-
My Rahm Reunion
May 16, 2013 | 16 comments
-
The Left Hates Us
May 9, 2013 | 143 comments
-
Such a Dynamic Duo
May 2, 2013 | 49 comments
-
The Continuing Crisis
May 1, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Calvin Coolidge: His Times Are Our Times
April 26, 2013 | 22 comments
The Current Crisis
William F. Buckley, Still at Yale
Celebrating 60 years of God and Man at Yale at the scene of the crime.
WASHINGTON — Last weekend I was given a hint as to how an erroneous idea is born and how it takes on a life of its own. I was at Yale University, as a guest of “The William F. Buckley Jr. Program at Yale.” It is run by a group of extremely winning young Yale students who are all admirably conservative. Bill would approve. They all carried themselves like young ladies and young gentlemen. They were confident of their ideas and amused. One of their goals is to keep the name of William F. Buckley Jr. alive and a thorn in the side of Yale’s smug Liberal establishment. The theme of the weekend was commemorating the 60th anniversary of the publication of God and Man at Yale, written by the very same enfant terrible, William F. Buckley Jr. It nicely complemented the group’s mission of badgering smug Yale.
There were several panels, and Friday evening a speech by Bill’s great friend, Henry Kissinger. It was a moving speech. Henry and Bill maintained a friendship that was exceptional and endured over a lifetime, overcoming every political disagreement. Henry’s opening to China? No problem. Henry’s support of President Gerald Ford over Governor Ronald Reagan? No problem. Henry’s speech and the interaction on the panels went swimmingly, but there was a problem. An erroneous idea was born, and by the end of the evening it threatened to disfigure the memory of Bill Buckley.
The first glimmer of the erroneous idea was launched on a panel in which Bill’s erudition was remarked on. Also his penchant for polysyllabic words was noted. I think his mastery of debate was mentioned, and his sailing, his harpsichord playing, and dozens of other achievements. Then came the mention of the improbable and the erroneous. Someone got it into his head that Bill was “humble.” Humility has a ready market in America today, especially reflections on the humility of a dead giant. The notion took off. Suddenly everyone — or almost everyone — was attesting to Bill’s humility. By the end of the day Bill and his humility were on a par with the humility of Mother Teresa. I was too astonished to protest.
Now Bill had many virtues. In fact, he had no serious vices that I am aware of. Still this great and good man did not include humility in his repertoire of moral assets. In fact, Bill was confident to the point of arrogance. In Bill arrogance became a virtue or at least an asset, when he went up against the likes of Gore Vidal and John Kenneth Galbraith as a talking head or in debate. Both were well armored in an almost impregnable arrogance. It was only Bill’s superior arrogance — allied with wit and intelligence — that penetrated the likes of Vidal or Galbraith, revealing their essential inanity. Today Bill’s conservatism is everywhere in the ascendency. Vidal and Galbraith’s Liberalism is scrambling to survive.
Young conservatives in the 1960s were grateful to Bill for repeatedly getting the best of his opponents. He was fun. He was dashing. And he was right. Young conservatives took his cue and followed him into debating their Liberal peers, on Vietnam, the social issues of the day, and politics. They developed a style and it had little to do with humility. I mean of all the virtues humility is the one that we always found inscrutable. I can understand courage. But humility, what is the point?
When Bill began his career with God and Man at Yale he was in the minority. Then he founded National Review and marched forward. In time he had a whole army marching with him, taking on the Liberals at every turn. Some day the historians will acknowledge that by the time of his death in 2008 Liberalism was on the run and Buckley’s conservatism was chasing it. Bill was having a jolly good time, but it had nothing to do with humility.
About the Author
R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. is the founder and editor in chief of The American Spectator. He is the author of The Death of Liberalism, published by Thomas Nelson Inc. His previous books include the New York Times bestseller Boy Clinton: the Political Biography; The Impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton; The Liberal Crack-Up; The Conservative Crack-Up; Public Nuisances; The Future that Doesn’t Work: Social Democracy’s Failure in Britain; Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to the White House; The Clinton Crack-Up; and After the Hangover: The Conservatives’ Road to Recovery.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (39) | Leave a comment
More Articles by R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.
More Articles From The Current Crisis
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/11/10/william-f-buckley-still-at-yal
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Current Wisdom
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
- Self-Righteous Republic
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Brian Mc| 11.10.11 @ 6:46AM
One of my earliest recollections of Mr. Buckley was a debate I witnessed on T.V. in which he took on all comers philosofizing upon the virtues and merits of left over right. He ended up, amongst monstrous cheers, mopping the floor with them.
I've attempted to youtube the debate but, alas, it is relegated to my remembrances alone-never to be revisited, I'm afraid.
What struck me the most in that moment was Mr. Buckley's confidence in his utterances that were laced with a softness of delivery where I found myself leaning forward on his every word. Might this be the humility referred to in your article, Mr. Tyrrell?
Moe Blotz| 11.10.11 @ 8:29AM
If Mr. FBuckley had been perceived as humble whilst delivering his arguments softly, his opponents in the debate you mention would have mopped the floor with him. Aks anyone who knew William FBuckley as Mr. Tyrrell knew him and you are most likely to get the same opinion concerning the late gentleman's lack of humility.
Alan Brooks| 11.10.11 @ 1:08PM
Mr. Tyrrell (may I call you Bob?),
WFB was as good as they get, he is almost universally admired, however his generation is dead or dying. I honestly think it is over and done with.
you can and undoubtedly will go through the motions, you will squeeze out every last drop in stringing out 'conservatism' to the max, yet youth today are infinitely more interested in Joe Paterno, MMJ cards, Justin and GaGa, than in WFB.
It is FINISHED. by all means, go through the motions-- knock yourselves out if you have to-- But those of you who are conservative in conserving yourselves wont kill yourselves about it.
You can revere who ad what is gone, but not bring them back to life.
Herb| 11.11.11 @ 8:52AM
I had the honor to meet Mr. Buckley in 1973 and still have the autographed book he sent me. And Firing Line was a show where liberals intent on revenge ended up "having their flesh nibbled off by a fair-haired conservative baracuda" as one writer put it. Without ever raising his voice.
But it was in 1987 right after Sen. Gary Hart's "Monkey Business" scandal that the senator appeared on a panel discussion with WFB. When Hartpants made some remark about "feeling ashamed for my country" over the Iran-Contra mess, Buckley replied softly that he wasn't sure Sen. Hart could even feel shame at this point. Steam came out of the senator's ears as he denounced WFB's "intrusion into my personal life!"
Buckley just grinned with his trademark sea of teeth.
Chuck in North Va| 11.10.11 @ 8:35AM
Some day someone should write a book that documents just how bleak things were in the 50's and 60's when brave souls like Bill Buckley stood up to the hegemony of liberalism. Today, conservatives have many sources of information, many spokesmen, talk radio, the web, and some of Bill's arrogance. Bill was there for the cause when it was a lonely time.
Alan Brooks| 11.10.11 @ 5:16PM
"Moses and Jesus were humble [not weak]"
Moses lived to old age; however seeing as how Jesus only made it to 33, we can't say for sure he was strong for his age; strong also means longevity.
Clint| 11.10.11 @ 8:43AM
George Will, "Today, we have a very different kind of foreign policy. It’s called Wilsonian. And the premise of the Bush Doctrine is that America must spread democracy, because our national security depends upon it. And America can spread democracy. It knows how. It can engage in national building. This is conservative or not?"
William F. Buckley, " It’s not at all conservative. It’s anything but conservative. It’s not conservative at all, inasmuch as conservatism doesn’t invite unnecessary challenges. It insists on coming to terms with the world as it is …”
uncle curmudgeon| 11.10.11 @ 9:38AM
Apropos to Mr. Buckley's army chasing the Liberals,
Scout: General, the Yankees are running as fast as they can!
Stonewall Jackson: They never run too fast for me.
Alan Brooks| 11.10.11 @ 1:13PM
"George Will, 'Today, we have a very different kind of foreign policy. It’s called Wilsonian. And the premise of the Bush Doctrine is that America must spread democracy, because our national security depends upon it. And America can spread democracy. It knows how. It can engage in national building. This is conservative or not?' "
Will is no fool, he modified his positions later on when he saw the overreach. Will saw the inflating of the Executive Branch under Dubya-- not even FDR would attempt such a rapid growth in the Executive Branch if he had been alive in the last decade.
Yet one has to admire Dubya's tenacity; Bush was/is as tough as nails-- a Texan down to his cells.
Alan Brooks| 11.10.11 @ 1:49PM
... a mean motor scooter.
Edward Cropper | 11.10.11 @ 10:12AM
I first heard of Bill Buckley from an article in Time magazine a few years after the publication of God & Man At Yale. The article stirred me to get a copy and read it. I was very new to "conservative" thinking and wanted to get hold of anything that could enlighten me. I later subscribed to National Review and ultimately became a Goldwater Conservative. Your article on Bill's humility or lack thereof hit the nail right on the head. It was Bill's arrogance that endeared him to me. Your defining "his" arrogance completely covered it's beauty and the startling impact it had on the liberal world. They couldn't understand it or deal with it. That is what made it so remarkably satisfying to me. Thanks for a great article.
Alan Brooks| 11.10.11 @ 1:17PM
"Stonewall Jackson: They never run too fast for me."
Curmudgeon, Stonewll Jackson died pretty early in the war; he did not live long enough to do much chasing--he went to Heaven.
Or Hell, perhaps, considering what a bad cause the Confederacy was. And a hopeless one.
G. Daniel Harden| 11.10.11 @ 10:48AM
To say that WFB was "humble" would be incorrect for the reasons given. At the same time he was always pleasant and approachable to his lessers, of which I was one at the Sharon Conference in 1960. If I wrote him a note, he never failed to ultimately respond, and seemed appreciative of any communication. No, he wasn't necessarily humble but he was kind and thoughtful. These terms are often confused.
Alan Brooks| 11.10.11 @ 5:10PM
"At the same time he was always pleasant and approachable to his lessers"
That's part of what made him HUMBLE.
Great guy, but let's not slobber over WFB like Liberace or Rock Hudson drooling over Shaun Cassidy!
Purpleguy| 11.10.11 @ 10:56AM
Why has this site not addressed the overwhelming rejection of the GOP on Tuesday? Ohio, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Arizona to name a few rejected many initiatives and elected Democrats to Red State positions ... Could this be the harbinger of a Blue Wave in 2012? Hmmmm?
The Big E| 11.10.11 @ 12:08PM
Mississippi?
The State which replaced a Republican Governor with another Republican?
The State which elected a GOP majority in both houses of the legislature FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE RECONSTRUCTION?
If that's a rejection of the GOP then I hope there are many more such rejections to come.
Alan Brooks| 11.10.11 @ 5:11PM
Conservatism is alive--
but not in America.
Clint| 11.10.11 @ 11:19AM
" Thursday, November 10, 2011
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows that 22% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty percent (40%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -18 "
Purpleguy| 11.10.11 @ 11:40AM
A poll vs. actual election results? Hmmm, seems someone (Clint) is delusional... polls mean very little, have you not figured that out. Especially when you have actual election results to cry over.... sorry but the GOP got walloped good on Tuesday. For real, ya.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 11.10.11 @ 11:50AM
reaching...
RCV| 11.10.11 @ 1:23PM
To paraphrase Churchill, WFB was not humble and he had a lot not to be humble about.
Alan Brooks| 11.10.11 @ 1:48PM
No, he was a good guy; but today it is over and done with. Today 'conservatism' is a nostalgia club.
Alan Brooks| 11.10.11 @ 4:23PM
Oh I see, you are praising him, RCV. I misread it as "he was humble and he had a lot to be humble about"
-- the double negative threw me off. But conservatism is dead, in fact it died in the '70s, conservatism was on life-support in the '80s.
RCV| 11.10.11 @ 4:25PM
Bill Buckley was a class guy. Intelligent, witty and full of integrity. I miss having him on the national stage.
Alan Brooks| 11.10.11 @ 5:07PM
Nah, WFB is the past. Becoming long in the tooth, I'm very sentimental now, but it doesn't bring back our dearly departed.
'Nuff said, bury the dead.' WFB has been gone since around Feb. 2008, time to let him RIP.
Willy| 11.10.11 @ 1:55PM
Describing WFB as humble is further evidence that we are fast becoming a nation of wussies. Since when do greatness and humility necessarily go together?
Alan Brooks| 11.10.11 @ 4:20PM
Jesus Christ.
TrueBlue| 11.10.11 @ 5:25PM
Truth, but it isn't necessary to be humble in order to be great. Humility paired with greatness tends to be admired as greater still.
Alan Brooks| 11.10.11 @ 6:05PM
Right, yet, again, let's not slobber over WFB like Liberace or Rock Hudson drooling over Shawn Cassidy.
Vern Crisler| 11.10.11 @ 2:55PM
I think you guys are confusing humility with weakness. Moses and Jesus were humble, after all, but let lightning strike you if you say they were weak.
Let's not confuse confidence with arrogance. Bill had the natural confidence of someone of upper class breeding, upper class money, terrific vocal patterns, and strong beliefs, religious, economic, and political. That may be perceived as arrogance to some, but it was all perfectly normal and natural to Bill.
Arrogant people are SOBs who are only interested in themselves -- a far cry from WFB from what I've read and and heard.
Alan Brooks| 11.10.11 @ 5:00PM
"Arrogant people are SOBs who are only interested in themselves"
But since capitaism is based on self-interest, everyone, save for Jesus Hisself, is implicated.
Vern Crisler | 11.10.11 @ 6:19PM
Capitalist self-interest is not the same as egotistical self-regard. Only when the capitalist violates the rule of law does his economic self-interest become subject to moral disapprobation.
Jesus himself said we should love others as we love ourselves. IOW our other-interest (charity) should be as natural and instinctive as our self-interest (love of one's-self).
Alan Brooks| 11.10.11 @ 5:02PM
"capitaism"
Capitalism. Capitalism IS self-interest, though it is very successful.
PattyMor| 11.10.11 @ 5:34PM
he had a whole army marching with him, taking on the Liberals at every turn. I think this is great. If you can find some of this "army" could you get them into the Republican leadership for a change so they can oppose liberal (and unconstitutional) policies and programs?
POST American| 11.11.11 @ 5:59AM
---------------------BOTTOM LINE----------------------
Buckley was surely a disinctive figure
for his time. A fine writer
and interviewer, in spite of affectations.
We have to admit though, as the demoliton,
'by design', of the American economy,
the destruction of American sovereignty
proceeds ---we don't find ourselves sifting
through any of Buckley's work.
What is troubling in retrospect, was his
virtual SILENCE on the issue of the, then
well underway, CFR-RIIA Globalist RED
China sellout and TREASON OP.
Can anyone remember Buckley ever
saying much of anything on the subject?
Surely, he well knew what was going on.
"America better watch it or in
a couple of decades we're going to
be a minstrel show for RED China."
-GORE VIDAL
1985
------------------And so it's come to pass. . .
josephine| 11.11.11 @ 10:47PM
I was a faithful subscriber to WFB's NR until he fired Joe Sobran. Unforgivable.
Russell| 11.12.11 @ 4:09AM
As my acquaintance with Bill Buckley and John Galbraith antedated TAS's foundation, it saddens me to see RET descend into impudence in averring while they "were well armored in an almost impregnable arrogance. It was only Bill's superior arrogance -- allied with wit and intelligence -- that penetrated the likes of Vidal or Galbraith, revealing their essential inanity."
Buckley never suffered inanity lightly, yet he and Galbraith were a fast friends when I was host to Bill at Harvard and his guest on Firing Line in the 70's and 80's and remained so to the end of their lives , exchanging visits here and in Switzerland.
Since National Review has fallen captive to a political ascendency with antecedents farther to the left than a fish fork that has so purged it of Buckley's original crew that even his son has abandoned ship, it is fatuous to suggest : " Today Bill's conservatism is everywhere in the ascendency."
Derek Tyler| 11.13.11 @ 2:14AM
I met WFB in Miami Beach and at NR HQ in NYC in the mid to late eighties. I met Joe Sobran the time in NY.
Bill described the virtue of being self assured versus a "snob" which he described as a facade.
The idea that Bill or his legacy is washed up is just stupid. So many genuinely conservative pundits were nurtured by his writings and debate, etc. Even some phony conservatives claim to be influenced by him.
When Krauthammer used the "Buckley Rule" to justify backing Mike Castle in Delaware over Christine O'Donnell, that was misappropriating "the rule" which is what I thought Bob was going to kvetch about instead of "humility". Buckley backed Joe Lieberman a Democrat over Lowell Weicker in a Connecticut Senate race in the late eighties or early nineties. So he was for principle over party.
wedding dresses | 11.14.11 @ 3:09AM
Buckley never suffered inanity lightly, yet he and Galbraith were a fast friends when I was host to Bill at Harvard and his guest on Firing Line in the 70's and 80's and remained so to the end of their lives , exchanging visits here and in Switzerland.