I Miss Bill Buckley

[subllibrm]

Conservatism’s ugly slide from intellectual curiosity to imbecility

I’m just glad most of the “Firing Line” participants aren’t alive to see it.

www.ocregister.com

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Rush loved him!

 

[subllibrm]

Rush loved him!

I don't know why he wouldn't have.

 

[Ransom]

The article rightly points out that political conservatism doesn't have much of an intellectual foundation anymore. Minds like Buckley, Roger Scruton, Robert Bork, and of course "classic" greats like Edmund Burke are long gone.

It feels to me like we're left with populists and rightists going through the motions but without perhaps a real intellectual foundation underlying why they believe what they do.

 

[subllibrm]

The article rightly points out that political conservatism doesn't have much of an intellectual foundation anymore. Minds like Buckley, Roger Scruton, Robert Bork, and of course "classic" greats like Edmund Burke are long gone.

It feels to me like we're left with populists and rightists going through the motions but without perhaps a real intellectual foundation underlying why they believe what they do.

Foundations are important. The GOP's lack of a discernible foundation is a major issue IMO

 

[abcaines]

Foundations are important. The GOP's lack of a discernible foundation is a major issue IMO

I think it's that way over the entire spectrum, left and right. Talking points and slogans are all anyone wants to hear anymore. Everything is based on how we feel. No one wants to put in the mental effort to think critically. I think Charlie Kirk was the last one who cared enough to defend his position with facts and logic. Sadly, even TPUSA has devolved into a mindless party mode without any real substance.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

I think it's that way over the entire spectrum, left and right. Talking points and slogans are all anyone wants to hear anymore. Everything is based on how we feel. No one wants to put in the mental effort to think critically. I think Charlie Kirk was the last one who cared enough to defend his position with facts and logic. Sadly, even TPUSA has devolved into a mindless party mode without any real substance.

I agree.
There seems to be very few middle ground common sense arguments in the political arena.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

I don't know why he wouldn't have.

True. Buckley championed Rush when he was beginning to gain steam. I think Rush also appeared on Firing Line.

 

[JimKnox]

Conservatism’s ugly slide from intellectual curiosity to imbecility

I’m just glad most of the “Firing Line” participants aren’t alive to see it.

www.ocregister.com

Name dropping William Buckley to legitimize yet ANOTHER hit piece on the current Administration is lame, sopomomoric and predictable.

Now, please excuse me while I figure out how to avoid being inundated with spam from this California rag that forced me to subscribe in order to read that 《|○¤£ article.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Name dropping William Buckley to legitimize yet ANOTHER hit piece on the current Administration is lame, sopomomoric and predictable.

Now, please excuse me while I figure out how to avoid being inundated with spam from this California rag that forced me to subscribe in order to read that 《|○¤£ article.

I didn’t read it.
The title of the article, along with who posted it, told me all I needed to know…

 

[subllibrm]

Open minds.

 

[subllibrm]

Name dropping William Buckley to legitimize yet ANOTHER hit piece on the current Administration is lame, sopomomoric and predictable.

Now, please excuse me while I figure out how to avoid being inundated with spam from this California rag that forced me to subscribe in order to read that 《|○¤£ article.

I didn't subscribe. I have no idea why you had to. .

 

[JimKnox]

I didn't subscribe. I have no idea why you had to. .

Strange days.

 

[abcaines]

Open minds.

Just another way of saying you have holes in your head.

 

[ALAYMAN]

Name dropping William Buckley to legitimize yet ANOTHER hit piece on the current Administration is lame, sopomomoric and predictable.

Now, please excuse me while I figure out how to avoid being inundated with spam from this California rag that forced me to subscribe in order to read that 《|○¤£ article.

This was pretty much my take too. There’s room for legitimate criticism of Trump, but there’s still conservatives that aren’t anti intellectual. It just so happens that the MAGA variety is having its moment in the sun. Political cycles are a well known phenomenon, like the Socialist surge running virulent right now in the left wing of politics and ideology. Lamenting that there’s not a Buckley among the conservative movement is just a cloak for this hatchet job. Once Trump is gone from office their tune will be the same, regardless of any uptick in “intellectualism”.

 

[subllibrm]

So ANTIFA is behind the algae blooms.

 

[subllibrm]

I wonder what Buckley would have thought about good old QAnon. The heart and soul of MAGA intellectuals.

 

[Jo]

The article rightly points out that political conservatism doesn't have much of an intellectual foundation anymore. Minds like Buckley, Roger Scruton, Robert Bork, and of course "classic" greats like Edmund Burke are long gone.

It feels to me like we're left with populists and rightists going through the motions but without perhaps a real intellectual foundation underlying why they believe what they do.

.......as thousands like me, scroll through Facebook and Instagram.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

I wonder what Buckley would have thought about good old QAnon. The heart and soul of MAGA intellectuals.

I wonder if other dogs think Poodles are in some strange cult….

 

[Ransom]

There’s room for legitimate criticism of Trump, but there’s still conservatives that aren’t anti intellectual.

Off the top of my head, it seems to me like Michael Knowles has a pretty solid intellectual foundation behind his arguments. He could be William F. Buckley's spiritual successor.

Also at the Daily Wire, Ben Shapiro is obviously also very well read (as law-school graduates tend to be) but he's the very archetype of the "own the libs" kind of conservative that the article is complaining about. (Also, his books tend to be of the We're Hosed: Why Liberals Are So Stupid popular variety that keeps Regnery Press going.)

Also amongst the law graduates, Ann Coulter has a brilliant mind but uses it more for wit than serious reasoning.

Charlie Kirk, despite his lack of higher education, was clearly quite capable of self-education and it showed in the quality of his arguments. But it's hard to say what sort of philosophy he imbibed. And of course, unfortunately he's one of the ones no longer with us. I appreciate that he spent his time going out and talking to his audience and adversaries, rather than zinging them from the sidelines.