Christopher Buckley’s Fresh Hell

Despite my slow start, I am absolutely delighted to be a guest in the Faculty Lounge. Many thanks to Dan for inviting me.

Christopher Buckley, son of William F. Buckley, Jr., caught hell after endorsing Sen. Barack Obama this past week. He did so on the pages of The Daily Beast, not in his column at the National Review. Nonetheless, the National Review was flooded with mail. As Buckley describes the effluvia, “the only thing the Right can’t quite decide is whether I should be boiled in oil or just put up against the wall and shot. Lethal injection would be too painless.” So far, Buckley notes that he has yet to receive an email to top one of the 12,000 negative emails his colleague Kathleen Parker received after writing that Gov. Sarah Palin was an embarrassment. That email stated “that Kathleen’s mother ought to have aborted her and tossed the fetus into a dumpster.” Buckley added:

[I]t’s pretty darned angry out there in Right Wing Land. One editor at National Review—a friend of 30 years—emailed me that he thought my opinions “cretinous.” One thoughtful correspondent, who feels that I have “betrayed”—the b-word has been much used in all this—my father and the conservative movement generally, said he plans to devote the rest of his life to getting people to cancel their subscriptions to National Review. But there was one bright spot: To those who wrote me to demand, “Cancel my subscription,” I was able to quote the title of my father’s last book, a delicious compendium of his NR “Notes and Asides”: Cancel Your Own Goddam Subscription.

As a consequence of the fury, he was forced to resign his position with the magazine his father founded. Buckley thinks that his decision to endorse Obama is consistent with his father’s approach to the conservative movement, which was both rigorous and unpredictable. “My father was also unpredictable, which tends to keep things fresh and lively and on-their-feet.” As I have written elsewhere, William Buckley suggested that a younger version of himself would not be so enthusiastic about the way that market discourse dominates how we think about the world. A younger Buckley very well might have done something far more rebellious than Christopher has done in endorsing Obama. Indeed, a younger Buckley might have been a socialist in the present political economy.

The forced separation of Buckley from the National Review suggests how deep the divide is between those across the political spectrum who are committed to reasoned argument, open to fresh ideas, and value intelligent solutions to common problems and those who substitute acrimonious aspersion for political substance. No doubt fundamental disagreements exist among different political participants over basic principles such as the role of government in public and private life, but these disagreements can only become truly visible through rational political discourse, not through rhetorical tactics that try to tar opponents as un-American friends of terrorists. Although he does not regret his separation from the National Review, Buckley states, “I will admit to a certain sadness that an act of publishing a reasoned argument for the opposition should result in acrimony and disavowal.”

Comments

[Michelle]

In general, many conservatives are intelligently angry, meaning that they write letters, call radio shows, boycott Oprah, and engage in various activities that support their agendas. I have learned that many conservatives believe the left-wing and various groups that support the left, are just as angry. This is just not true. This is why, even though there are more Democrats than Republicans in America, Republicans remain powerful. Glenn Beck, Bill O'reilly, and Sean Hannity all have shows on major networks, in spite of their claims of a vast left-wing media. I do not see many liberal hosts getting their own prime time cable news shows.

I am not surprised at the conservative response to Buckley's endorsement. It is just disappointing that people would prefer a biased idealogue over an objective writer.

Yet, it is also ashamed that Joe the Plumber is getting such negative publicity, simply because he questioned Obama's health care plan. If we have to support whoever is affiliated with our party, why even have debates? If we cannot hold our candidates accountable by questioning their positions and policies, why even feign concern about our future?

[BD]

"I have learned that many conservatives believe the left-wing and various groups that support the left, are just as angry."

Haven't you ever read the comments section of the Daily Kos?