I did read Jeffrey Hart's piece, and what struck me about it was
how he allowed himself to be so meanspirited. Note the subhead
reads, "William F. Buckley's last gift to conservatism may have
been his opposition to the Iraq War." That seems to read, "William
F. Buckley's last gift to conservatism was a position I agree
with." Was it, though? A gift to conservatism? A gift?
It's a good time to make the point that a good number of Mr.
Buckley's eulogizers have remarked just how nice he was. But the
compliment is leveled at a trait held at arms length. I can't guess
what Mr. Hart is thinking when he writes:
But to have influence, direct influence of the
kind Buckley wanted, he would have to associate to some extent with
quite a few popular yahoos. I recall, at one of Buckley's Monday
night dinners for National Review senior editors, a sort
of salon, seeing Rush Limbaugh enter the room and squeeze his
considerable bulk into one of Pat Buckley's fragile-looking
18th-century French chairs. Would he reduce this antique to
splinters? What Pat would have done if Limbaugh collapsed the thing
boggles the mind. Revolt against the masses? Limbaugh was the
masses. To have influence, to be a player in practical politics,
Buckley would have to deal with the likes of Limbaugh, a radio
blowhard, a type that has proliferated in the conservative
movement
But I think this line in the next paragraph (regarding Buckley's
association also with liberals) is illuminating:
I think Buckley wanted to show them [the
liberals] that the editors were not fools and show the younger
editors that civility with liberals was
desirable.
This omits a more important lesson. Civility IN GENERAL is
desirable. Describing somebody who's been as helpful to the
movement as this supposedly "fat" "blowhard" (who is currently no
heavier than your average man of years). Why conservatives heap
onto other conservatives in such a way, I don't understand.
Sure, Rush Limbaugh, who reaches drive-time listeners, appeals
to a larger audience than the intellectual establishment was used
to. His style is different than that of Buckley's. Namecalling is
unnecessary, especially when Rush has given no offense.
Speaking of which, I haven't seen much namecalling among the
"younger generation" of conservatives, as you put it. Ross Douthat,
Reihan Salam, Jim Antle, Peter Suderman -- Certainly, no one I
mention among this group is currently
super-famous, but I doubt that when the time comes, they'll heap it
on like this.
As for the momentary pall that's come over conservatism --
you're right, Christopher, it's curious that the older
conservatives are gloomy. The ideas are still salient -- so who
cares about political power? Us young folk got all the time in the
world.
topics:
Iraq, Conservatism
