威廉·F·巴克利 前保守派专家， 庆祝他的 81^st今天（24 月 XNUMX 日）生日。去年秋天，他的八十岁生日为自由派记者提供了一个赞扬某人的机会，据报道， “华盛顿邮报” 专栏作家 E.J.迪翁将右翼从极端主义中拯救出来。根据迪翁（巴克利：右翼的实用知识分子 “华盛顿邮报”，11年2005月17日，AXNUMX），几天后得到回应 通过戈德堡变体 在国家侦察局（黄金岁月，27年2005月XNUMX日），巴克利在他的整个职业生涯中做出了英勇的努力 “去掉右边的翼形螺母。” 事实上，根据迪翁的说法，巴克利成为 “的 祸害 反犹太主义曾经占据了相当一部分右翼人士的地位。他还抨击了约翰·伯奇协会的奇怪阴谋论。 “

但是，与这篇自吹自擂的文章相反，巴克利将他年轻时的大部分怨气发泄到了穆雷·罗斯巴德身上， 罗纳德·哈莫伊，以及其他主要是犹太自由主义者。这些数字与巴克利的观点不一致 明确的意愿 支持旨在继续冷战的不断发展的公共行政。

尽管在 1950 世纪 XNUMX 年代，巴克利发起了一场反共、充满活力的国际主义保守运动，但他的论战几乎没有触及后来的新闻恶魔，例如 种族主义 和 反犹太主义。长期贡献者 国家评论，谁是巴克利婚礼派对的一部分， 雷维洛·奥利弗, 自称是纳粹同情者和狂热的反犹分子。

国家评论 广泛阅读的攻击 约翰·伯奇协会（19年1965月XNUMX日）强调协会的 孤立主义 以及对越南战争的疑虑。巴克利和他的圈子将伯奇家族逐出教会，因为他们在冷战时期的干预主义不够充分，其次是因为他们对共产主义阴谋家的执着。 （尽管奥利弗是成员，但 JBS 本身从未采取反犹太主义立场。）

在研究一本关于保守派运动的书（称为 毫无根据的保守主义：理解美国的权利，将于 2007 年初）我惊讶地发现巴克利目前作为敏感温和派的声誉之间存在鸿沟，巴克利将知识分子右派从 “极端分子” 和他的真实， 低于PC 记录为争议者。这张唱片可以说是经过整容手术的。巴克利来自各个政治派别的记者同事们都接受了这项正在进行的工作，甚至进行了合作。

但考虑到巴克利在 1961 年发表的关于犹太人复仇精神促使审判纳粹罪犯阿尔伯特·艾希曼的声明，他的 一次爆炸 国家评论 反对民权运动， 以及他发表的对后来的新保守主义活神的谩骂 马丁·路德·金，很难想象经过改造的巴克利是唯一存在的。 [Vdare.com注意： 巴克利 1950 世纪 XNUMX 年代以来的所有著作均可在以下网址查阅： 希尔斯代尔学院，但显然不可能链接到单个文件。您可以搜索，E.G., 马丁·路德的新庄园 1964 年 12 月 22 日]

我个人 可以沉迷 巴克利的一些年轻评论。但我们必须问，为什么他在左翼自由主义者中表现得如此出色。为什么他们不鼓起勇气拿出他过去不检点行为的大量档案呢？难道巴克利成为了两者之间的桥梁？ 战后右派 及其新保守主义领导的继任运动？

确实，这个词 “桥” 对于巴克利在与新秩序合作中所扮演的角色来说，这种描述可能过于温和。毕竟他至少花了三十年的时间 容纳 他在纽约和华盛顿的熟人，显然使他得到了非右翼记者的社会认可。无论 开除员工 或者拒绝对移民问题不够敏感的九十年代的贡献者，谴责在某些社会和其他试金石问题上反应不够迅速的老朋友，特别是当这些变化符合巴克利的网络目的时，或者暗中警告新当选的人 里根总统 （根据马克·格尔森的 新保守主义愿景）反对任命巴克利的老朋友、南方保守派文学评论家 我布拉德福德， 对于 NEH 的董事职务，巴克利可以指望顺其自然。

同样明显的是，巴克利作为那些对他不再有任何用处的人的朋友的价值从不可靠到极其糟糕。

正是由于这种不诚实的记录，我很困惑地看到那些应该更了解情况的人在比尔与他精心挑选的继任者之间不断发展的争吵中给予比尔无罪推定。 国家评论。今年早些时候，巴克利和他的追随者之间爆发了这场争吵，这些追随者以 NR 主编辑 里奇·洛瑞（Rich Lowry），关于美国占领伊拉克的功绩。 24 年 2006 月 XNUMX 日，巴克利在 NRO 这 “美国在伊拉克的目标失败了。” 于是，他曾经喜爱的助手们就让他拥有了它 打破了队伍 布什总统 和布什的新保守主义顾问。

To my utter surprise, some of those whom Buckley had slighted or wronged over the years lined up against his detractors. Led by 乔·索伯兰 和 美国保守党 these men of the right expressed sympathy for the elderly sage, who had 遭遇 at the hands of his ungrateful disciples.

But Buckley’s apparent change of heart has not caused him to reconsider his relations with the 旧右, whose members he has generally ignored or defamed. Nor has he started to hang out with the anti-war Right, which represents that part of the Right that had opposed the war in Iraq even before Buckley had arrived at his second thoughts about Bush’s “failure.”

My first reaction to this imbroglio was to root for the adolescents at NR against the fool who had put them in power. My next response was to wonder what advantage Buckley might have perceived for changing his position on the war. Over the years he has responded to social interest; and one is led to wonder: what exactly is he going after by lamenting the war in Iraq?

立即订购

Perhaps Buckley is tilting toward the Left, even at this late date in his career, for social reasons. Perhaps like 乔治·威尔， who combines sneers at patriotic immigration reformers with complaints against the war, Buckley may be trying to broaden his public appeal, which might have shrunk from his many years of public exposure.

The fact that Buckley bolted shortly before his eightieth birthday celebration last November, a gala event that took place at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, may lend plausibility to my surmise. The soon-to-be octogenarian might have been trying to show an independent spirit, one that incidentally could not have displeased the journalistic Left. Such a move would not have kept his movement conservative friends from attending his bash but it would have appealed to those on the left who might have considered him over the hill. Buckley is apparently back doing what Dionne likes best about him:郊游 the extremists and enthusiasts in his movement.

Despite these unkind thoughts, I do hope that Buckley has changed his mind about the course that his career has taken since the 1970s. While I cannot claim to feel the personal fondness for him exhibited by my friend Joe Sobran, years after Buckley had betrayed his onetime protégé, I would like to think of my boyhood hero in a more positive way than I have been able to do in the last several decades.

As I enter my sixty-fifth year, I can recall a time when I respected Buckley as a daring polemicist. It is painful to think that I may have misjudged him, as when I met him in the company of Joe, at 希尔斯代尔学院 in 1974, and told him with utter sincerity that he was “my favorite living writer.” It would be nice to believe that there was at least some small basis for what turned out to be a hyperbolic assessment.

And though Buckley strayed from the straight and narrow, I do still hope that he is finding his way back to being something more than a neocon echo given in convoluted syntax. Despite his prolonged lapses, I want to believe there may still be something left in this once-sparkling wit—something more that Dionne praised in Buckley: the “moderate conservative,” also known as the leader of a toothless opposition.

保罗·格特弗里德 是宾夕法尼亚州伊丽莎白敦学院的人文教授。 他是的作者 自由主义之后, 多元文化主义与罪恶政治 和 马克思主义的奇怪死亡.