Rubio what, if anything, he has received from Sheldon Adelson and, if something, what he promised in return for Adelson's support, and

    5. the LDP of Japan why it supported Craig Spence who was discovered to be running a "call boy" ring patronized by civilian and military officials in Washington in the 1980s.

    Even though the transfers of money were,are, or will presumably matters of public record (with the exception of no. 5 perhaps) the fact of transparency does not dispose of the problem of subornation. And nos. 1 and 3 are as fresh as the morning dew.

    Finally, there is sometimes an assumption that readers of opinion that are disadvantaged by not knowing the existence or extent of support that a writer enjoys. That may be true if one reads a few sources not knowing about funding that has distorted the opinion of the author. But no serious student of a certain topic can reasonably base his or her opinion on a limited number of sources. On crucial points, even questionable works have to cite evidence for what the author argues and competing views can be, and will have to be, considered for the reader to form his or her own opinion.

    The problem with our media today is that they are so uniform in their opinions and the volume of questionable opinion is so great that superior ideas are just overwhelmed by the tidal wave of propaganda. From the western German border all the way to San Diego there is a remarkable unanimity of opinion on the wonderfulness of immigration and the inevitability of foreigners assimilating into any and all Western countries.

    Will you tell us exactly how much the Jews paid you to write this piece of propaganda?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ace
    Iffen, my services as a Jewish apologist do not come cheap. If you must know, I demanded -- and got -- a nickel a word and four new snow tires.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • […] I want to draw attention to Matthew Richer‘s post on The Unz Review: Up from Buckleyism| Will Trump’s Victory Spell National Review’s Demise? (March 3, 2016, Comments accepted). He […]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • […] I want to draw attention to Matthew Richer‘s post on The Unz Review: Up from Buckleyism| Will Trump’s Victory Spell National Review’s Demise? (March 3, 2016, Comments accepted). He […]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • “Denigrating your opponents—rather than simply challenging their arguments—is a standard tactic of the Left. Conservatives—that is, real conservatives—are supposed to be above that.”

    Lol, left, right, centrist, doesn’t matter; nobody practices this ideal anymore.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cagey Beast
    Raymond Aaron was another European public intellectual tainted by this CIA covert funding campaign. I'm sure there are others all over Europe, Latin America and everywhere else.

    When one thinks about it, wouldn't it be odd for the CIA and the people employed by the various foundations (Ford, Rockefeller, Carnegie) to develop a whole tool-kit of political manipulation techniques for foreign countries and not apply them back at home in the USA? That really is expecting a superhuman level of good sportsmanship. You're right to bring this up when we're discussing just what exactly Buckley's legacy really is.

    Covert CIA funding is always assumed to “taint” the recipient but there it is not certain that funds are only paid to writers on condition that they contort their opinions. In Aaron’s case his writings seemed excellent on their face and if CIA funds were allegedly paid to him and he thereby became more independent that was a good thing.

    Covert funding is always subject to being revealed and when it is the recipient will always be behind the power curve in trying to argue that his opinions were not dictated by the (per se nefarious, infamous, execrable, demonic) CIA, say. The fact of covert funding becomes the “taint” even though there is not necessarily an actual purchase of a change of opinion.

    That disposes, I believe, of the earlier problem of CIA funding of propaganda. Whether there is an ongoing propaganda war financed by the Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie foundations is an interesting area for exploration. Similarly, we have the problem of extraordinary media concentration in six giant entities. The supposed distortions of the CIA pale in significance compared to what is being sluiced into the public mind through these six sewers.

    In the wake of the uproar instigated by Sen. Church, I believe the CIA decided no longer to support journalists. That was a healthy reform though bear in mind that whatever had gone on before should be seen in the context of massive Soviet efforts to have its propaganda planted around the world by willing journalists. Personally, I’m not inclined to reach for my smelling salts at the discovery that the CIA fought fire with fire. Would that the American government today showed some willingness to combat communism and socialism. Those were different times and the danger posed by the Soviets was not something that could be ignored.

    If the topic of subornation of opinion and politics is on the table, and it should always be, it would be interesting to ask:

    1. Hillary what in particular in each of her recent speeches could be worth a quarter of a million a pop,

    2. the Democrat Party what it promised in return for the 1996 contribution by James Riady of Djakarta,

    3. Newt Gingrich what he promised in return for Sheldon Adelson’s support in 2014,

    4. Marco Rubio what, if anything, he has received from Sheldon Adelson and, if something, what he promised in return for Adelson’s support, and

    5. the LDP of Japan why it supported Craig Spence who was discovered to be running a “call boy” ring patronized by civilian and military officials in Washington in the 1980s.

    Even though the transfers of money were,are, or will presumably matters of public record (with the exception of no. 5 perhaps) the fact of transparency does not dispose of the problem of subornation. And nos. 1 and 3 are as fresh as the morning dew.

    Finally, there is sometimes an assumption that readers of opinion that are disadvantaged by not knowing the existence or extent of support that a writer enjoys. That may be true if one reads a few sources not knowing about funding that has distorted the opinion of the author. But no serious student of a certain topic can reasonably base his or her opinion on a limited number of sources. On crucial points, even questionable works have to cite evidence for what the author argues and competing views can be, and will have to be, considered for the reader to form his or her own opinion.

    The problem with our media today is that they are so uniform in their opinions and the volume of questionable opinion is so great that superior ideas are just overwhelmed by the tidal wave of propaganda. From the western German border all the way to San Diego there is a remarkable unanimity of opinion on the wonderfulness of immigration and the inevitability of foreigners assimilating into any and all Western countries.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    Will you tell us exactly how much the Jews paid you to write this piece of propaganda?
    , @Cagey Beast
    Two quick points:

    1) That's all fine as long as the Americans really do know better than the rest of us how to run our own countries.

    2) Whatever purpose these Cold War, postwar arrangements served in the past, they're now being used by one political faction to nail their rivals, even back in America:


    From Trump to Merkel: how the world is divided between fear and openness
    The Republican candidate and German chancellor are polar opposites in the key struggle of our age

    Two major concepts define the political struggle in the west today. One can be termed “globalism”, which is currently most prominently represented by the German chancellor, Angela Merkel. The other is “territorialism”, a view that the very likely Republican candidate for the US elections in November, Donald Trump, represents.
     

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/06/donald-trump-angela-merkel-territorial-global-ulrich-speck

    Notice the author of the piece is a German think-tanker of the Carnegie, Euro-Atlantic, "senior guest fellow chair" sort. The term "blowback" has been overused but it may fit here. Perhaps it fits but I don't think that's the best way to understand this. I think instead we're now being presented with this clear distinction between globalists and patriots that has existed for at least the last century. I also think Bill Buckley and his National Review had as a core function the job of throwing smoke on this distinction. I think he was doing this on behalf of the globalist faction and at the expense of American patriots. By the way, by "globalists" I do not mean "Jews". If I meant that I'd say it.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Crawfurdmuir
    I agree with you about the clubs' relative lack of exclusivity today - but, up through perhaps the mid-1960s, they were more exclusive. I do not have a long enough run of Social Register volumes to see when Buckley joined the ones listed in the year before his death. I wonder if he joined the Bohemian Club as early as the 1950s - the waiting list was long, even then.

    It is interesting to compare Buckley's Social Register entry with that of his close contemporary as a socialite/celebrity/author, George Plimpton. Plimpton listed (in 2002): Racquet, Brook, Century Association, River, and Devon Yacht. Sarah (Dudley) Plimpton, his second wife, is a member of the Cosmopolitan Club and retains membership in the Devon Yacht Club.

    Of course, Plimpton was a real WASP. The Ameses (his mother's family) were a distinguished Massachusetts family (and Mayflower descendants). Their wealth and social prominence had been established generations before a Buckley set foot in the United States. George was also politically liberal.

    Actually, I think the Brook is still very exclusive, just no longer really WASPy.

    The Union is very exclusive, but in a sort of you’ve-made-it UES kind of way. They’ve long admitted Jews, for instance. The Union Club more than the others was always more about money than position. Several of the NYC clubs were founded by members pissed off that the Union was too loose with its membership rolls.

    The Union League is partisan/ideological: you have to be a Republican. In the main lounge, there are portraits of all the Republican presidents but not one Democrat. (Harvard and Yale have all their president-graduates, which is not a short list in either case.) I would be shocked if Buckley was refused by the ULC. More likely he just didn’t choose to join, for whatever reason. Maybe he didn’t like the location. Thought it was quite close to his office (150 East 35th, for about 30 years at least).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Catiline
    Craw,

    I was mainly thinking of Jr.'s political positions not his private life. (Stunningly beautiful Anglo wife by the way.) He was openly contemptuous of 'ethnics' at home and Continental Europe abroad. His politics lined up fairly closely to typical WASP concerns and interests.

    “His politics lined up fairly closely to typical WASP concerns and interests.”

    It seems to me there’s too much variation in those “concerns and interests” to characterize any of them in particular as typical. Sir Peregrine Worsthorne, in his book In Defence of Aristocracy, remarks that the American elite (which was certainly WASP up through at least the mid-’60s) has been politically divided since the 1930s.

    And in any event, as Brimelow makes clear, Buckley was an outsider to the WASP elite, both by religion and by ancestry. He craved entrée into that circle, and that explains much of his behavior. Whether he ever really achieved it is questionable. Money opens many doors, but not all of them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Crawfurdmuir
    Buckley's Catholicism was ancestral. How genuinely felt it may have been, only the man himself knew. One of the points made by Peter Brimelow in his Buckley obituary at Vdare (there's a link to it in the article above) is that Buckley was a social climber, who wished all his life for acceptance among the elite. He was born at a time when the WASP elite described by Digby Baltzell was still in the ascendancy, and Irish Catholics were still not completely welcome in the "best" circles.

    Buckley's entry in the Social Register provides a list of his associations. He was a member of the Bohemian Club of San Francisco, the New York Yacht Club, the Century Association, and the Knights of Malta. His wife's university and class are not listed (suggesting that she did not attend a school among the group recognized in Social Register listings), although his status as an alumnus of Yale, class of 1950, is shown.

    This information tells us the extent to which Buckley was still excluded from the remaining institutions of the old WASP ascendancy, as recently as 2007. He did not belong to those dependent upon ancestry, such as the Society of the Cincinnati, Sons of the Revolution, Society of Colonial Wars, or Mayflower Descendants - he would not have qualified. Perhaps more tellingly, he was not a member of any of the great New York City clubs, such as the Knickerbocker, Metropolitan, Brook, Links, Racquet, Union League, or Union. Was the reason that he had no desire to join one (somewhat unlikely given his propensity for social climbing) - or that he couldn't pass the membership committees?

    Craw,

    I was mainly thinking of Jr.’s political positions not his private life. (Stunningly beautiful Anglo wife by the way.) He was openly contemptuous of ‘ethnics’ at home and Continental Europe abroad. His politics lined up fairly closely to typical WASP concerns and interests.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
    "His politics lined up fairly closely to typical WASP concerns and interests."

    It seems to me there's too much variation in those "concerns and interests" to characterize any of them in particular as typical. Sir Peregrine Worsthorne, in his book In Defence of Aristocracy, remarks that the American elite (which was certainly WASP up through at least the mid-'60s) has been politically divided since the 1930s.

    And in any event, as Brimelow makes clear, Buckley was an outsider to the WASP elite, both by religion and by ancestry. He craved entrée into that circle, and that explains much of his behavior. Whether he ever really achieved it is questionable. Money opens many doors, but not all of them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Crawfurdmuir
    I don't know that Buckley was "kept out" of those clubs. He was, however, not in them, for whatever reason. It is curious that a man of his wealth and pretensions, with offices in New York and a principal residence in nearby Connecticut, did not belong to any of them, even though he was a member of the Bohemian Club in San Francisco, all the way across the country.

    This discussion originated in a previous commenter's remark that Buckley was a WASP, which he was not. He was an Irish Catholic, the son of a self-made father, and according to Peter Brimelow, a lifelong social climber anxious for acceptance in what he thought was the best society. Brimelow suggests (persuasively, in my view) that his self-appointment as an arbiter of "respectable" conservatism was born of the desire to distance himself and his magazine from what he referred to as "those people" - in other words, elements of the American right with whom he was embarrassed to be associated by the cosmopolitan and sophisticated circles in which he craved acceptance.

    “This discussion originated in a previous commenter’s remark that Buckley was a WASP, which he was not. He was an Irish Catholic, the son of a self-made father, and according to Peter Brimelow, a lifelong social climber anxious for acceptance in what he thought was the best society. Brimelow suggests (persuasively, in my view) that his self-appointment as an arbiter of “respectable” conservatism was born of the desire to distance himself and his magazine from what he referred to as “those people” – in other words, elements of the American right with whom he was embarrassed to be associated by the cosmopolitan and sophisticated circles in which he craved acceptance.”

    Exactly.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I would wager that more than half of the NR staff will vote for Hillary this time..

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • sorry about the wasp-catholic distraction.
    was buckley one of the first republicans to bow to jewry aiding jewry’s toppling wasps and catholics?

    in addition to sobran, how many more of his betters did buckley backstab thus aiding jewry/neocons?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cagey Beast
    Surely keeping Bill Buckley out of WASP New York clubs back in the 1960s must rate as one of the hollowest victories imaginable, considering the state of WASPdom today?

    I don’t know that Buckley was “kept out” of those clubs. He was, however, not in them, for whatever reason. It is curious that a man of his wealth and pretensions, with offices in New York and a principal residence in nearby Connecticut, did not belong to any of them, even though he was a member of the Bohemian Club in San Francisco, all the way across the country.

    This discussion originated in a previous commenter’s remark that Buckley was a WASP, which he was not. He was an Irish Catholic, the son of a self-made father, and according to Peter Brimelow, a lifelong social climber anxious for acceptance in what he thought was the best society. Brimelow suggests (persuasively, in my view) that his self-appointment as an arbiter of “respectable” conservatism was born of the desire to distance himself and his magazine from what he referred to as “those people” – in other words, elements of the American right with whom he was embarrassed to be associated by the cosmopolitan and sophisticated circles in which he craved acceptance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Catiline
    "This discussion originated in a previous commenter’s remark that Buckley was a WASP, which he was not. He was an Irish Catholic, the son of a self-made father, and according to Peter Brimelow, a lifelong social climber anxious for acceptance in what he thought was the best society. Brimelow suggests (persuasively, in my view) that his self-appointment as an arbiter of “respectable” conservatism was born of the desire to distance himself and his magazine from what he referred to as “those people” – in other words, elements of the American right with whom he was embarrassed to be associated by the cosmopolitan and sophisticated circles in which he craved acceptance."

    Exactly.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @War for Blair Mountain
    The larger issue is that the COLD WAR ANTI-COMMIE Crusade was a death sentence for the Historic Native Born White American Majority. First came the integration of the US Military....Afterwards, school busing, and the 1964 Civil Rights Act...all three social policies...are a direct consequence of The Cold War...We had to show that we were morally superior to the RUSSKIES.

    Of course, the passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act was a direct consequence of the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act for Blacks. If the 1965 Immigration Reform Act had not been passed, Barack Obama would not have had a snowballs chance in Hell of ever being elected POTUS in 2008 and 2012...And Native Born White Americans would still be a 90 percent racial majority in the US in 2016. In fact, if America had not gone into Cold War mode against Russia, Barack Obama's Kenyan father would never have been allowed into the US. Barack Obama's father was allowed into the US through a NATO foreign student program. This is also the reason why the Turks own all our gas stations in the US...They are the chain migration beneficiares through the Turkish science,math..engineering grad students who were allowed into US Universites in the 1970s through the same NATO Scholars Program.

    The Soviet Union-Russia was not an existential threat to millions of Native Born White Americans. JFK and the reprobate Kennedy Family was the number one existential threat to the continued existence of The Historic Native Born White American Majority.

    The passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act was Teddy's permanent monument of demographic annihilation of The Historic Native Born White American Majority to his War Criminal brother JFK.

    God Bless the late Russian Naval Commander Vitali Akhipov!!!..For he saved The Historic Native Born White American Majority from the Irish Catholic Monstrosity JFK.

    This is the proper context in which William F Buckley and the NR should be understood in terms of.

    That is very insightful. I never thought of it that way. Western politicians almost to a man have not been able to muster the courage to say, “So what?” to anyone. Always the scramble was to placate the foreigner and his precious sensibilities.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Diversity Heretic
    I admit to a twinge of nostalgia, as I was introduced to modern conservatism in the 1970s by National Review and subscribed to it for a number of years. But it is now sadly clear that it has rendered itself irrelevant to the real needs of Americans, largely because it cannot get past the race shibboleths of the 1960s. It is now the epitomy of "cuckservative." For me the final straw was the removal of John Derbyshire from his position for writing the truth about blacks in another publication.

    I used to hang on its every word but I think after Buckley’s rambling essay on anti-Semitism (or was it carburetor maintenance?) I just lost interest.

    American Spectator the same. I’d wait for it at the mailbox during Whitewatergate but eventually let my subscription lapse. No real reason I can recall. I read somewhere that they’d become open border advocates and emailed them twice to inquire if that was accurate before re-subscribing. They never bothered to reply. Offhand, I still can’t say that they are but then it’s not hard to know where Vdare stands (he says with understatement). The fact that I can’t say about AS is probably the long and the short of it right there. I have a feeling that their gathering financial difficulties probably nixed a more aggressive position in favor of the national question but then not every potential financial contributor is a sellout, so there’s that.

    Chronicles has remained the bright jewel it’s always been.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Crawfurdmuir
    I agree with you about the clubs' relative lack of exclusivity today - but, up through perhaps the mid-1960s, they were more exclusive. I do not have a long enough run of Social Register volumes to see when Buckley joined the ones listed in the year before his death. I wonder if he joined the Bohemian Club as early as the 1950s - the waiting list was long, even then.

    It is interesting to compare Buckley's Social Register entry with that of his close contemporary as a socialite/celebrity/author, George Plimpton. Plimpton listed (in 2002): Racquet, Brook, Century Association, River, and Devon Yacht. Sarah (Dudley) Plimpton, his second wife, is a member of the Cosmopolitan Club and retains membership in the Devon Yacht Club.

    Of course, Plimpton was a real WASP. The Ameses (his mother's family) were a distinguished Massachusetts family (and Mayflower descendants). Their wealth and social prominence had been established generations before a Buckley set foot in the United States. George was also politically liberal.

    Surely keeping Bill Buckley out of WASP New York clubs back in the 1960s must rate as one of the hollowest victories imaginable, considering the state of WASPdom today?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
    I don't know that Buckley was "kept out" of those clubs. He was, however, not in them, for whatever reason. It is curious that a man of his wealth and pretensions, with offices in New York and a principal residence in nearby Connecticut, did not belong to any of them, even though he was a member of the Bohemian Club in San Francisco, all the way across the country.

    This discussion originated in a previous commenter's remark that Buckley was a WASP, which he was not. He was an Irish Catholic, the son of a self-made father, and according to Peter Brimelow, a lifelong social climber anxious for acceptance in what he thought was the best society. Brimelow suggests (persuasively, in my view) that his self-appointment as an arbiter of "respectable" conservatism was born of the desire to distance himself and his magazine from what he referred to as "those people" - in other words, elements of the American right with whom he was embarrassed to be associated by the cosmopolitan and sophisticated circles in which he craved acceptance.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @manton
    None of those clubs--with the possible exception of the Knick--are all that exclusive any more. I don't know about the 1950s--maybe Buckeley would not have been able to gain entry then. But certainly by the 80s, no problem.

    I agree with you about the clubs’ relative lack of exclusivity today – but, up through perhaps the mid-1960s, they were more exclusive. I do not have a long enough run of Social Register volumes to see when Buckley joined the ones listed in the year before his death. I wonder if he joined the Bohemian Club as early as the 1950s – the waiting list was long, even then.

    It is interesting to compare Buckley’s Social Register entry with that of his close contemporary as a socialite/celebrity/author, George Plimpton. Plimpton listed (in 2002): Racquet, Brook, Century Association, River, and Devon Yacht. Sarah (Dudley) Plimpton, his second wife, is a member of the Cosmopolitan Club and retains membership in the Devon Yacht Club.

    Of course, Plimpton was a real WASP. The Ameses (his mother’s family) were a distinguished Massachusetts family (and Mayflower descendants). Their wealth and social prominence had been established generations before a Buckley set foot in the United States. George was also politically liberal.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    Surely keeping Bill Buckley out of WASP New York clubs back in the 1960s must rate as one of the hollowest victories imaginable, considering the state of WASPdom today?
    , @manton
    Actually, I think the Brook is still very exclusive, just no longer really WASPy.

    The Union is very exclusive, but in a sort of you've-made-it UES kind of way. They've long admitted Jews, for instance. The Union Club more than the others was always more about money than position. Several of the NYC clubs were founded by members pissed off that the Union was too loose with its membership rolls.

    The Union League is partisan/ideological: you have to be a Republican. In the main lounge, there are portraits of all the Republican presidents but not one Democrat. (Harvard and Yale have all their president-graduates, which is not a short list in either case.) I would be shocked if Buckley was refused by the ULC. More likely he just didn't choose to join, for whatever reason. Maybe he didn't like the location. Thought it was quite close to his office (150 East 35th, for about 30 years at least).

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Crawfurdmuir
    Buckley's Catholicism was ancestral. How genuinely felt it may have been, only the man himself knew. One of the points made by Peter Brimelow in his Buckley obituary at Vdare (there's a link to it in the article above) is that Buckley was a social climber, who wished all his life for acceptance among the elite. He was born at a time when the WASP elite described by Digby Baltzell was still in the ascendancy, and Irish Catholics were still not completely welcome in the "best" circles.

    Buckley's entry in the Social Register provides a list of his associations. He was a member of the Bohemian Club of San Francisco, the New York Yacht Club, the Century Association, and the Knights of Malta. His wife's university and class are not listed (suggesting that she did not attend a school among the group recognized in Social Register listings), although his status as an alumnus of Yale, class of 1950, is shown.

    This information tells us the extent to which Buckley was still excluded from the remaining institutions of the old WASP ascendancy, as recently as 2007. He did not belong to those dependent upon ancestry, such as the Society of the Cincinnati, Sons of the Revolution, Society of Colonial Wars, or Mayflower Descendants - he would not have qualified. Perhaps more tellingly, he was not a member of any of the great New York City clubs, such as the Knickerbocker, Metropolitan, Brook, Links, Racquet, Union League, or Union. Was the reason that he had no desire to join one (somewhat unlikely given his propensity for social climbing) - or that he couldn't pass the membership committees?

    None of those clubs–with the possible exception of the Knick–are all that exclusive any more. I don’t know about the 1950s–maybe Buckeley would not have been able to gain entry then. But certainly by the 80s, no problem.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
    I agree with you about the clubs' relative lack of exclusivity today - but, up through perhaps the mid-1960s, they were more exclusive. I do not have a long enough run of Social Register volumes to see when Buckley joined the ones listed in the year before his death. I wonder if he joined the Bohemian Club as early as the 1950s - the waiting list was long, even then.

    It is interesting to compare Buckley's Social Register entry with that of his close contemporary as a socialite/celebrity/author, George Plimpton. Plimpton listed (in 2002): Racquet, Brook, Century Association, River, and Devon Yacht. Sarah (Dudley) Plimpton, his second wife, is a member of the Cosmopolitan Club and retains membership in the Devon Yacht Club.

    Of course, Plimpton was a real WASP. The Ameses (his mother's family) were a distinguished Massachusetts family (and Mayflower descendants). Their wealth and social prominence had been established generations before a Buckley set foot in the United States. George was also politically liberal.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • In short, policies and platforms make absolutely no difference when a “conservative” casts his ballot. All that matters is whether a candidate is committed to white nationalism.

    Of course, even if you buy into that idiotic and racist notion, does anyone believe Donald Trump means a word he says? You believe he’s pro-life now? That he’s not the same guy promising to confiscate your guns a few years back? That while he hammered Mitt Romney four years ago for being mean to the Mexicans, he’s now a tight borders guy himself?

    It’s contemptible that you hold the racist positions you do, but it’s pathetic you honestly believe Donald Trump shares your positions.

    Pat Buchanan loves Trump because he’s a peace loving candidate who’ll get us back to isolationism. Of course, most of Trump’s low info fans love him because he’s going to smash ISIS and because he wants to kill terrorists’ families. Get the feeling at least one of those propositions is wrong?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • NR is a pro israel neocon rag. Of course it’s leading the charge against Trump because he opposes more middle east wars for israel’s benefit. Wait until Trump brands Hillary as the warmonger that she is. Having voted for the disaster in Iraq she led the charge against Libya and wanted to do the same in Syria.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Catiline
    Not quite. Jr. was an Anglo-maniac and his Catholicism was only nominal and largely a facade. A poor facade I might add.

    Buckley’s Catholicism was ancestral. How genuinely felt it may have been, only the man himself knew. One of the points made by Peter Brimelow in his Buckley obituary at Vdare (there’s a link to it in the article above) is that Buckley was a social climber, who wished all his life for acceptance among the elite. He was born at a time when the WASP elite described by Digby Baltzell was still in the ascendancy, and Irish Catholics were still not completely welcome in the “best” circles.

    Buckley’s entry in the Social Register provides a list of his associations. He was a member of the Bohemian Club of San Francisco, the New York Yacht Club, the Century Association, and the Knights of Malta. His wife’s university and class are not listed (suggesting that she did not attend a school among the group recognized in Social Register listings), although his status as an alumnus of Yale, class of 1950, is shown.

    This information tells us the extent to which Buckley was still excluded from the remaining institutions of the old WASP ascendancy, as recently as 2007. He did not belong to those dependent upon ancestry, such as the Society of the Cincinnati, Sons of the Revolution, Society of Colonial Wars, or Mayflower Descendants – he would not have qualified. Perhaps more tellingly, he was not a member of any of the great New York City clubs, such as the Knickerbocker, Metropolitan, Brook, Links, Racquet, Union League, or Union. Was the reason that he had no desire to join one (somewhat unlikely given his propensity for social climbing) – or that he couldn’t pass the membership committees?

    Read More
    • Replies: @manton
    None of those clubs--with the possible exception of the Knick--are all that exclusive any more. I don't know about the 1950s--maybe Buckeley would not have been able to gain entry then. But certainly by the 80s, no problem.
    , @Catiline
    Craw,

    I was mainly thinking of Jr.'s political positions not his private life. (Stunningly beautiful Anglo wife by the way.) He was openly contemptuous of 'ethnics' at home and Continental Europe abroad. His politics lined up fairly closely to typical WASP concerns and interests.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @anonymous
    buckley is catholic

    catholics have an uncomfortable relationship with both wasps and jews

    Not quite. Jr. was an Anglo-maniac and his Catholicism was only nominal and largely a facade. A poor facade I might add.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
    Buckley's Catholicism was ancestral. How genuinely felt it may have been, only the man himself knew. One of the points made by Peter Brimelow in his Buckley obituary at Vdare (there's a link to it in the article above) is that Buckley was a social climber, who wished all his life for acceptance among the elite. He was born at a time when the WASP elite described by Digby Baltzell was still in the ascendancy, and Irish Catholics were still not completely welcome in the "best" circles.

    Buckley's entry in the Social Register provides a list of his associations. He was a member of the Bohemian Club of San Francisco, the New York Yacht Club, the Century Association, and the Knights of Malta. His wife's university and class are not listed (suggesting that she did not attend a school among the group recognized in Social Register listings), although his status as an alumnus of Yale, class of 1950, is shown.

    This information tells us the extent to which Buckley was still excluded from the remaining institutions of the old WASP ascendancy, as recently as 2007. He did not belong to those dependent upon ancestry, such as the Society of the Cincinnati, Sons of the Revolution, Society of Colonial Wars, or Mayflower Descendants - he would not have qualified. Perhaps more tellingly, he was not a member of any of the great New York City clubs, such as the Knickerbocker, Metropolitan, Brook, Links, Racquet, Union League, or Union. Was the reason that he had no desire to join one (somewhat unlikely given his propensity for social climbing) - or that he couldn't pass the membership committees?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @bondo
    was buckley the first wasp to bow to the jews allowing jewry (we hide one group of em behind "neocon") an easier route to takeover?

    buckley certainly distinguished himself by stabbing joe sobran, a real conservative and greater intellectual, in the back, front, top of the head.

    buckley is catholic

    catholics have an uncomfortable relationship with both wasps and jews

    Read More
    • Replies: @Catiline
    Not quite. Jr. was an Anglo-maniac and his Catholicism was only nominal and largely a facade. A poor facade I might add.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • was buckley the first wasp to bow to the jews allowing jewry (we hide one group of em behind “neocon”) an easier route to takeover?

    buckley certainly distinguished himself by stabbing joe sobran, a real conservative and greater intellectual, in the back, front, top of the head.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    buckley is catholic

    catholics have an uncomfortable relationship with both wasps and jews
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Denigrating your opponents—rather than simply challenging their arguments—is a standard tactic of the Left. Conservatives—that is, real conservatives—are supposed to be above that. It’s the ideas that matter, at least to some of us.

    With straight face, can you say this to Trump supporters?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Rex May
    I've decided to use "Libertarian Nationalist." It has the virtue of being fairly self-descriptive, while clearly not including the antinationalist left-libertarians and neocons, but also indicating a healthy respect for America's tradition of freedom.

    Dextral-governmentalism and sinistral-governmentalism would be appropriate for the two major political belief systems.

    Libertarians have a very dissimilar moral compass compared to conservatives and so-called left-libertarians.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Intelligent Dasein
    That's brilliant!

    I've been trying to get someone besides me to refer to Barack Obama as "Cannigula." I think it would be perfect, especially considering his 2008 Greek columns thing, but so far it hasn't taken.

    I’ll pass “Cannigula” on to a friend of mine, and give you in trade his nickname for B. Hussein – “Uncle Ream Us.”

    My friend also suggested “Old White Joe” for Biden, but I prefer “Joey Hairplugs” in his case. It sounds like the name of a supporting character in a gangster movie, which suits his position in the administration.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Michael Walsh
    Actually NR was never implicated in that scandal. However, It turns out that Billy Kristols's dad, Irving Kristol, was on the receiving end of CIA subsidies for the London based magazine Encounter, founded by Stephen Spender and Irving Kristol in the mid 50s. Irving Kristol and Spender insisted that they were unaware of the source of the funding. They were told the funds were from an American millionaire funneling the money through a foundation, at least according to their account. However the CIA cultural, anti-communist front group called the Committee for Cultural Freedom was a pet project of James Burnham before he left the CIA to help Buckley found the National Review. Buckley called Burnham "indispensable".

    Raymond Aaron was another European public intellectual tainted by this CIA covert funding campaign. I’m sure there are others all over Europe, Latin America and everywhere else.

    When one thinks about it, wouldn’t it be odd for the CIA and the people employed by the various foundations (Ford, Rockefeller, Carnegie) to develop a whole tool-kit of political manipulation techniques for foreign countries and not apply them back at home in the USA? That really is expecting a superhuman level of good sportsmanship. You’re right to bring this up when we’re discussing just what exactly Buckley’s legacy really is.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ace
    Covert CIA funding is always assumed to "taint" the recipient but there it is not certain that funds are only paid to writers on condition that they contort their opinions. In Aaron's case his writings seemed excellent on their face and if CIA funds were allegedly paid to him and he thereby became more independent that was a good thing.

    Covert funding is always subject to being revealed and when it is the recipient will always be behind the power curve in trying to argue that his opinions were not dictated by the (per se nefarious, infamous, execrable, demonic) CIA, say. The fact of covert funding becomes the "taint" even though there is not necessarily an actual purchase of a change of opinion.

    That disposes, I believe, of the earlier problem of CIA funding of propaganda. Whether there is an ongoing propaganda war financed by the Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie foundations is an interesting area for exploration. Similarly, we have the problem of extraordinary media concentration in six giant entities. The supposed distortions of the CIA pale in significance compared to what is being sluiced into the public mind through these six sewers.

    In the wake of the uproar instigated by Sen. Church, I believe the CIA decided no longer to support journalists. That was a healthy reform though bear in mind that whatever had gone on before should be seen in the context of massive Soviet efforts to have its propaganda planted around the world by willing journalists. Personally, I'm not inclined to reach for my smelling salts at the discovery that the CIA fought fire with fire. Would that the American government today showed some willingness to combat communism and socialism. Those were different times and the danger posed by the Soviets was not something that could be ignored.

    If the topic of subornation of opinion and politics is on the table, and it should always be, it would be interesting to ask:

    1. Hillary what in particular in each of her recent speeches could be worth a quarter of a million a pop,

    2. the Democrat Party what it promised in return for the 1996 contribution by James Riady of Djakarta,

    3. Newt Gingrich what he promised in return for Sheldon Adelson's support in 2014,

    4. Marco Rubio what, if anything, he has received from Sheldon Adelson and, if something, what he promised in return for Adelson's support, and

    5. the LDP of Japan why it supported Craig Spence who was discovered to be running a "call boy" ring patronized by civilian and military officials in Washington in the 1980s.

    Even though the transfers of money were,are, or will presumably matters of public record (with the exception of no. 5 perhaps) the fact of transparency does not dispose of the problem of subornation. And nos. 1 and 3 are as fresh as the morning dew.

    Finally, there is sometimes an assumption that readers of opinion that are disadvantaged by not knowing the existence or extent of support that a writer enjoys. That may be true if one reads a few sources not knowing about funding that has distorted the opinion of the author. But no serious student of a certain topic can reasonably base his or her opinion on a limited number of sources. On crucial points, even questionable works have to cite evidence for what the author argues and competing views can be, and will have to be, considered for the reader to form his or her own opinion.

    The problem with our media today is that they are so uniform in their opinions and the volume of questionable opinion is so great that superior ideas are just overwhelmed by the tidal wave of propaganda. From the western German border all the way to San Diego there is a remarkable unanimity of opinion on the wonderfulness of immigration and the inevitability of foreigners assimilating into any and all Western countries.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @David Davenport
    What about the old rumors that the CIA subsidized *National Review* in the early days of that mag?

    ... *National Review* conservativism being the ostensibly respectable alternative to the John Birch Society, which had unacceptably isolationist tendencies.

    Actually NR was never implicated in that scandal. However, It turns out that Billy Kristols’s dad, Irving Kristol, was on the receiving end of CIA subsidies for the London based magazine Encounter, founded by Stephen Spender and Irving Kristol in the mid 50s. Irving Kristol and Spender insisted that they were unaware of the source of the funding. They were told the funds were from an American millionaire funneling the money through a foundation, at least according to their account. However the CIA cultural, anti-communist front group called the Committee for Cultural Freedom was a pet project of James Burnham before he left the CIA to help Buckley found the National Review. Buckley called Burnham “indispensable”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    Raymond Aaron was another European public intellectual tainted by this CIA covert funding campaign. I'm sure there are others all over Europe, Latin America and everywhere else.

    When one thinks about it, wouldn't it be odd for the CIA and the people employed by the various foundations (Ford, Rockefeller, Carnegie) to develop a whole tool-kit of political manipulation techniques for foreign countries and not apply them back at home in the USA? That really is expecting a superhuman level of good sportsmanship. You're right to bring this up when we're discussing just what exactly Buckley's legacy really is.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The NR conservatives fail to understand that American politics is mostly about denigration. Cheap sound bytes, scandals, accusations of violating social taboos and so forth. It’s like high school.

    They can preach reasoned conservatism all day, but that’s not going to destroy the enemy.

    Buckley, Reagan, and other conservative heroes are really not ideologically strong enough to oppose equality. You need the more flexible, vicious mindset embodied by young men, and therefore the answer always comes back to nationalism.

    Read More
    • Agree: Ace
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Wizard of Oz
    I don't recall The Spectator (which I was reading regularly) having sold out to the neo-cons and am not in a position to speak about the Telegraph. Of course Murdoch has never had anything to do with either of them so maybe your memory is playing tricks on this subject. I recall the Spectator giving plenty of space to the Blair government's suicide-of-David-Kelly scandal, and Taki, the arch palaeo, is and was a regular columnist....(also in the Telegraph I think).

    Yes, I know quite well that the Spectator was Conrad Black’s baby back then, not Murdoch’s, and yet there was Irwin Steltzer and some other Jewish-American oddball named Douglas Davis or something. It seems as though the Spectator and Telegraph Group were nominally in Black’s hands back then but were really just the plaything of Murdoch and his Weekly Standard dream team. If you continued to enjoy the magazine during this shift well then that’s fantastic.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @norm741
    Buckley's admired the Jewish Neocons anti communist stance and the intellectual power they brought to NR. In the end they took control and now dominate. Most did not notice Sobran's departure and the Birch Society was considered fringe. This is now changing with theAlt Right and the power of the internet.

    I can’t say I’ve noticed any intellectual power on display by any neo-cons, inside or outside of National Review. Virtually all their writers are neo-cons, and they are uniformly puerile and deeply dishonest.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Crawfurdmuir
    I have tried to come up with a nickname for "these guys at National Review" and arrived at:

    NROdnik

    It borrows the acronym NRO and also alludes to the Russian Narodniks, would-be revolutionaries drawn from the middle and upper classes, who tried but signally failed to rouse the peasantry to their cause. The American people today have about as much use for neoconservative propaganda as Russian mouzhiks had for the proto-Trotskyism of the the narodniki.

    Anyone who wishes to use my coinage is welcome to do so at his pleasure. It would be rewarding to see it become widespread.

    That’s brilliant!

    I’ve been trying to get someone besides me to refer to Barack Obama as “Cannigula.” I think it would be perfect, especially considering his 2008 Greek columns thing, but so far it hasn’t taken.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
    I'll pass "Cannigula" on to a friend of mine, and give you in trade his nickname for B. Hussein - "Uncle Ream Us."

    My friend also suggested "Old White Joe" for Biden, but I prefer "Joey Hairplugs" in his case. It sounds like the name of a supporting character in a gangster movie, which suits his position in the administration.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • It was a good magazine, once. But it’s always been prone to Soviet style purges, and those purged are invariably on the right. The axing of the anti-open borders writers in the late 1990′s was the most significant example of this and since that time NR has not deserved to be called “conservative’ at all. You’ll find nothing in the magazine that you won’t find in Commentary and The Weekly Standard, which don’t bother professing to be conservative.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Groovy Battle for Blair Mountain"] says:
    @Clyde
    Good accounting on chain migration of Turks and others.

    Clyde………one of the things that worries me about POTUS Trump is that he wants to import a “small” number of nonwhite elites to generate economic opportunites for White Americans. This experiment was already performed…NATO SCHOLARS PROGRAM….and now it seems that all the Gas-Service Stations in the Northeast are owned by Turks. Pocono PA is now being colonized by Turkey.

    Here is my immigration policy:0 nonwhite legal immigrants forever!!!!!!!!!!. Followed by a steady reclamation of Native Born White American Living and Breeding Space.

    There is no economic case for race-replacing The Historic Native Born White American Working Class across the US. A very severe labor scarcity should not be used as an excuse to race-replace Our People across the US…POTUS Trump would scream “LABOR SCARCITY” IMPORT THE LEGAL IMMIRANT ASIANS.” Severe labor scarcities are wonderfull for real wage growth!!!..POTUS Trump would deprive the White Working Class of this very great economic benefit.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dwright
    What did Ann Coulter call these guys at National Review? Girly boys.

    Everyone they fired or smeared is one worth honoring, including Joe Sobran, Pat Buchanan, Peter Brimelow, Paul Gottfried and John Derbyshire.

    Good riddance to all of that filth.

    I have tried to come up with a nickname for “these guys at National Review” and arrived at:

    NROdnik

    It borrows the acronym NRO and also alludes to the Russian Narodniks, would-be revolutionaries drawn from the middle and upper classes, who tried but signally failed to rouse the peasantry to their cause. The American people today have about as much use for neoconservative propaganda as Russian mouzhiks had for the proto-Trotskyism of the the narodniki.

    Anyone who wishes to use my coinage is welcome to do so at his pleasure. It would be rewarding to see it become widespread.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
    That's brilliant!

    I've been trying to get someone besides me to refer to Barack Obama as "Cannigula." I think it would be perfect, especially considering his 2008 Greek columns thing, but so far it hasn't taken.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • And so it seems, have many of their readers, if the scathing dissents regularly left in the comments section of National ReviewOnline are any indication.

    I’ve been amazed that the National Review has not shut down there websites comment section, as a solid majority of the comments have countered there opinion. Additionally I’ve noticed the pro National Review neocon’s seem to be particular devoid of wit, humor or any understanding of satire. It’s almost child’s play, although enjoyable to counter there arguments.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Wizard of Oz
    I don't recall The Spectator (which I was reading regularly) having sold out to the neo-cons and am not in a position to speak about the Telegraph. Of course Murdoch has never had anything to do with either of them so maybe your memory is playing tricks on this subject. I recall the Spectator giving plenty of space to the Blair government's suicide-of-David-Kelly scandal, and Taki, the arch palaeo, is and was a regular columnist....(also in the Telegraph I think).

    Taki is still a Spectator regular.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Buckley’s admired the Jewish Neocons anti communist stance and the intellectual power they brought to NR. In the end they took control and now dominate. Most did not notice Sobran’s departure and the Birch Society was considered fringe. This is now changing with theAlt Right and the power of the internet.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twirlip
    I can't say I've noticed any intellectual power on display by any neo-cons, inside or outside of National Review. Virtually all their writers are neo-cons, and they are uniformly puerile and deeply dishonest.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "Dominique Francon Society"] says: • Website
    @AndrewR
    National Review: Standing athwart history yelling "please don't call me racist"

    National Review: Standing athwart history yelling “I’m for sale to the highest bidder”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "Dominique Francon Society"] says: • Website

    Why don’ they change it to Global Review?

    It is now anti-national.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cagey Beast
    It's worth mentioning that the same neocon weeds who choked out all other forms of life via National Review did the same thing to mainstream conservative discussion over in the UK in their Spectator magazine and Telegraph papers. I think an American guy in Rupert Murdoch's talent pool, named Irwin Steltzer (sp?) played a big role in this. They "make a desert and call it peace" wherever they go.

    I don’t recall The Spectator (which I was reading regularly) having sold out to the neo-cons and am not in a position to speak about the Telegraph. Of course Murdoch has never had anything to do with either of them so maybe your memory is playing tricks on this subject. I recall the Spectator giving plenty of space to the Blair government’s suicide-of-David-Kelly scandal, and Taki, the arch palaeo, is and was a regular columnist….(also in the Telegraph I think).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
    Taki is still a Spectator regular.
    , @Cagey Beast
    Yes, I know quite well that the Spectator was Conrad Black's baby back then, not Murdoch's, and yet there was Irwin Steltzer and some other Jewish-American oddball named Douglas Davis or something. It seems as though the Spectator and Telegraph Group were nominally in Black's hands back then but were really just the plaything of Murdoch and his Weekly Standard dream team. If you continued to enjoy the magazine during this shift well then that's fantastic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @boogerbently
    If they represent "conservatism", then, perhaps, we are no longer conservatives.
    We need a new name. How about previous conservatives, or, original conservatives.

    The paleocons at Chronicles magazine have been battling for an authentic conservatism for decades. The ideas of the Old Right never died. Check out

    Revolt from the Heartland: The Struggle for an Authentic Conservatism

    Joseph Scotchie

    Transaction Publishers, 2002 – Political Science – 135 pages

    0 Reviews

    [MORE]

    “Joseph Scotchie wishes to tell the story of what he terms an “underfunded, mostly unknown movement” known as the “paleoconservative” or “Old Right” which, he argues, has “provided the intellectual firepower behind the troubled populism of the 1990′s.” And Scotchie is not afraid to ask hard questions.” –”The Review of Politics”
    “An essential and valuable contribution to American intellectual history in the last decade of the last century.” — “The American Conservative”
    The dominant forces of American conservatism remain wedded, at all costs, to the Republican Party, but another movement, one with its roots in the pre-World War II era, has stepped forth to fill an intellectual vacuum on the right. This Old Right first rose in opposition to the New Deal, fighting both statism at home and the emergence of an American empire abroad. More recently this movement, sometimes called paleoconservatism, has provided the ideological backbone of modern populism and the opposition to globalization, with decisive effects on presidential politics. In “Revolt from the Heartland,” Joseph Scotchie provides an intellectual history of the Old Right, treating its main figures and defining its conflict with the traditional left-right political mainstream.
    As Scotchie’s account makes clear, the Old Right and its descendents have articulated an arresting and powerful worldview. They include an array of learned and provocative writers, including M.E. Bradford, Russell Kirk, Richard Weaver, and Murray Rothbard, and more recently, Clyde Wilson, Thomas Fleming, Samuel Francis, and Chilton Williamson, Jr. Beginning with the movement’s anti-Federalist forerunners, Scotchie traces its developments over two centuries of American history. In the realm of politics and economics, he examines the anti-imperialist stance against the Spanish-American War and the League of Nations, the split among conservatives on Cold War foreign policy, and the hostility to the socialist orientation of the New Deal. Identifying a number of social and cultural attitudes that define the Old Right, Scotchie finds the most important to be the importance of the classics, a recognition of regional cultures, the primacy of family over state, the moral case against immigration. In general, too, a Tenth Amendment approach to such recurring issues as education, abortion, and school prayer characterizes the group.
    As Scotchie makes clear, the Old Right and its grass-roots supporters have, and continue to be, a powerful force in modern American politics in spite of a lack of institutional support and media recognition. “Revolt from the Heartland” is an important study of a persisting current in American political life.
    Joseph Scotchie is the author of “Barbarians in the Saddle: An Intellectual Biography of Richard M. Weaver” and the editor of “The Paleoconservatives: New Voices of the Old Right” and “The Vision of Richard Weaver,” all available from Transaction. He is also the author of a biography on the novelist Thomas Wolfe.
    “”Joe Scotchie’s terrific new book solves a Great American Mystery. Why do our conservative intellectuals attack one another more viciously than they do liberals? Why does the splintered movement-Old Right, Neoconservative, New Right, and Beltway Right-behave like old communists who would rather purge each other than carry out the revolution? Why, if a member has some success, as when Pat Buchanan won in New Hampshire in 1996, do the rest attack him until they have assured his defeat? It’s an incredible story and you have to read the book to find the answer””-William J. Quirk, Professor of Law, “University of South Carolina”
    “”As an immigrant, I have always regarded the American conserative movement as the flower of democracy, the real reason for the Free World’s victory in the Cold War. But flowers do not grow to the sky and the historic conservative movement is clearly now dead. In this remarkable and erudite account, Joseph Scothie investigates the new shoots that are coming up, traces their roots, and analyzes their future-and America’s.””
    -Peter Brimelow, author of “Alien Nation: Common Sense About America’s Immigration Disaster”
    “”With truly masterful precision, Joe Scotchie illuminates the myriad dissident strains of American Conservatism which knocked at the doors of power at the end of the Cold War before meeting a fateful rebuff. He tells the story of those distinctive Right wing intellectuals who said “no” to an imperial foreign policy, mass immigration, and a globalized economy. While this band lost the key internecine battles of the 1990s to Newt Gingrich the neoconvervatives, and the politics of Clinton-bashing, in Scotchie’ eloquent account their struggle for a conservatism rooted a sense of measure and respect for the American past retains all its piquancy for the decade to come.””-Scott McConnell
    « Less

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • If and when obituaries for NR are written, the critical issue of its subsidization by the CIA needs to be assessed and as thoroughly aired as possible. Rather than “standing athwart history, yelling Stop”, as claimed by its founder, opposing ‘big government’, it is probable that its primary purpose was to support the growth of the military-industrial-governmental apparatus in opposition to the Soviet Union. Those purged in the early years were men on the right who had doubts about this program, such as Welch and Murray Rothbard. ‘Heretics’ purged in later years, including Pat Buchanan, Joe Sobran, M.E Bradford and others up to John O’Sullivan and Peter Brimelow, had offended against the Neoconservative money cabal, to which Buckley had submitted by the early ’90′s. Did the Neocons take over as the financial underwriters at that time? And who underwrites the magazine today?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @War for Blair Mountain
    The larger issue is that the COLD WAR ANTI-COMMIE Crusade was a death sentence for the Historic Native Born White American Majority. First came the integration of the US Military....Afterwards, school busing, and the 1964 Civil Rights Act...all three social policies...are a direct consequence of The Cold War...We had to show that we were morally superior to the RUSSKIES.

    Of course, the passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act was a direct consequence of the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act for Blacks. If the 1965 Immigration Reform Act had not been passed, Barack Obama would not have had a snowballs chance in Hell of ever being elected POTUS in 2008 and 2012...And Native Born White Americans would still be a 90 percent racial majority in the US in 2016. In fact, if America had not gone into Cold War mode against Russia, Barack Obama's Kenyan father would never have been allowed into the US. Barack Obama's father was allowed into the US through a NATO foreign student program. This is also the reason why the Turks own all our gas stations in the US...They are the chain migration beneficiares through the Turkish science,math..engineering grad students who were allowed into US Universites in the 1970s through the same NATO Scholars Program.

    The Soviet Union-Russia was not an existential threat to millions of Native Born White Americans. JFK and the reprobate Kennedy Family was the number one existential threat to the continued existence of The Historic Native Born White American Majority.

    The passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act was Teddy's permanent monument of demographic annihilation of The Historic Native Born White American Majority to his War Criminal brother JFK.

    God Bless the late Russian Naval Commander Vitali Akhipov!!!..For he saved The Historic Native Born White American Majority from the Irish Catholic Monstrosity JFK.

    This is the proper context in which William F Buckley and the NR should be understood in terms of.

    Good accounting on chain migration of Turks and others.

    Read More
    • Replies: @War for Blair Mountain
    Clyde.........one of the things that worries me about POTUS Trump is that he wants to import a "small" number of nonwhite elites to generate economic opportunites for White Americans. This experiment was already performed...NATO SCHOLARS PROGRAM....and now it seems that all the Gas-Service Stations in the Northeast are owned by Turks. Pocono PA is now being colonized by Turkey.

    Here is my immigration policy:0 nonwhite legal immigrants forever!!!!!!!!!!. Followed by a steady reclamation of Native Born White American Living and Breeding Space.

    There is no economic case for race-replacing The Historic Native Born White American Working Class across the US. A very severe labor scarcity should not be used as an excuse to race-replace Our People across the US...POTUS Trump would scream "LABOR SCARCITY" IMPORT THE LEGAL IMMIRANT ASIANS." Severe labor scarcities are wonderfull for real wage growth!!!..POTUS Trump would deprive the White Working Class of this very great economic benefit.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "Dominique Francon Society"] says: • Website

    Is this like a Counter-Cuckture?

    Trump reminds me of the 70s all over again.

    It was a time of movies like

    ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST (albeit based on an early 60s book).

    [MORE]

    THE LONGEST YARD

    BAD NEWS BEARS

    THE LAST DETAIL

    CHINATOWN

    AMERICAN GRAFFITI

    BILLY JACK

    CONVOY

    Anti-Estab movies.

    They were follow-ups to 60s films like BONNIE AND CLYDE, THE GRADUATE, IN THE HEAT OF THE NIGHT, COOL HAND LUKE, and EASY RIDER.

    The rebels were the youths, the blacks, the oddballs, the outsiders, the nutballs, the outlaws, etc.

    It was seen in relation to Nixonian Conformity and the Man.

    And yet, they didn’t simply appeal to the Liberals or the Left.
    They even appealed to rightwing populism.

    And some movies like DEATH WISH, DIRTY HARRY, and THE FRENCH CONNECTION — even PATTON — played on a combo of counterculture and right-wing themes.
    These ‘right-wing’ heroes were rebels and mavericks against the System that was increasingly seen as controlled by the Liberal Establishment. Stallone later ran with this white-man-as-underdog in ROCKY and RAMBO movies.

    Ironically, the so-called Reagan Era of the 80s did wonders for the Lib Establishment. Reagan’s pro-business and pro-order policies paved the way for super-revival of Liberal Democratic cities during the Clinton Era of high incarceration rates and pro-’free trade’ policies that made the Liberal urban gentry and entrepreneurial class richer than ever. And the restoration of the culture of Order paved the way for Liberal use of PC and other means to make us more orderly in the ways that would please Steven Pinker.

    So, the Libs really had no more use for genuine counter-culture antics and rebellion.
    There is a lot of sex and violence in Pop Culture but they are all so industry-controlled, groomed, manufactured, and engineered. They are not genuine and real, as with Janis Joplin and Jim Morrison.
    The likes of Miley Cyrus and Nikki Minaj, gross as they are, are purely the product of the industry. They were made that way by the industry.

    In contrast, there was genuine anarchic threat in movies like THE LONGEST YARD, ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST, and BAD NEWS BEARS, huge topic of discussion among kids at school.

    Back then, many Boomer Libs(still young and idealistic and a bit rough) were willing to throw caution to the winds and let the mob run free. There was no PC though plenty of lefty politicking. But there was also good deal of un-PC stuff all over.

    But PC has seriously suppressed genuine free speech. There is SJW rage, but SJW are toy radicals manufactured and engineered by boomer and X-er college professors.
    They are to radicalism what Rubio is to conservatism. Robotic.

    The Lib Elites are no longer interested in BAD NEWS BEARS style antics since they totally rule everything. This is especially the case since the main rulers of Lib Elites are Jews, and Jews are very nervous about the gentile masses becoming restless and stampeding against Elite Power.
    So, the very Lib Boomers who might have cheered for the inmates of THE LONGEST YARD in the 1970s are probably secretly cheering for the prison authorities when they see the movie today. To them, Trump seems like the Reynolds character leading an unruly mob who are only to happy to storm the gates.

    That the white conservative middle/working class are now the face of rebellion against the Establishment of both parties goes to show how much this nation has changed.
    The Jewish Elites have been promoting ‘white guilt’, ‘diversity’, ‘open borders’, ‘multi-culturalism’, etc as the New Official Creed of America. Of course, this elitism doesn’t favor all non-whites. Instead, it just favors some token non-whites for elite world so that the elites can show off their ‘progressive’ credentials. With the likes of Fareed Zakaria by their side, they sneer at the gentile masses as low and vulgar. And even though the globalist elites are the ones lording over blacks and Mexicans, they use ‘diversity’ narrative to fool non-white have-nots into believing that they are being held back by the middle/working/lower class whites who are ending up with nothing. Divide-and-rule over gentile dummies. The fact that some blacks are beginning to listen to Trump is a sign that some are waking up to fact that their main enemies are not ‘white trash’ but the globo elites who push immigration to send blacks to the back of the bus in favor of yellows/browns and homos.

    The question is… is Trump pulling an act or does he have the gall to run the longest yard?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    February 22, 2016 The Age of Authoritarianism: Government of the Politicians, by the Military, for the Corporations By John W. Whitehead

    History may show that from this point forward, we will have left behind any semblance of constitutional government and entered into a militaristic state where all citizens are suspects and security trumps freedom.

    https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2016/02/24/the-age-of-authoritarianism/#.VtCLNZ3D-XY

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "Dominique Francon Society"] says: • Website

    Political Correctness and Pop Culture. Taboos and Tattoos.

    What America has become.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dr. X
    NR was was a thoughtful and worthwhile read when Buckley was alive. Much of NR's influence came, rightly, from staunch opposition to Soviet communism during the Cold War and its opposition to leftist cultural rot.

    Today, Buckley's successors haven't got the Soviets to rail against, and frankly, NR and the conservative movement have utterly failed at halting the cultural rot. Abortion, pornography, homosexuality, affirmative action, Third World immigration, government debt and welfare have all become as American as apple pie. NR's editors have basically come to accept all of that. What have they got left? Nothing, really, but neo-con interventionism and anti-Putinism.

    Dr. X said: What have they got left?

    Hunsdon said: They’ve always got Israel.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • What did Ann Coulter call these guys at National Review? Girly boys.

    Everyone they fired or smeared is one worth honoring, including Joe Sobran, Pat Buchanan, Peter Brimelow, Paul Gottfried and John Derbyshire.

    Good riddance to all of that filth.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
    I have tried to come up with a nickname for "these guys at National Review" and arrived at:

    NROdnik

    It borrows the acronym NRO and also alludes to the Russian Narodniks, would-be revolutionaries drawn from the middle and upper classes, who tried but signally failed to rouse the peasantry to their cause. The American people today have about as much use for neoconservative propaganda as Russian mouzhiks had for the proto-Trotskyism of the the narodniki.

    Anyone who wishes to use my coinage is welcome to do so at his pleasure. It would be rewarding to see it become widespread.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Matthew Kelly
    Excellent essay. One note, per your comment:

    ...the scathing dissents regularly left in the comments section of National ReviewOnline are any indication.
     
    Any more, NRO ferociously censors their commentary, as bad as--if not worse than--say, HuffPo or NYT. I.e., if anyone goes snooping around NRO to find this "scathing dissent", they will come up lacking. All of my polite dissents have been scrubbed from NRO memory (though not from my Disqus account). Just like with any other left-wing publication, the naif who wanders over there will believe everyone agrees with their POV.

    ” Just like with any other left-wing publication, the naif who wanders over there will believe everyone agrees with their POV.”

    The same goes for Jayman and Razib, here.
    Intellectually dishonest.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • National Review: Standing athwart history yelling “please don’t call me racist”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    National Review: Standing athwart history yelling “I'm for sale to the highest bidder”
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • [It's really not proper behavior to use multiple handles when commenting. Pick a single handle and stick to it, or use Anonymous or Anon for other comments.]

    Not only that, but NR seems to have dropped their wonderful cartoonist, Baloo.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @boogerbently
    If they represent "conservatism", then, perhaps, we are no longer conservatives.
    We need a new name. How about previous conservatives, or, original conservatives.

    I’ve decided to use “Libertarian Nationalist.” It has the virtue of being fairly self-descriptive, while clearly not including the antinationalist left-libertarians and neocons, but also indicating a healthy respect for America’s tradition of freedom.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Drapetomaniac
    Dextral-governmentalism and sinistral-governmentalism would be appropriate for the two major political belief systems.

    Libertarians have a very dissimilar moral compass compared to conservatives and so-called left-libertarians.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "Dominique Francon Society"] says: • Website

    Alt Right and white patriots don’t mind sharing Trump with the Jews. After all, Trump is pro-Israel.
    But Jews mind sharing any candidate with the Alt Right or white patriots. They must totally own him. Jews will not share.
    What does that tell you?

    Alt Right and white patriots don’t mind if Trump will be good for both Jews and whites. But Jews want someone who will be good for Jews only and bad for whites.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "Dominique Francon Society"] says: • Website
    @Priss Factor
    Taboos maintain the walls of power and privilege. Trump weakens taboos, therefore threatens vested interests. He opens up the narrative and inspires others to say and do like him. Power is maintained not only by what is said but by fearsome rules of what cannot be said. After all, glastnost and the overton window/wall in the USSR undermined communism in the USSR of the 1980s.

    Trump isn't open borders on immigration but open borders on the narrative. His style and brashness are like 'barbarians at the gates' for the ruling Jewish elites. He is like the uppity Negro who finally looks in the eyes of his massuh and says NO. Jewish massuhs cannot tolerate the white man looking directly in the eye and saying NO to them. Jews cannot stand uppity whites. Chutzpah is reserved for them only. Ironically, Trump is like Jack Johnson, and he keeps knocking out all these 'great goy hopes' put forth by Jews. Romney is the latest one of the 'hopes'.

    As for genteel respectable gentile conservatives, they lost all legitimacy since they lacked the balls to speak the truth about globalism and its threat to Americans. Just like German upper class sold their souls to Hitler to keep their status, gentile conservative elites sold their souls to Jewish globo tyrants to keep theirs. Respectability with integrity and courage is worthless. It is all look, no substance.

    Respectability is only as good as the real face it is masking. Conservative Establishment wears a respectable mask but lacks integrity and principles. It's all about lobbying for privilege for themselves without any regard for nation as a whole.

    Open borders on immigration destroys a nation. Open borders on the narrative/discourse destroys privilege and power that maintains itself by making people feel that it is ‘bad form’, ‘sinful’, or ‘odious’ to say certain things(that usually speak truth to power). When Jews were rising and challenging Wasp power, they were for open borders or open barbs on the narrative controlled by wasps. But now that they got the power, they fear open borders discourse free of censorship and taboos. They are now for closed borders on discourse. PC is enforced through means legal, economic, cultural, and political not so much to protect the ‘weak’ but to protect the powerful Jewish elites from scrutiny and accountability.

    Trump stands before the Overton Window/Wall and says ‘tear down this wall’. It is the one wall — along with the wall in Israel — that Jews don’t want torn down. Without taboos, Jews will be flooded with criticism of their power, privilege, and abuses since they are the kings of the hill.

    We must say ‘closed borders against invasion and open borders for speech’.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Lorax
    Just for the record,Buckley has been an OSS and CIA asset over the years.
    Points from Russ Baker's book about the Bush dynasty "Family of Secrets", page 23.
    1. In 1950 at Yale, Buckley was recruited for the OSS by philosophy instructor and covert operations advisor James Burnham.
    2. He introduced Buckley to CIA Officer E. Howard Hunt also a Yale man.
    3. Buckley was Skull and Bones at Yale and as were the Bushes and Allen Dulles.
    4. After graduation he went to work in the CIA's Mexico station under Hunt which fact he
    acknowledged in 2005.
    Here is a key takeaway from the book about the intelligence community's view of the Presidency.
    "Presidents were viewed less as elected leaders to be served than as temporary occupants to be closely monitored , subtly guided, and where necessary, given a shove." (page 182)
    Although this quote was written about JFK and Nixon, it will also impact Trump, should he win.

    Didn’t know that The Buck was S&B at Yale but I knew he was connected with the CIA in some fashion. I used to be an inveterate reader of NR but haven’t read it in years. Buckley and the increasingly antic George Will effectively banished Pat Buchanan from The Movement back in the Nineties as a consequence of Buchanan’s opposition to both unbridled immigration and AIPAC (remember his description of the US Congress as “Israeli Occupied Territory?”). Buckley may have already then have been in his cups (I heard him interviewed on a talk show back in the early Nineties and he was barely coherent). Now he’s gone. Small “c” conservatism has since been replaced by “Conservative Inc.” Pretty sad.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "Dominique Francon Society"] says: • Website

    Taboos maintain the walls of power and privilege. Trump weakens taboos, therefore threatens vested interests. He opens up the narrative and inspires others to say and do like him. Power is maintained not only by what is said but by fearsome rules of what cannot be said. After all, glastnost and the overton window/wall in the USSR undermined communism in the USSR of the 1980s.

    Trump isn’t open borders on immigration but open borders on the narrative. His style and brashness are like ‘barbarians at the gates’ for the ruling Jewish elites. He is like the uppity Negro who finally looks in the eyes of his massuh and says NO. Jewish massuhs cannot tolerate the white man looking directly in the eye and saying NO to them. Jews cannot stand uppity whites. Chutzpah is reserved for them only. Ironically, Trump is like Jack Johnson, and he keeps knocking out all these ‘great goy hopes’ put forth by Jews. Romney is the latest one of the ‘hopes’.

    As for genteel respectable gentile conservatives, they lost all legitimacy since they lacked the balls to speak the truth about globalism and its threat to Americans. Just like German upper class sold their souls to Hitler to keep their status, gentile conservative elites sold their souls to Jewish globo tyrants to keep theirs. Respectability with integrity and courage is worthless. It is all look, no substance.

    Respectability is only as good as the real face it is masking. Conservative Establishment wears a respectable mask but lacks integrity and principles. It’s all about lobbying for privilege for themselves without any regard for nation as a whole.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    Open borders on immigration destroys a nation. Open borders on the narrative/discourse destroys privilege and power that maintains itself by making people feel that it is 'bad form', 'sinful', or 'odious' to say certain things(that usually speak truth to power). When Jews were rising and challenging Wasp power, they were for open borders or open barbs on the narrative controlled by wasps. But now that they got the power, they fear open borders discourse free of censorship and taboos. They are now for closed borders on discourse. PC is enforced through means legal, economic, cultural, and political not so much to protect the 'weak' but to protect the powerful Jewish elites from scrutiny and accountability.

    Trump stands before the Overton Window/Wall and says 'tear down this wall'. It is the one wall --- along with the wall in Israel --- that Jews don't want torn down. Without taboos, Jews will be flooded with criticism of their power, privilege, and abuses since they are the kings of the hill.

    We must say 'closed borders against invasion and open borders for speech'.

    , @vcragain
    Well as a response to all your obvious hatred of 'the jews' - you do realize/know that many, many Europeans are actually of Jewish origin, because the Jewish peoples of hundreds of years ago shelved their Jewish identity and absorbed themselves into the host community - 'disappeared' themselves for survival, even went as far as Scotland to escape persecution, so many of us actually have strong jewish roots - my own family via 2 grandparents were jews, which I had no idea about until 5 years ago - many, many Europeans have the exact same history - hah - that is so amusing - so maybe you will relax a little and realize you are just another human with a motley background and MAY discover to your total discomfort that you also have the 'dreaded genes' - a very comical story surfaced recently of a leader of an anti-semite mid-western kkk group was discovered to be half-jewish and the group threw him out - I fell over laughing !!!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Biff
    The NR became neocon central, and anything but conservative in their liberal nation building ways. One stick to mark their grave will do.

    A circular target would be better. It would give me something to aim at while I piss on their grave.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Reg Cæsar

    In due course—one of Buckley’s favorite phrases—many conservatives like Phyllis Schlaffly [sic] and Laura Ingraham have begun to wash their hands of National Review.
     
    Other than the late, great reactionary Florence King, whom I suspect was kept around for entertainment and sales value, I don't remember NR ever featuring many female writers at all. They sure could use some now, as it seems that on the "National Question" the ladies are carrying the ball-- Mrs Schlafly, Miss Ingraham, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter...

    Not sure about Michelle Malin. She founded Hot Air (HA), an intellectually dishonest cesspool of RINO leftism, piss poor writing and non-existent editing, which she sold to some RINO organization that has continued HA’s downward spiral.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • If they represent “conservatism”, then, perhaps, we are no longer conservatives.
    We need a new name. How about previous conservatives, or, original conservatives.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rex May
    I've decided to use "Libertarian Nationalist." It has the virtue of being fairly self-descriptive, while clearly not including the antinationalist left-libertarians and neocons, but also indicating a healthy respect for America's tradition of freedom.
    , @Stan
    The paleocons at Chronicles magazine have been battling for an authentic conservatism for decades. The ideas of the Old Right never died. Check out

    Revolt from the Heartland: The Struggle for an Authentic Conservatism

    Joseph Scotchie

    Transaction Publishers, 2002 - Political Science - 135 pages

    0 Reviews






    "Joseph Scotchie wishes to tell the story of what he terms an "underfunded, mostly unknown movement" known as the "paleoconservative" or "Old Right" which, he argues, has "provided the intellectual firepower behind the troubled populism of the 1990's." And Scotchie is not afraid to ask hard questions." --"The Review of Politics"
    "An essential and valuable contribution to American intellectual history in the last decade of the last century." -- "The American Conservative"
    The dominant forces of American conservatism remain wedded, at all costs, to the Republican Party, but another movement, one with its roots in the pre-World War II era, has stepped forth to fill an intellectual vacuum on the right. This Old Right first rose in opposition to the New Deal, fighting both statism at home and the emergence of an American empire abroad. More recently this movement, sometimes called paleoconservatism, has provided the ideological backbone of modern populism and the opposition to globalization, with decisive effects on presidential politics. In "Revolt from the Heartland," Joseph Scotchie provides an intellectual history of the Old Right, treating its main figures and defining its conflict with the traditional left-right political mainstream.
    As Scotchie's account makes clear, the Old Right and its descendents have articulated an arresting and powerful worldview. They include an array of learned and provocative writers, including M.E. Bradford, Russell Kirk, Richard Weaver, and Murray Rothbard, and more recently, Clyde Wilson, Thomas Fleming, Samuel Francis, and Chilton Williamson, Jr. Beginning with the movement's anti-Federalist forerunners, Scotchie traces its developments over two centuries of American history. In the realm of politics and economics, he examines the anti-imperialist stance against the Spanish-American War and the League of Nations, the split among conservatives on Cold War foreign policy, and the hostility to the socialist orientation of the New Deal. Identifying a number of social and cultural attitudes that define the Old Right, Scotchie finds the most important to be the importance of the classics, a recognition of regional cultures, the primacy of family over state, the moral case against immigration. In general, too, a Tenth Amendment approach to such recurring issues as education, abortion, and school prayer characterizes the group.
    As Scotchie makes clear, the Old Right and its grass-roots supporters have, and continue to be, a powerful force in modern American politics in spite of a lack of institutional support and media recognition. "Revolt from the Heartland" is an important study of a persisting current in American political life.
    Joseph Scotchie is the author of "Barbarians in the Saddle: An Intellectual Biography of Richard M. Weaver" and the editor of "The Paleoconservatives: New Voices of the Old Right" and "The Vision of Richard Weaver," all available from Transaction. He is also the author of a biography on the novelist Thomas Wolfe.
    ""Joe Scotchie's terrific new book solves a Great American Mystery. Why do our conservative intellectuals attack one another more viciously than they do liberals? Why does the splintered movement-Old Right, Neoconservative, New Right, and Beltway Right-behave like old communists who would rather purge each other than carry out the revolution? Why, if a member has some success, as when Pat Buchanan won in New Hampshire in 1996, do the rest attack him until they have assured his defeat? It's an incredible story and you have to read the book to find the answer""-William J. Quirk, Professor of Law, "University of South Carolina"
    ""As an immigrant, I have always regarded the American conserative movement as the flower of democracy, the real reason for the Free World's victory in the Cold War. But flowers do not grow to the sky and the historic conservative movement is clearly now dead. In this remarkable and erudite account, Joseph Scothie investigates the new shoots that are coming up, traces their roots, and analyzes their future-and America's.""
    -Peter Brimelow, author of "Alien Nation: Common Sense About America's Immigration Disaster"
    ""With truly masterful precision, Joe Scotchie illuminates the myriad dissident strains of American Conservatism which knocked at the doors of power at the end of the Cold War before meeting a fateful rebuff. He tells the story of those distinctive Right wing intellectuals who said "no" to an imperial foreign policy, mass immigration, and a globalized economy. While this band lost the key internecine battles of the 1990s to Newt Gingrich the neoconvervatives, and the politics of Clinton-bashing, in Scotchie' eloquent account their struggle for a conservatism rooted a sense of measure and respect for the American past retains all its piquancy for the decade to come.""-Scott McConnell
    « Less
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The NR became neocon central, and anything but conservative in their liberal nation building ways. One stick to mark their grave will do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @woodNfish
    A circular target would be better. It would give me something to aim at while I piss on their grave.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Just for the record,Buckley has been an OSS and CIA asset over the years.
    Points from Russ Baker’s book about the Bush dynasty “Family of Secrets”, page 23.
    1. In 1950 at Yale, Buckley was recruited for the OSS by philosophy instructor and covert operations advisor James Burnham.
    2. He introduced Buckley to CIA Officer E. Howard Hunt also a Yale man.
    3. Buckley was Skull and Bones at Yale and as were the Bushes and Allen Dulles.
    4. After graduation he went to work in the CIA’s Mexico station under Hunt which fact he
    acknowledged in 2005.
    Here is a key takeaway from the book about the intelligence community’s view of the Presidency.
    “Presidents were viewed less as elected leaders to be served than as temporary occupants to be closely monitored , subtly guided, and where necessary, given a shove.” (page 182)
    Although this quote was written about JFK and Nixon, it will also impact Trump, should he win.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Connecticut Famer
    Didn't know that The Buck was S&B at Yale but I knew he was connected with the CIA in some fashion. I used to be an inveterate reader of NR but haven't read it in years. Buckley and the increasingly antic George Will effectively banished Pat Buchanan from The Movement back in the Nineties as a consequence of Buchanan's opposition to both unbridled immigration and AIPAC (remember his description of the US Congress as "Israeli Occupied Territory?"). Buckley may have already then have been in his cups (I heard him interviewed on a talk show back in the early Nineties and he was barely coherent). Now he's gone. Small "c" conservatism has since been replaced by "Conservative Inc." Pretty sad.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cagey Beast
    It's worth mentioning that the same neocon weeds who choked out all other forms of life via National Review did the same thing to mainstream conservative discussion over in the UK in their Spectator magazine and Telegraph papers. I think an American guy in Rupert Murdoch's talent pool, named Irwin Steltzer (sp?) played a big role in this. They "make a desert and call it peace" wherever they go.

    “named Irwin Steltzer (sp?) ”

    You mean, (((Irwin Steltzer)))

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Matthew Kelly
    Excellent essay. One note, per your comment:

    ...the scathing dissents regularly left in the comments section of National ReviewOnline are any indication.
     
    Any more, NRO ferociously censors their commentary, as bad as--if not worse than--say, HuffPo or NYT. I.e., if anyone goes snooping around NRO to find this "scathing dissent", they will come up lacking. All of my polite dissents have been scrubbed from NRO memory (though not from my Disqus account). Just like with any other left-wing publication, the naif who wanders over there will believe everyone agrees with their POV.

    I have found that NRO deletes scathing dissents, but usually allows milder stuff….but the person doing it is an ignorant moron. One comment I filed was just a quote from a famous Shelley poem…gone….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • It’s worth mentioning that the same neocon weeds who choked out all other forms of life via National Review did the same thing to mainstream conservative discussion over in the UK in their Spectator magazine and Telegraph papers. I think an American guy in Rupert Murdoch’s talent pool, named Irwin Steltzer (sp?) played a big role in this. They “make a desert and call it peace” wherever they go.

    Read More
    • Replies: @James O'Meara
    "named Irwin Steltzer (sp?) "

    You mean, (((Irwin Steltzer)))
    , @Wizard of Oz
    I don't recall The Spectator (which I was reading regularly) having sold out to the neo-cons and am not in a position to speak about the Telegraph. Of course Murdoch has never had anything to do with either of them so maybe your memory is playing tricks on this subject. I recall the Spectator giving plenty of space to the Blair government's suicide-of-David-Kelly scandal, and Taki, the arch palaeo, is and was a regular columnist....(also in the Telegraph I think).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Buckley (rot in hell) and Will are sniveling rodents sent into conservative America by its enemies as a fifth column to undermine the pillars and rot the intellectual foundations of conservatism from the inside out.

    Hard to even imagine more contemptible scum. They’re like those Jewish kapos who strode the camps with clubs beating any inmate who looked at the guards crosswise.

    like those Apache scouts who showed the US cavalry where their tribes were hiding out, they happily betray their own for shinny trinkets

    and they would urge us all to get on our knees like they are, and worship their master

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I haven’t read National Review in over ten years. There’s nothing there.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • NR was was a thoughtful and worthwhile read when Buckley was alive. Much of NR’s influence came, rightly, from staunch opposition to Soviet communism during the Cold War and its opposition to leftist cultural rot.

    Today, Buckley’s successors haven’t got the Soviets to rail against, and frankly, NR and the conservative movement have utterly failed at halting the cultural rot. Abortion, pornography, homosexuality, affirmative action, Third World immigration, government debt and welfare have all become as American as apple pie. NR’s editors have basically come to accept all of that. What have they got left? Nothing, really, but neo-con interventionism and anti-Putinism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hunsdon
    Dr. X said: What have they got left?

    Hunsdon said: They've always got Israel.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Groovy Battle for Blair Mountain"] says:

    White Guys

    If you allow yourselves to become a racial minority on Historical Native Born White American Living and Breeding Space…..meet your new Hindu Brahman Masters:Ramesh Ponnuru and his Species…Brahmans such as IIT Grad Vishod Khalsa who view you guys as SUBHUMAN!!!!

    Was Fantasy “WHAT STUD” Football really worth it?

    The Genocide of White Males is happening in real 2016 time…even Noam Chomsky has recently admitted this last week in Huff Post….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • NR and NRO have made themselves irrelevant. Lowry is still a callow youth whose lack of ability is covered up by strategic banishments and the hiring of people with even less ability than him. It was condign punishment that Lowry eventually turned on the man that made him.

    Unapologetic, I disagree with you one minor point. Goldberg isn’t one tenth as smart as he think he is. I remember back about 2002, 2003, when Goldberg was trying to carry out an argument with the Paleoconservatives. Gottfried had Goldberg spitting and spluttering, and energetically making a fool of himself. It would have been hilarious, if it hadn’t also been very painful watching a reasonably intelligent man being taken down several notches with so little effort. I swapped several emails with the man trying to get him to shut up, but he was simply too arrogant.

    After NR goes away, and it will since it’s founding function has been abandoned, the people that write there will have a hard time writing anywhere else. Krikorian will probably do OK, but I can’t think of anyone else that will. People like Lowry, Goldberg and Ponnuru will richly deserve their banishment to oblivion.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • There is something really obscene about guys who have done nothing in their lives, except talk and write, being critical of someone who has spent decades not only doing but doing on a mega scale, employing thousands, turning Manhattan and NYC around, etc., etc…

    I hope NR, WSJ,… the whole conservative establishment, die a quick death. Not for humane reasons, but the sooner they get out of here the better the country will be.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Fran Macadam
    Some time before his passing, a coup was mounted at NRO and Buckley himself and others were exiled from the magazine he founded. He had begun to question the wisdom of Mideast wars and had long supported marijuana legalization, mounted critiques that the neocons treated as treason. His columns were no longer carried by the magazne. NRO had become little better than a propaganda outlet

    “He had begun to question the wisdom of Mideast wars and had long supported marijuana legalization….”

    That’s what I remember about Buckley. That and the wonderful way he looked down his nose so that you knew his mighty brain was working. Marijuana legalization? He was insufficiently pompous and stuffy (like George Will) to be a real conservative.

    Being a card carrying member of the white working class, all I can say about the National Review is who cares?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Groovy Battle for Blair Moutain"] says:

    The larger issue is that the COLD WAR ANTI-COMMIE Crusade was a death sentence for the Historic Native Born White American Majority. First came the integration of the US Military….Afterwards, school busing, and the 1964 Civil Rights Act…all three social policies…are a direct consequence of The Cold War…We had to show that we were morally superior to the RUSSKIES.

    Of course, the passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act was a direct consequence of the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act for Blacks. If the 1965 Immigration Reform Act had not been passed, Barack Obama would not have had a snowballs chance in Hell of ever being elected POTUS in 2008 and 2012…And Native Born White Americans would still be a 90 percent racial majority in the US in 2016. In fact, if America had not gone into Cold War mode against Russia, Barack Obama’s Kenyan father would never have been allowed into the US. Barack Obama’s father was allowed into the US through a NATO foreign student program. This is also the reason why the Turks own all our gas stations in the US…They are the chain migration beneficiares through the Turkish science,math..engineering grad students who were allowed into US Universites in the 1970s through the same NATO Scholars Program.

    The Soviet Union-Russia was not an existential threat to millions of Native Born White Americans. JFK and the reprobate Kennedy Family was the number one existential threat to the continued existence of The Historic Native Born White American Majority.

    The passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act was Teddy’s permanent monument of demographic annihilation of The Historic Native Born White American Majority to his War Criminal brother JFK.

    God Bless the late Russian Naval Commander Vitali Akhipov!!!..For he saved The Historic Native Born White American Majority from the Irish Catholic Monstrosity JFK.

    This is the proper context in which William F Buckley and the NR should be understood in terms of.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde
    Good accounting on chain migration of Turks and others.
    , @Ace
    That is very insightful. I never thought of it that way. Western politicians almost to a man have not been able to muster the courage to say, "So what?" to anyone. Always the scramble was to placate the foreigner and his precious sensibilities.
    , @Anonymous
    Wow. Where to begin with this, Groovy Battle poster? Maybe a simple question- how does JFK not qualify for the seemingly sacrosanct "Historic Native Born White American Majority"? He seems to hit all necessary criteria, unless "Historic" is to be read as no familial immigration history. But, then, such a reading would be a pretty large disqualifier for most in that "Majority", no? As for the article itself, this is a well written if confusing rant- who really cares whether or not George Will is qualified to speak about whether others are paying proper homage to the legacy of William F. Buckley? If the author wants to position Trump as the true heir to the immigration principles WFB once stood for, great. But I do not think Trump actually cares whether or not such a link can be made. The fact that he shares such close-mindedness with a now fading memory of an outspoken rabble rouser (intellectual or not) matters little in 2016. As abundantly clear within these comments, the issue is whether or not Trump's rhetoric has found root in the dangerous categorizations such as the unwieldly and ultimately self-defeating "Historic Native Born White American Majority" tag spun above. To me, the rights recognized in the Constitution as to "all men" being created equal and having equal rights is paramount. Others (and I'm looking at you, Groovy Battle for Blair Moutain [sic])seem to think that it is more important to still decry the integration of the US armed forces. God help us.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @anonymous
    iow while whites are engaged in internecine warfare over who is whiter and who hates immigrants more, Jews are eating their lunch and using US military and treasure to sow chaos and create refugees who migrate to Europe and USA.

    these are conservatism's intellectual elite??

    Zeus help us.

    iow while whites are engaged in internecine warfare over who is whiter and who hates immigrants more, Jews are eating their lunch and using US military and treasure to sow chaos and create refugees who migrate to Europe and USA.

    Tried telling that to Joe Webb, but he claims that addressing the racial issue has higher priority over addressing the Zionist issue. It’s based on a short-run/long-run kind of argument. Not sure I agree.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Matthew Richer’s ZionCon references discredits his opinion – the ‘National Review on Line’, a Zionist propaganda forum, and George F. Will, who works for Israeli Hasbara media outlets like Fox News, Newsweek, and The Washington Post.

    The first to cry “wolf” on Will’s ‘shifting sands’ was no other than another Zionist warmonger, Peter Wehner, who took his old buddy to task in his article, “Will’s Loss of Nerve” for the Jewish magazine ‘Commentary”, published on September 1, 2009, by saying: “Mr. Will’s shifting stands on these wars is vertigo-inducing. To understand just how much this is so. Will was not just in favor of the war (Iraq), he was as passionate and articulate champion of it as you could possibly find…..Will applauded bringing instability to the Middle East and countries like Egypt…. Will also predicted ‘a fairly quick end to Iraqi conflict’. However, as the war draged-on, Will came to believe the Iraq war was a grave error….”

    https://rehmat1.com/2009/09/09/iraq-afghanistan-the-zionists-shifting-stands/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Reg Cæsar

    In due course—one of Buckley’s favorite phrases—many conservatives like Phyllis Schlaffly [sic] and Laura Ingraham have begun to wash their hands of National Review.
     
    Other than the late, great reactionary Florence King, whom I suspect was kept around for entertainment and sales value, I don't remember NR ever featuring many female writers at all. They sure could use some now, as it seems that on the "National Question" the ladies are carrying the ball-- Mrs Schlafly, Miss Ingraham, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter...

    Make that “…who…was kept around for entertainment and sales value,…”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Some time before his passing, a coup was mounted at NRO and Buckley himself and others were exiled from the magazine he founded. He had begun to question the wisdom of Mideast wars and had long supported marijuana legalization, mounted critiques that the neocons treated as treason. His columns were no longer carried by the magazne. NRO had become little better than a propaganda outlet

    Read More
    • Replies: @WorkingClass
    "He had begun to question the wisdom of Mideast wars and had long supported marijuana legalization...."

    That's what I remember about Buckley. That and the wonderful way he looked down his nose so that you knew his mighty brain was working. Marijuana legalization? He was insufficiently pompous and stuffy (like George Will) to be a real conservative.

    Being a card carrying member of the white working class, all I can say about the National Review is who cares?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • One is tempted to imitate the style of Prof. Glenn Reynolds: “Yes. Next question.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I admit to a twinge of nostalgia, as I was introduced to modern conservatism in the 1970s by National Review and subscribed to it for a number of years. But it is now sadly clear that it has rendered itself irrelevant to the real needs of Americans, largely because it cannot get past the race shibboleths of the 1960s. It is now the epitomy of “cuckservative.” For me the final straw was the removal of John Derbyshire from his position for writing the truth about blacks in another publication.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ace
    I used to hang on its every word but I think after Buckley's rambling essay on anti-Semitism (or was it carburetor maintenance?) I just lost interest.

    American Spectator the same. I'd wait for it at the mailbox during Whitewatergate but eventually let my subscription lapse. No real reason I can recall. I read somewhere that they'd become open border advocates and emailed them twice to inquire if that was accurate before re-subscribing. They never bothered to reply. Offhand, I still can't say that they are but then it's not hard to know where Vdare stands (he says with understatement). The fact that I can't say about AS is probably the long and the short of it right there. I have a feeling that their gathering financial difficulties probably nixed a more aggressive position in favor of the national question but then not every potential financial contributor is a sellout, so there's that.

    Chronicles has remained the bright jewel it's always been.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Will blindly accepts the Left’s premise that people like Archie Bunker (as if his type were ever accorded the status of human beings) have feelings, beliefs, and rights that must also be accorded respect and tolerance in a just society. I believe that makes Will an intolerant bigot … so who’s calling for his columns to be silenced?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The demise of NR is well deserved, and a long time coming.

    I don’t know who owns it, but I’m sure they must have taken a pretty good hit in subscription cancellations over the past month. And yes, their comments sections are blood-stained.

    I hope Trump become POTUS, and I hope Rich Lowry is lucky to get a gig at a community newspaper after NR becomes a historical footnote, if that. The man is no conservative, and he has real gaul posing as one.

    As for Goldberg, Donaldson, and Ponnoru, they are all self-important dickheads, and not half as smart as they imagine.

    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    Well, I must say, William Buckley did remain loyal to traditional conservative principles when he appointed Rich Lowry as his successor at NR. Supposedly, he is reputed to have said that appointing David Brooks to that position was out of the question in light of the fact that he was Jewish. Upon hearing that report, Brooks is supposed to have been upset. I imagine he must have regretted abandoning his deep felt socialist principles back in his 20's and only getting a free ride on Buckley's expensive yacht in exchange. (According to an obituary in Slate: "Christian piety and anti-communism were Buckley's twin pillars, the former to such an extent that Buckley ruled out David Brooks, his onetime protégé, as a possible editor of National Review on the grounds that Brooks was Jewish. Buckley wasn't willing to sacrifice National Review's identity as a publication whose mission was at least partly theological." http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/obit/2008/02/william_f_buckley_rip.html)
    I find it highly ironic that his treasured icon, "The National Review," was taken over by a Jewish sect, neoconservatism, after he relinquished the reins.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • iow while whites are engaged in internecine warfare over who is whiter and who hates immigrants more, Jews are eating their lunch and using US military and treasure to sow chaos and create refugees who migrate to Europe and USA.

    these are conservatism’s intellectual elite??

    Zeus help us.

    Read More
    • Replies: @geokat62

    iow while whites are engaged in internecine warfare over who is whiter and who hates immigrants more, Jews are eating their lunch and using US military and treasure to sow chaos and create refugees who migrate to Europe and USA.
     
    Tried telling that to Joe Webb, but he claims that addressing the racial issue has higher priority over addressing the Zionist issue. It's based on a short-run/long-run kind of argument. Not sure I agree.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Excellent essay. One note, per your comment:

    …the scathing dissents regularly left in the comments section of National ReviewOnline are any indication.

    Any more, NRO ferociously censors their commentary, as bad as–if not worse than–say, HuffPo or NYT. I.e., if anyone goes snooping around NRO to find this “scathing dissent”, they will come up lacking. All of my polite dissents have been scrubbed from NRO memory (though not from my Disqus account). Just like with any other left-wing publication, the naif who wanders over there will believe everyone agrees with their POV.

    Read More
    • Agree: nickels
    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    I have found that NRO deletes scathing dissents, but usually allows milder stuff....but the person doing it is an ignorant moron. One comment I filed was just a quote from a famous Shelley poem...gone....
    , @boogerbently
    " Just like with any other left-wing publication, the naif who wanders over there will believe everyone agrees with their POV."

    The same goes for Jayman and Razib, here.
    Intellectually dishonest.
    , @Huperetes
    You're exactly right. I am automatically scrubbed from any Disqus posts on NRO, i.e., no dissents allowed at all. I now refuse to even read it. During the mid 1980s I had a paper subscription to NR.
    That was then. This is now.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • What about the old rumors that the CIA subsidized *National Review* in the early days of that mag?

    *National Review* conservativism being the ostensibly respectable alternative to the John Birch Society, which had unacceptably isolationist tendencies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Michael Walsh
    Actually NR was never implicated in that scandal. However, It turns out that Billy Kristols's dad, Irving Kristol, was on the receiving end of CIA subsidies for the London based magazine Encounter, founded by Stephen Spender and Irving Kristol in the mid 50s. Irving Kristol and Spender insisted that they were unaware of the source of the funding. They were told the funds were from an American millionaire funneling the money through a foundation, at least according to their account. However the CIA cultural, anti-communist front group called the Committee for Cultural Freedom was a pet project of James Burnham before he left the CIA to help Buckley found the National Review. Buckley called Burnham "indispensable".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.