![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
63.134.129.109 changed the description of National Review from "conservative" to " neoconservative". National Review is more usually considered a pure conservative publication, and many of its writers and editors (such as Jonah Goldberg) would vehemently deny being "neoconservative". Therefore I am reverting this change. — DLJessup 01:52, 2004 Dec 2 (UTC)
I have remarked this page as npov penis (GreatWhiteEric eliminated the npov), at least until the neoconservative epithet is thoroughly debunked. — DLJessup 04:03, 2004 Dec 12 (UTC)
The following section is in need of further context - Buckley changed his views since this editorial:
"Also in 1957, Buckley came out strongly in support of the segregationist South, writing "The central question that emerges…is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas where it does not predominate numerically? The sobering answer is Yes—the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race.” in the August 24, 1957 edition of the National Review." Bsurette ( talk) 18:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Phil179, here's something to think about: it is pretty much undisputed that National Review is conservative. It is arguable whether NR is neoconservative, partially because neoconservative is a term that is both vague and politically charged. (For certain sections of the conservative movement, it is a perjorative phrase.) Therefore, referring to NR as neoconservative is inherently less neutral than referring to it as simply conservative. — DLJessup 14:34, 2004 Dec 13 (UTC)
"…we have to accept Big Government for the duration – for neither an offensive nor defensive war can be waged given our present government skills, except through the instrument of a totalitarian bureaucracy within our shores…
And if they deem Soviet power a menace to our freedom (as I happen to), they will have to support large armies and air forces, atomic energy, central intelligence, war production boards, and the attendant of centralization of power in Washington – Even with Truman at the reins of it all."
Here we have neoconservatism in a nutshell: Militarism, centralization, big government. Various authors, Murray N. Rothbard and Justin Raimondo among them, have identified National Review's birth as the birth of neoconservatism, i.e., the death of the anti-interventionist Old Right. Buckley was most definitely a neoconservative, as his magazine. Josh ( talk) 11:13, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Firing Line was on the air for over 33 years and is the primary reason anybody outside of New York ever heard of Buckley. Somebody ought to try to work it in somewhere. And why some debate about a TV movie has been singled out for mention in the article is not obvious. Squib 22:48, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
I think this article should mention WFB's struggle with the John Birch society and other far-right anti-semitic groups. Many commentators regard his effort to establish a conservative movement which was cleary separate from (and indeed hostile to) the far right as a crucial step in American politics. See, for example, [3], [4] and this E. J. Dionne column from Oct 2005. (See also William F. Buckley, Jr.: Pied Piper for the Establishment, ISBN 1881919064, in which a Bircher claims that WFB is/was secretly working to destroy American conservatism on behalf of the liberal establishment.)
BTW, Dionne's column should probably go in the external links.
Chris Chittleborough 08:08, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
I personally do not like the usage of the term "far-right" because this can be interpreted to mean that the John Birch Society, et al, were somehow more conservative than Mr. Buckley. Perhaps using the term "radical" "extremist" or simply "anti-semitic" would be more accurate. -- NebraskaDawg ( talk) 22:41, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Not a fan of the JBS, personally, but do you have proof that they are "anti-Semitic?" Josh ( talk) 11:04, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Nothing in the criticism section is referenced; it needs to be! Joey1898 23:37, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
This bizarre section can only be based on a ridiculous caricature of Conservatives: "Buckley came late to the English language, not learning it until he was seven (his first language was Spanish, learned in Mexico and his second French, learned in Paris). This would hardly endear him to many conservatives and thus is not emphasized by his supporters." Joey1898 23:59, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
This page is dripping with POV.- Jersey Devil 09:52, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
While I am sure that Mr. Buckley has spoken Spanish and French fluently from a young age, I find it hard to believe that his parents did not speak to him in English for the first seven years of his life. Can someone please clarify this for me?
I'd like to see a citation for the statement that says his interviewing methods were "nonconfrontational." Granted I've only seen one clip of "Firing Line," but it was a clip in which he debated Noam Chomsky, and Buckley was certainly "confrontational," and definitely insulting.
I've been searching for what Buckley says to Chomsky verbatim but cannot find it. Interesting you mention O'Reilly, who often threatens those he interviews with physical violence, because Buckley tells Chomsky (I quote loosely) "Good, because if you did I'd smash you in your face." And he certainly cut off Chomsky midsentence in order to form the debate, which I'd say isn't exactly polite. He's an early O'Reilly, not a more polite O'Reilly.
Another (non)confrontational Buckley quotation, aimed at Gore Vidal: "'Now, listen you queer, stop calling me a crypto-Nazi or I’ll sock you in the goddamn face.' This is according to several sources, including Esquire Magazine at the time" (from Wikipedia's entry on crypto-facism). Buckley's got the hatred and the threat of physical violence thing down pretty well, but he still gets a "nonconfrontational" label in the Wiki-text. I wish that could be deleted. But maybe it's correct; maybe hatred of gays and violence weren't frowned upon by the 1960s-era "Firing Line" audience. ...
Suggested quotation: 'everyone detected with AIDs should be tattooed in the upper forearm to protect common needle-users, and on the buttocks, to prevent the victimization of other homosexuals' - New York Times op-ed, 1985. Quoted in Harry Collins and Trevor Pinch's The Golem At Large, page 127
Should not some attention be paid to Buckley's pivotal role in the creation of the modern conservative movement, as documented in Rick Perlstein's Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus? Dvd Avins 21:07, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Can someone find the source of Buckley's famous line about shunning governance by the Harvard faculty? Because this point of view can be easily caricatured, it would be useful to see it in the orginal context.
I consider myself generally familiar with politics and with political opinionists and I have never before seen Buckley referred to as "WFB" in a public forum. I consider it very odd that this nickname appears right along with his name at this opening of the article. I believe it's just not well-known enough to be given such a prominent position. If "WFB" is used in some contexts, then it should be mentioned as trivia. Acsenray 20:17, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
"It was rumored, in 1946, that the hangman in Nuremberg adjusted the nooses of some of the condemned to magnify the pain of suffocation. Such sadism was not called for then and is not called for now. But if fornication is wrong, there is no denying that it can bring pleasure. The death of Saddam Hussein at rope's end brings a pleasure that is undeniable, and absolutely chaste in its provenance."
This quote is brand new, from this morning's addition of National Review Online. Does everyone else think that this belongs with such notables as the Boston phone book? In my opinion, only time can make a quote especially noteworthy... V. Joe 04:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
There is a reference in the article to a day school in "London, Connecticut." Should this be New London?
65.116.31.254 14:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Correct. There is no London, Connecticut.... —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
DraperMan (
talk •
contribs)
18:52, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Please could we be told what St John's Beaumont (sic) was or is?
It's a Catholic private school in England. -- Ben 16:26, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Buckley is sometimes mentioned as a possible member of various conspiracies that are said to want to take over the world. I don't think it's true, myself. But could it be mentioned in the article? Steve Dufour 17:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Buckley's bibliography needs to be updated. He is the author of many more books than listed here.
Is Buckley really based in New York and Stamford, CT? I thought it was Sharon, CT not Stamford. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.65.127.180 ( talk) 20:38, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Image:Milesgoneby.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 16:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
He has nothing to do with the holocaust, or the Israel-Palestine conflict, I don't see why hi article is included on wikipedia. Maybe you could put something in about the 10 Billion Jews that died in the holocaust, if you find the right context. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.200.246.252 ( talk) 00:04, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I have found a public domain photo of Buckley courtesy the US Military and inserted it in the infobox. I have also added three photos to the article, so I hope that the photo request was taken care of. Thanks, Happyme22 ( talk) 02:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
This week various television shows & websites have indicated these connections.
Thank You,
[[ hopiakuta Please do sign your signature on your message. ~~ Thank You. -]] 01:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I added a section on controversies with conservatives only to have it undone within about two seconds by some asshat moderator saying whether or not it was notable. Buckley firing his own editor in chief? PROBABLY NOTABLE. Prominent conservative intellectuals claiming that Buckley had lost his way, saying he had ruined the movement he claims to have started because his magazine sold out on the Iraq War, probably the most talked about political issue of the year? PROBABLY NOTABLE. having to defend the OBVIOUS from people who watch these pages and raise the opportunity cost to make serious contributions to wikipedia are a real hassle and completely ridiculous. 216.157.212.250 ( talk) 05:33, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
It appears - from the references already provided in this article - that this is not really a controversy, even though there have been several edits on the subject.
The original feud appears to have ended with Vidal paying WFB's COURT costs. This is not the same as "legal fees," which was pointed out in an editorial note which has since been removed. (I am not commenting on that edit, just noting it here. The point is, that "court costs" are not the same as "legal fees.")
However, it appears that, at a later date, Esquire published the original essay that had gotten them in the soup the first time, and WFB's attorneys contacted them AGAIN, and they agreed - the second time - to pay his LEGAL FEES associated with forcing them to stop doing what they'd already agreed not to do decades earlier.
So, from my read of the references, the first time, Vidal paid WFB's COURT COSTS, and the second time, Esquire magazine paid his LEGAL FEES.
Right?
Isaacsf ( talk) 20:51, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
The reference to Buckley renouncing racism comes pretty much verbatum from a blogpost. Does anyone know of a better citation for this?
66.179.113.135 ( talk) 20:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
This article says his father's family was Irish and Catholic. I never heard him described as of Irish origin. I seem to remember reading his book on his Catholic faith in which Buckley discussed his family's long tradition among English Catholics. At the very least, it suggests his family were Scots and Catholic.-- Parkwells ( talk) 19:27, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone have any firm citation(s) for childhood in South America / Texas / Europe / Mars? He's said to have learned English later in his childhood...where did he live that this was the case? Frank | talk 21:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
In the intro of his book "Nearer Thy God" he explains that he was born in Mexico City and lived there until the age of 4 (his first language was Spanish). He was then sent to live in Paris, (his second language was French). He didn't start using English as his primary languagae until the age of 6, when he was sent to live at a boarding school in England. I remember in a Q&A session someone asked him why he spoke with an accent --- he replied testily (basically explaining the chronology above) and then asking, "how else should I talk?"
Did Wm. Buckley invent an economic term or did he simply discuss it? The term I'm referring to describes the choices that consumers make when they pay $100 for a dog's haircut as opposed to giving $100 to charity.
Some would find fault with the former choice while others would say that that is what happens in a free market.
Eclecticeducation (
talk)
01:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)eclecticeducation 08-02-2008
I have heard that wikipedia discourages "trivia" sections in their articles, but I recently read an interesting fact about WFB that I thought might be appropriate for the article. In 1987, as detailed in a The New York Times Magazine article, WFB wrote about riding in a specialized submarine to view the wreckage of the Titanic. While this may be trivia, it is damn interesting trivia.
Lborchardt ( talk) 08:42, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I was reading this article (William F. Buckley Jr.) and it states that near the end of his life he supported the surge and the "[ensuing military success.']" I think that this phrase should be edited because by no means has the surge been given time to be evaluated, and there are many who argue that the surge was not the causal factor in the reduction of violence in Iraqi cities but rather ethnic cleansing (the information I have seen seems to suggest this). With that in mind I again suggest that this particular phrase in this article be amended until further notice. 141.211.221.137 ( talk) 22:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
I entered this edition into the article because the section did not fully communicate Mr. Buckley's position on the surge. The current status of the section seems to likewise fail. I am no military expert, but Mr. Buckley, based on certain manifest successes of the surge, thought it worthy of continuation. The section as it now stands does not reflect that reality. It was so reported in the WFB Memorial issue of National Review (3/24/08). With that in mind I suggest that some reflection to his later support of the surge be included to reflect biographical accuracy. -- NebraskaDawg ( talk) 22:15, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
The article states: "Academy Award winner Dustin Hoffman modeled the voice of his character after Buckley's when he played the title role in the Robin Williams feature, Hook."
The article linked to for this trivia is rather ambiguous about this point at best. It states: "As this New Age revision goes, the middle-aged Peter (renamed Peter Banning) goes up against a Captain Hook played by Mr. Hoffman with a kind of campy villainy that owes much to William F. Buckley Jr." In the article it seems that any similarity to WFB exists in the mind of the reviewer, not in Hoffman's acting approach. Lborchardt ( talk) 06:41, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I have a colleague who is planning to record a spoken version of this article, but doesn't know how to pronounce "Aldyen". Any pointers? Thanks. howcheng { chat} 03:30, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
"Buckley's primary intellectual achievement was to fuse traditional American political conservatism with laissez-faire and anti-communism, laying the groundwork for the modern American conservatism of U.S. presidential candidate Barry Goldwater and President Ronald Reagan."
Buckley called for a "totalitarian bureaucracy within our shores" (his exact words). Hardly a definition of "laissez faire" by any stretch of the imagination. Josh ( talk) 10:46, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Also, why is he in the category "American Libertarians?" Josh ( talk) 03:19, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Once the context of his quote regarding the totalitairan bureaucracy (fighting Communisism) and the entire body of work from his career is examined, his laissez faire and libertarian leanings become manifest. His brand of conservatism was heavily influenced by libertarianism; partly producing the fusionism referenced in the article.-- NebraskaDawg ( talk) 03:14, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Context is irrelevant. No one can both call for a "totalitarian bureaucracy" and be a libertarian at the same time. The context doesn't matter. No libertarian of any variety would call for centralization of all power in the nation's capital, totalitarian bureaucracy, etc. Also, Buckley's extreme hawkishness kind of contradicts the non-aggression principle, which most libertarians subscribe to. Just because he calls himself a libertarian doesn't make him one. After all, Hitler called himself an "arch-democrat," but no one in his right mind would call Hitler a democrat, let alone an "arch-" one. Josh ( talk) 09:00, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Context absolutely matters. He viewed Communism to be the greatest foreign threat to our security at the time (especially at the time the quote you referenced was made). As I said earlier, when the context of his career is juxtaposed to this one quote you are noting, his political philosophy is obvious. He, along with Meyer, fused traditional conservative principles with libertarian principles to produce Modern American Conservatism; which unfortunately was abandoned by the Republican Party during the Bush Administration. Using one quote of WFB is not sufficient ground to bring Hitler's "democrat" values in the conversation.-- NebraskaDawg ( talk) 22:28, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
All I'm saying is that calling yourself something doesn't make it so. Josh ( talk) 09:33, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
That is indeed true, but likewise, taking one quote over the course of someone's career does not constitute evidence of the individual's worldview, particularly when context is not considered or acknowledged. Regardless of our respective points of view on this question, we cannot forget that life in the United States in the 1950s was a far cry from what it is today. No one knew with certainty that the Sovite Union would when it did. Consequently, any modern American Conservative (traditionalism + libertarianism + anti-communism) would fear that their laissez-faire perspective would be worthless if the freedom enjoyed in the United States fell to the tyranny of communism. WFB also recanted his support for the Vietnam Conflict, with the benefit of retrospection. -- NebraskaDawg ( talk) 18:44, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Suggested in his essay "Algeria Warned Us" published in National Review that Alisdair Horne's book A Savage War of Peace, which advocated the use of torture against the Arabs, was right and that the insurrectionists in Iraq cannot be defeated by any means that we would consent to use. http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/wfb200410261311.asp
If there are doubts about Buckleys advocacy of torture, the interested reader should consult Horne's book which contains a section entitled "How Effective Was Torture?" Horne cites Edward Behr as saying that without torture the FLN Terrorist Network would never have been defeated and the Battle of Algiers could not have been won. rumjal 01:37, 5 February 2009 (UTC). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rumjal ( talk • contribs)
I have edited this section to ensure clarification on WFB's opinions. While Christopher Buckley has advocated a more libertarian philosophy, as was demonstrated in his Chris Matthews' interview, he did not always agree with his father, particularly on the abortion issue. This disagreement was observable during a joint appearance at the Goldwater Institute in 2004; the video is available on YouTube. Buckley did, however, advocate drug legalization or decriminalization. So I have edited the section to read "socially Conservative/Libertarian or libertarian-leaning." I also clarified his position on the Iraq Surge and provided a National Review reference link.-- NebraskaDawg ( talk) 21:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Could someone knowledgeable about his biography please edit the section on his early life? Perhaps in the interest of brevity, it omits essential details that make it difficult to follow.
1. We see he is born in "New York City" but his next location is moving "from Mexico". Presumably he moved "to Mexico" at some point, but when? Was his family living in Mexico when he was born, and just in New York traveling?
2. We see he moves with his family from Mexico to Sharon, Connecticut, and then he starts school in Paris. Did his family move to Paris? Or was he only there to go to school? The he "received his first formal training in English at a day school in London" at "age seven." Also, this seems to (possibly) say that his family lived in New York, Mexico, Connecticut, France, and London all before the age of 7 or so. Doesn't that amount of moving seem unusual enough to warrant a note of explanation?
3. It's not clear what he and his family are doing before and during the early years of World War 2, or where they are. Shortly before the war he is at day school in England (presumably day school means that he is with his family, although he could be living with another family). Then his family takes in Alistair Horne as a "war evacuee" - but this could be a domestic evacuee (from London to the English countryside), or presumably an evacuee from England to the USA. Then he graduates from high school in New York, but again it's not mentioned that his family ever moved to New York, so it's not clear whether he is with them or not.
4. His early language learning is also not clear. Late in the article, it explains that his first language was Spanish, learned in Mexico, and his second French, learned in Paris. In the section on his early life, we learn, "by age seven, he received his first formal training in English at a day school in London." But was this his first significant exposure to English? Or just his first schooling? What did the family speak at home, considering that both parents were American, and neither is obviously a native Spanish or French speaker? In general this topic doesn't make much sense: a couple years as a toddler in Mexico, presumably with a Mexican nanny, followed by (at most) a couple years as a preschooler in Paris, presumably with a French nanny, with parents speaking English at home, does not result in a native speaker of Spanish or French. Children who learn a language at that age, with no opportunity to build upon it, normally remember a few words of preschooler vocabulary, and have an easier time if they try to learn that language in adolescence or adulthood, but they're hardly fluent just from that brief exposure. This is especially true when the entire rest of his childhood and adolescence he is living in English-speaking countries. So what's going on here?
Darkstar8799 ( talk) 16:34, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
The introduction here seems impressive in its compactness and organization. Two questions. (1) Is it considered permissible to make the statement "Buckley's primary intellectual achievement" without attribution to a source? I don't question its relevance, but wonder about sourcing, and my question is genuine since I didn't study that guideline. (2) I wonder about the meaning of "Buckley came on the public scene" particularly 'public scene'. I can't suggest alternative words because I wonder what to aim for in this instance, but it seems ambiguous. See Words to Avoid. -- 207.172.94.79 ( talk) 19:01, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
I tagged this section as POV since it clearly means to show some kind of conspiracy view of the universe.
William F. Buckley Jr. had nine siblings, including sister Maureen Buckley-O'Reilly (b. 1933 d. 1964) who married Gerald A. O'Reilly, the CEO of Richardson-Vicks (makers of Vicks Vapo-Rub) which sponsored the H. Smith Richardson Foundation and their projects related to the CIA's MK/ULTRA Mind Control programs, sister Priscilla L. Buckley, author of Living It Up With National Review: A Memoir for which William wrote the foreword; sister Patricia Lee Buckley Bozell, who was Patricia Taylor's roommate at Vassar before each married; brother Fergus Reid Buckley, an author, debate-master, and founder of the Buckley School of Public Speaking; and brother James L. Buckley, a former senior judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and a former U.S. Senator from New York. William and James appeared together on Firing Line. Buckley co-authored a book, McCarthy and His Enemies, with his brother-in-law attorney L. Brent Bozell Jr. (Patricia's husband) who worked with Buckley at The American Mercury in the early 1950s when it was owned by Clendenin Ryan, Jr. The American Mercury took an editorial turn to the hard right during the Buckley and Bozell tenure there when eventual American Nazi Party leader George Lincoln Rockwell also worked there. Ryan had sponsored both Col. Ulius Amoss and Maj. Carleton Coon, a recipient of Pioneer Fund financing from Wickliffe Draper in their successful efforts to develop MK/ULTRA trained, mind controlled programmed assassins like Robert Emmett Johnson, and to convince a Polish MIG pilot to defect to France while flying his MIG jet. Ryan later sold The American Mercury to Rev. Gerald B. Winrod, known as the "Jayhawk Nazi", from Wichita, KS who was indicted during World War II for violations of the Alien and Sedition Act. Winrod was an associate of Rev. Gerald L. K. Smith who helped to form the isolationist America First Committee with the owners of Buckley's publishing house, Regnery Press, spearheaded the Hollywood Blacklist campaigns and formed the McCarthy-inspired America First Party with H. L. Hunt, a lifelong friend of William F. Buckley, Sr.
Seriously. Trying to connect the subject with the American Nazi party without documentation is a dead ringer for some kind of craziness. Could someone please edit this section? 04:04, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
To imply that these citations are either conspiratorial or Jewish-sponsored is pretty lame in fact and quite reprehensible. If you do not know your facts, try not to pose as some sort of expert.
Here are some citations from the Wikipedia "American Mercury" section.
These 2 URLs will contain page screen shots from American Fuhrer about Rockwell supporting The American Mercury citations:
http://www.wordhyperlinks.com/GLR1.rtf http://www.wordhyperlinks.com/GLR2.rtf
One of these URLs cites letters exchanged between GLR and William F. Buckley, Jr. as well. Read them and weep.
From Wikipedia:
Huie's experiment
William Bradford Huie — whose work had appeared in the magazine before — had gleaned the beginning of a new, post-World War II American conservative intellectual movement. He sensed correctly that Ryan had begun to guide The American Mercury toward that direction. He also opened the magazine's pages to more mass-appeal writing, by the like of the Reverend Billy Graham and FBI director J. Edgar Hoover. With boldness if anything, Huie seemed en route to producing what one of his staffers would have an easier time producing a few years later — the young William F. Buckley, Jr., whose God and Man at Yale was a best seller, worked for Huie's Mercury, invaluable experience for his 1955 creation of the longer-living, more deeply respected National Review. Buckley would succeed at what Huie was unable to realise: a periodical that united the nascent but already differing strands of this new conservative movement.
Huie found himself facing financial difficulties sustaining the Mercury as he pursued the new direction, and was forced to sell to a sometime financial contributor, J. Russell Maguire, in August 1952. George Lincoln Rockwell, later head of the American Nazi Party worked for Russell Maguire at The American Mercury for during that period. It was at this point that the new owners of The American Mercury took that periodical on a journey into the nether world of national socialism. That sale spelled the end of The American Mercury as a respectable mainstream magazine, though it would survive, steadily declining, for nearly 30 more years.
Within a very short time, Maguire steered the magazine “toward the fever swamps of anti-Semitism”, as National Review publisher William A. Rusher would describe it. Various interest groups which began only with the Anti-Defamation League accused Maguire's Mercury of ongoing and increasing Jew-baiting, particularly when it drew a number of purportedly anti-Jewish comments from the writings of Mencken himself back for reprint. The influences of both George Lincoln Rockwell and later the Rev. Gerald B. Winrod and General Edwin A. Walker, on the editorial policy of The Mercury resulted in anti-semitic, white supremacist, and pro-Fascist articles becoming commonplace in the magazine. Control of the American Mercury had passed from the respectable journalistic anti-establishment into the domain of extremist factions, and the editorial policy never attempted to regain credibility within mainstream intellectual circles.
Maguire did not remain long as the magazine's owner/publisher, but what he started other owners continued for the rest of the magazine's life. Maguire sold the Mercury to the Gerald B. Winrod-owned Defenders of the Christian Faith, Inc. located in Wichita, KS in 1961; Reverend Gerald B. Winrod, was known as "The Jayhawk Nazi" during World War II and was once tried and convicted for violations of the Sedition Act of 1917. The DCF sold it to the Legion for the Survival of Freedom of Jason Matthews in 1963, and the LSF cut a deal in June 1966 with the Washington Observer that telegraphed a merger with Western Destiny which was a Liberty Lobby publication owned by Willis Carto and Roger Pearson a well known neo-Nazi who headed up the World Anti-Communist League during its most blatantly pro-Fascist periods. At that time, Gen. Edwin A. Walker who led the American insurrection called: "The Battle of Oxford, Mississippi" also wrote for The American Mercury when it merged with Western Destiny. By then The American Mercury was a quarterly with a circulation of barely 7,000, and its editorial content was composed almost entirely of attacks upon Jews, African Americans, and other minorities.
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DraperMan ( talk • contribs) 18:25, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
These are diametrically opposed ideas. Why are they put together with a slash mark as if they are neighbors or identical? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.191.152.253 ( talk) 02:11, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Social Conservatism and Social Libertarianism are only "diametrically" opposed in certain contexts. It is dependent upon which "conservatives" and "libertarians" are being examined. Mr. Buckley, and other Conservatives (capital "C" Conservatives), hold differing social positions on certain issues than the Libertarianism of the Libertarian Party, for example, but they come to those differing views as a result of their inherently shared philosophy, that is, the innate desire for individual liberty and freedom. The most graphic example of this is the position on abortion. The Libertarian Party would say that the true libertarian position would be that abortion restriction infringes upon the individual liberty of the mother, whereas Conservatives would say that abortion infringes upon the individual liberty of the unborn (the Creator-endowed, unalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). So inspite of differing conclusions, they result from shared philosophy. And honestly, the issues separting Conservatives from the Libertarian Party are minimal at best, and again, stem from shared philosophy and worldview. NebraskaDawg ( talk) 16:57, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm going to remove the POV tag from the Mayoral candidacy section. There's been no discussion here since it was added in June. Looking at the history I see attempts by IP editors to add conspiracy theories about Buckley's campaign manager (related, I think, to the contemporaneous attempts to add bizarre, half-gibberish claims elsewhere in the article about Gerald L. K. Smith et al.). None of this remains in the section now, which to me is currently a pretty straightforward recitation of the facts with a couple of sources. (Disclaimer: I have made edits to this section in the past.) YLee ( talk) 08:20, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
This passage is simply wrong. It misinterprets the sources [84] - which say he spoke "funny" because of British influence, and it misrepresents reality. Buckley's first language was English, spoken exclusively in his family BEFORE he moved to Mexico, as well as during his stay in Mexico. Learning other languages at an early age certainly had an effect on his verbal development, but he was an English speaker first and foremost, from the earliest age.
"Buckley was well known for his command of language.[83] Buckley came late to formal instruction in the English language, not learning it until he was seven years old (his first language was Spanish, learned in Mexico, and his second French, learned in Paris).[10] As a consequence, he spoke English with an idiosyncratic accent: something between an old-fashioned, upper class Mid-Atlantic accent and British Received Pronunciation.[84]"
82.224.103.123 ( talk) 22:42, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
This article has been reverted by a bot to this version as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) This has been done to remove User:Accotink2's contributions as they have a history of extensive copyright violation and so it is assumed that all of their major contributions are copyright violations. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. VWBot ( talk) 05:33, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Although the focus is on Buckley in this article, the previous text had stated that 'National Review' had "written out" of the conservative movement philosopher Ayn Rand with Chambers's negative review. This is belied by the fact that no less a figure than Reagan, after its publication, called himself a Rand "admirer" and by the fact that Rand never considered herself a conservative. Both are factually false implications of the previous text requiring either correction or a removal of all mention of Rand. Also, previous text had not even stated that the review was a negative one.- Pelagius2 ( talk) 19:41, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
It is my understanding that WJB Jr. acknowledged that he experimented with marijuana once in international waters in order to satisfy his curiosity. If I'm correct that this was the extent of his use, then I question whether characterizing him as a "user" is an accurate portrayal. (MTP) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.116.36.205 ( talk) 16:05, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
The following paragraph is factually incorrect:
The editorial in question, which is not cited or named, is called "Why the South must Prevail" and was published in his National Review magazine on August 24, 1957. In it, Buckley (for the record the editorial was unsigned, but there appears to be little disputing that Buckley was largely responsible for it) makes the claim that the cultural mores held by the white population of the south was superior to that held by the black population. He goes on to argue that this situation must be rectified by freeing the black population from the cultural decay which enslaves them.
Wikipedia's own page on White Supremacy describes it thus (The wikipedia quote above bizarrely doesn't even link wikipedia's White Supremacy page; it instead links to wikipedia's page on racial segregation in the US):
A full and honest reading of Buckley's editorial will show he supported no such thing.
It therefore follows that this article's characterization of Buckley's backtracking and renouncing of racism is politically motivated hackery, as he needed to do no such thing. -- Frochi ( talk) 07:24, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
I have removed the offending paragraph, however a section I added documenting this egregious editorial and academic failure on the part of Wikipedia and other media sources was also removed. The editor who removed my section advised that I use the talk page for discussion, so I will include my proposed section here for review. I envision that this should be added under the "Politics" heading:
Several media sources [3] [4] [5] [6], including previous versions of this very article [7], have used their platforms to lie about Buckley's position on race in the United States. Particularly in the case of this Wikipedia article, the claim has been made that Buckley was a white supremacist. This claim is fraudulent. The basis for this and other similar misrepresentations is usually an unsigned editorial commonly attributed to him which was published in his National Review magazine on August 24, 1957 [8]. The following quote is an example of that which is usually used to support the claim:
The following quotes are rarely, if ever included alongside:
...
Here it is easy to determine that the white supremacy charge is blatantly false given Buckley's vision of "genuine cultural equality between the races". Credibly recognized proponents of white supremacy such as the KKK and other WWII-era nazism movements would also find this passage objectionable because the basis for their claim of race inferiority arises from a supposed faulty physiological composition. This condition is therefore not subject to rectification via adoption of a different set of mores or cultural norms. This view, known as
Materialism, the culture is explicitly informed by race, as opposed to Buckley's view that there is little if any causal relationship.
This materialist view is exemplified by the following excerpts from a translation of Adolf Hitler's "Mein Kampf"
[9]:
…
...
Thus, a complete evaluation of Buckley's position shows this widely held view of him and by extension, many of his supporters to be dishonest at best, and academic fraud at worst.
--End of proposed section
I'd like to address the concerns brought up by the editor who removed my change.
1. Use the talk page for discussion - Done. This section has been up for over a week now, without comment.
2. Do not use
Circular references - This section does not represent the use of circular reference. That is to say, it does not use a Wikipedia article as a source to support a claim. This is an example of using Wikipedia as a source of information on itself, as referenced in the Wikipedia section on the subject.
3. Do not give
"undue weight" - what is meant by this is unclear. Can someone please expand on this point?
--
Frochi (
talk)
13:21, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
( edit conflict) It is important to note that the page secondary source is an article about the concept of secondary sources, and does not represent Wikipedia policy at all. You are much better off using WP:PRIMARY as the policy of record in this matter. Regardless of what preference might exist elsewhere, to use primary sources in this case is really not within policy. Frank | talk 21:45, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
While I find no fault with the section on Vidal, it does seems a bit overweighted when compared to (say) "Firing Line" which occupied a bit more of his time. Student7 ( talk) 21:49, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
The description of his verbal altercation at the 1968 convention describes Buckley as rising several inches from his seat as he launches into his "queer" diatribe. From the video you can clearly see he doesn't rise from his seat until after he finishes his threat. A very minor point, but clearly he gets far more worked up and threatening after he threatens to sock him. Brprivate ( talk) 02:26, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
97.87.29.188 ( talk) 00:11, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
The photo used makes him seem scary and pale and sickly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:EA00:104:1800:8025:9445:8D25:E939 ( talk) 18:33, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
While his on-air persona was noted for "ten dollar words" (NYT) his writing (such as his spy novels, was not so noted by the NYT or reviews thereof. Thus his WRITING had a "wide vocabulary" and not a "sesquipedalian vocabulary" even per the NYT. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 20:58, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
I have untangled as notes 42/43 two parts of the former three-part note 42. This makes clear that the note(s) actually provide nothing but links to two recent online reprints of the 1957 review by Whittaker Chambers, both without even a one-line preface.
The third part of note 42 was a link to http://whittakerchambers.org/ without comment, simple misuse of the authorlink field of {{ cite web}}. That Whittaker Chambers website may provide some comment on the incident but a link to the homepage is not sufficient. (A homepage glance shows that the site does reprint articles by Whittaker with short prefaces by David Chambers.) -- P64 ( talk) 20:15, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
On the occassion of Gore Vidal's death today ( 31 July 2012), myself and others will recall the Vidal/Buckley exchange of 'crypto fascist' / 'I served in the infantry in the last war' / 'no you didn't' etc
The narrative of Buckely's military service is unreferenced. The timeline would seem to be: graduation from Millbrook School ca June 1943, aged 17 / attendance at UNAM from 1943-1944 / "The following year upon his graduation from the U.S. Army Officer Candidate School, he was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the U.S." / "after the War" returned to Yale, ca. Sept 1945
OCS was at the time a brand-new 12 week training program at Ft Benning, Georgia. Buckley is apparently listed in the OCS Hall of Fame.
There's a lot of rapid jumping with no connecting narrative, and some of this does not make intuitive sense. Can someone with greater knowledge of the biography clarify dates and circumstances of OCS attendance and date of commission? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smcewincarr ( talk • contribs) 15:47, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Apparently there was a significant period of time that Buckley spent in Mexico, but this article doesn't even go into it. The first sentence in the section "Early Life" states, "Buckley was born...in New York City...", and then in the next sentence it says he "moved as a boy with his family from Mexico to Sharon, Connecticut." There's a gap of a couple thousand miles here. How, when and why did he go from New York to Mexico? Later in the article it is stated that he went to school in Mexico, and it is implied that Spanish was his first language, not learning English till he was seven years old. If Mexico was that significant a part of his story, can someone please elaborate? Eastcote ( talk) 02:25, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Buckley favored Ronald Reagan in the United States presidential election, 1980 over the Libertarian Party (United States) who nominated Ed Clark for President and David H. Koch for Vice President.
When, in 1980, David Koch ran for vice president on the Libertarian Party ticket—a race he also funded—his platform called for the abolition of Social Security, minimum-wage laws, gun control, all personal and corporate income taxes and much else. A worried William F. Buckley Jr. called it "Anarcho-Totalitarianism." [10] [11]
99.181.134.121 ( talk) 01:01, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
{{
cite web}}
: |first=
missing |last=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: date and year (
link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
{{
cite web}}
: Check |url=
value (
help)
The main picture for this person is hardly one that conveys a neutral impression ... they caught his really, really bad side, in the middle of something. Could we use another one that doesn't make him look like quite as much of a psycho? 74.141.69.51 ( talk) 03:59, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:William F. Buckley Jr./Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Needs general filling-in. WFB played an important role in the Cold War, modern conservatism, and has published writings that fill hundreds of archival boxes at Yale's library. Some more could be written. Rkevins82 20:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC) |
Last edited at 20:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 16:06, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
User:Collect today deleted Henry George from the list of influences with summary "rm unsourced and not in biography" ( diffs).
{{ Infobox writer}} no longer supports the fields influences and influenced. Its template documentation now instructs (twice): "No longer supported. Please move cited/citable instances into prose."
Here are the parameter values (cut and paste, modified to display the one deletion and the one reference):
The scope of the reference is clear only in covering Weaver and excluding Voegelin.
-- P64 ( talk) 18:53, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
William F. Buckley, Jr.. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 02:08, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
William F. Buckley, Jr.. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 18:08, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 9 external links on
William F. Buckley, Jr.. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:22, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Why is it that, in an article about William F. Buckley, we see a whole section dedicated to one quote made by Carl Sagan? It's irrelevant to Buckley being a part of the debate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.205.30.34 ( talk) 20:33, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
A "Search Wikipedia" for Buckley did not produce William F. Buckley. However, a search for William F... did. I have never been unable to find any other famous person by their last name and been forced to search by their first name. I don't have any idea how to edit the search capabilities of wikipedia so if this is going to be corrected, someone else is going to have to do it. Thanks, 209.12.141.34 ( talk) 19:32, 28 November 2016 (UTC)David Curbo
His Wikipedia article says he was Bill Buckley's younger brother. If true, he should be listed in this article's info box along with James L. Buckley.
HowardMorland ( talk) 03:32, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
hey there ! here: http://youtube.com/watch?v=aGBFqcPzgT4&feature=related you can see, that Buckley was an 'creationist' or at least 'evolution sceptic' I think that may derserve to be mentioned.
pa_an
His birthplace is given as NY, NY, but the source cited has nothing by way of documentation. I tried to track down every lead or source from which that source appeared to derive its information and found nothing. JohndanR ( talk) 23:25, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on William F. Buckley Jr.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:18, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
I have removed the claim that opposition to the civil rights movement was a core part of WFB's fusionism. It was not. If anyone feels otherwise and wants to have a discussion, please advance your argument here.
-- 24.188.35.161 ( talk) 18:41, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on William F. Buckley Jr.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:19, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
I note that there are fifteen names listed in 'Category: Buckley family'. It might be appropriate to have a page on the family as such, to overview where the individuals fit in. Valetude ( talk) 23:00, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
The final sentence of the third paragraph contains both an unsourced fact (Buckley's "primary" contribution) and an unsourced opinion that is based on a false premise (that a "rightward shift" occurred in the Republican party). This is indicative of a subtle, yet still nuanced bias that the Republican and Democrat parties shifted positions on the political spectrum. Although this might currently be taught by some academic circles, the very definitions of politically "left" and "right" from their inception have never supported such a premise. To maintain a neutral point of view on this subject, I suggest that the sentence either be removed completely, or at least rephrased in a way that does not imply that the parties shifted their positions. If the connection to Reagan and Goldwater really needs to be emphasized, change the wording to say something similar to "Buckley is known to have influenced some of the more prominent politically-right people, such as Goldwater and Reagan," and then complete it with a proper citation. Otherwise, it's mere speculation that he influenced them at all. If there's no allegation of influence by Buckley on either of those men but that he, instead, influenced the base of the Republican party by explaining and defining its rightward principles, then this needs to be explained in more detail (with multiple sources cited) and removed from the introduction section — by either moving it to its own section or including it in the "Death and Legacy" section. But at the very least, the wording needs to be changed to maintain a neutral point of view. JimSchuuz ( talk) 14:23, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
It was the issue of Aug 20, 1945, where he argued that being a Catholic does not mean he, or others, are against our alliance with the USSR. "We" are against communism because it is atheistic, but not against the country or individuals"
Simply signed William F. Buckley JR Lieutenant, USA Camp Gordon GA
I was tickled when I came across this, and is probably not in digital form, so I would have to put it on my personal blog, and use that as a link. Not sure it's even meaningful.
alvrdb-brt@yahoo.com
The Buckley in question is Reid Buckley, not Bill Buckley. It's a big family, and while Reid and Bill do share a similarity in looks and probably a common ancestor, they are in reality two different people.
Source: The link at the bottom of the Wikipedia page. Reid Buckley is identified on the first page.
-- davidtwery _at_ comcast _dot_ net (not a Buckley)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
63.134.129.109 changed the description of National Review from "conservative" to " neoconservative". National Review is more usually considered a pure conservative publication, and many of its writers and editors (such as Jonah Goldberg) would vehemently deny being "neoconservative". Therefore I am reverting this change. — DLJessup 01:52, 2004 Dec 2 (UTC)
I have remarked this page as npov penis (GreatWhiteEric eliminated the npov), at least until the neoconservative epithet is thoroughly debunked. — DLJessup 04:03, 2004 Dec 12 (UTC)
The following section is in need of further context - Buckley changed his views since this editorial:
"Also in 1957, Buckley came out strongly in support of the segregationist South, writing "The central question that emerges…is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas where it does not predominate numerically? The sobering answer is Yes—the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race.” in the August 24, 1957 edition of the National Review." Bsurette ( talk) 18:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Phil179, here's something to think about: it is pretty much undisputed that National Review is conservative. It is arguable whether NR is neoconservative, partially because neoconservative is a term that is both vague and politically charged. (For certain sections of the conservative movement, it is a perjorative phrase.) Therefore, referring to NR as neoconservative is inherently less neutral than referring to it as simply conservative. — DLJessup 14:34, 2004 Dec 13 (UTC)
"…we have to accept Big Government for the duration – for neither an offensive nor defensive war can be waged given our present government skills, except through the instrument of a totalitarian bureaucracy within our shores…
And if they deem Soviet power a menace to our freedom (as I happen to), they will have to support large armies and air forces, atomic energy, central intelligence, war production boards, and the attendant of centralization of power in Washington – Even with Truman at the reins of it all."
Here we have neoconservatism in a nutshell: Militarism, centralization, big government. Various authors, Murray N. Rothbard and Justin Raimondo among them, have identified National Review's birth as the birth of neoconservatism, i.e., the death of the anti-interventionist Old Right. Buckley was most definitely a neoconservative, as his magazine. Josh ( talk) 11:13, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Firing Line was on the air for over 33 years and is the primary reason anybody outside of New York ever heard of Buckley. Somebody ought to try to work it in somewhere. And why some debate about a TV movie has been singled out for mention in the article is not obvious. Squib 22:48, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
I think this article should mention WFB's struggle with the John Birch society and other far-right anti-semitic groups. Many commentators regard his effort to establish a conservative movement which was cleary separate from (and indeed hostile to) the far right as a crucial step in American politics. See, for example, [3], [4] and this E. J. Dionne column from Oct 2005. (See also William F. Buckley, Jr.: Pied Piper for the Establishment, ISBN 1881919064, in which a Bircher claims that WFB is/was secretly working to destroy American conservatism on behalf of the liberal establishment.)
BTW, Dionne's column should probably go in the external links.
Chris Chittleborough 08:08, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
I personally do not like the usage of the term "far-right" because this can be interpreted to mean that the John Birch Society, et al, were somehow more conservative than Mr. Buckley. Perhaps using the term "radical" "extremist" or simply "anti-semitic" would be more accurate. -- NebraskaDawg ( talk) 22:41, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Not a fan of the JBS, personally, but do you have proof that they are "anti-Semitic?" Josh ( talk) 11:04, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Nothing in the criticism section is referenced; it needs to be! Joey1898 23:37, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
This bizarre section can only be based on a ridiculous caricature of Conservatives: "Buckley came late to the English language, not learning it until he was seven (his first language was Spanish, learned in Mexico and his second French, learned in Paris). This would hardly endear him to many conservatives and thus is not emphasized by his supporters." Joey1898 23:59, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
This page is dripping with POV.- Jersey Devil 09:52, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
While I am sure that Mr. Buckley has spoken Spanish and French fluently from a young age, I find it hard to believe that his parents did not speak to him in English for the first seven years of his life. Can someone please clarify this for me?
I'd like to see a citation for the statement that says his interviewing methods were "nonconfrontational." Granted I've only seen one clip of "Firing Line," but it was a clip in which he debated Noam Chomsky, and Buckley was certainly "confrontational," and definitely insulting.
I've been searching for what Buckley says to Chomsky verbatim but cannot find it. Interesting you mention O'Reilly, who often threatens those he interviews with physical violence, because Buckley tells Chomsky (I quote loosely) "Good, because if you did I'd smash you in your face." And he certainly cut off Chomsky midsentence in order to form the debate, which I'd say isn't exactly polite. He's an early O'Reilly, not a more polite O'Reilly.
Another (non)confrontational Buckley quotation, aimed at Gore Vidal: "'Now, listen you queer, stop calling me a crypto-Nazi or I’ll sock you in the goddamn face.' This is according to several sources, including Esquire Magazine at the time" (from Wikipedia's entry on crypto-facism). Buckley's got the hatred and the threat of physical violence thing down pretty well, but he still gets a "nonconfrontational" label in the Wiki-text. I wish that could be deleted. But maybe it's correct; maybe hatred of gays and violence weren't frowned upon by the 1960s-era "Firing Line" audience. ...
Suggested quotation: 'everyone detected with AIDs should be tattooed in the upper forearm to protect common needle-users, and on the buttocks, to prevent the victimization of other homosexuals' - New York Times op-ed, 1985. Quoted in Harry Collins and Trevor Pinch's The Golem At Large, page 127
Should not some attention be paid to Buckley's pivotal role in the creation of the modern conservative movement, as documented in Rick Perlstein's Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus? Dvd Avins 21:07, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Can someone find the source of Buckley's famous line about shunning governance by the Harvard faculty? Because this point of view can be easily caricatured, it would be useful to see it in the orginal context.
I consider myself generally familiar with politics and with political opinionists and I have never before seen Buckley referred to as "WFB" in a public forum. I consider it very odd that this nickname appears right along with his name at this opening of the article. I believe it's just not well-known enough to be given such a prominent position. If "WFB" is used in some contexts, then it should be mentioned as trivia. Acsenray 20:17, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
"It was rumored, in 1946, that the hangman in Nuremberg adjusted the nooses of some of the condemned to magnify the pain of suffocation. Such sadism was not called for then and is not called for now. But if fornication is wrong, there is no denying that it can bring pleasure. The death of Saddam Hussein at rope's end brings a pleasure that is undeniable, and absolutely chaste in its provenance."
This quote is brand new, from this morning's addition of National Review Online. Does everyone else think that this belongs with such notables as the Boston phone book? In my opinion, only time can make a quote especially noteworthy... V. Joe 04:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
There is a reference in the article to a day school in "London, Connecticut." Should this be New London?
65.116.31.254 14:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Correct. There is no London, Connecticut.... —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
DraperMan (
talk •
contribs)
18:52, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Please could we be told what St John's Beaumont (sic) was or is?
It's a Catholic private school in England. -- Ben 16:26, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Buckley is sometimes mentioned as a possible member of various conspiracies that are said to want to take over the world. I don't think it's true, myself. But could it be mentioned in the article? Steve Dufour 17:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Buckley's bibliography needs to be updated. He is the author of many more books than listed here.
Is Buckley really based in New York and Stamford, CT? I thought it was Sharon, CT not Stamford. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.65.127.180 ( talk) 20:38, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
Image:Milesgoneby.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 16:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
He has nothing to do with the holocaust, or the Israel-Palestine conflict, I don't see why hi article is included on wikipedia. Maybe you could put something in about the 10 Billion Jews that died in the holocaust, if you find the right context. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.200.246.252 ( talk) 00:04, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I have found a public domain photo of Buckley courtesy the US Military and inserted it in the infobox. I have also added three photos to the article, so I hope that the photo request was taken care of. Thanks, Happyme22 ( talk) 02:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
This week various television shows & websites have indicated these connections.
Thank You,
[[ hopiakuta Please do sign your signature on your message. ~~ Thank You. -]] 01:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I added a section on controversies with conservatives only to have it undone within about two seconds by some asshat moderator saying whether or not it was notable. Buckley firing his own editor in chief? PROBABLY NOTABLE. Prominent conservative intellectuals claiming that Buckley had lost his way, saying he had ruined the movement he claims to have started because his magazine sold out on the Iraq War, probably the most talked about political issue of the year? PROBABLY NOTABLE. having to defend the OBVIOUS from people who watch these pages and raise the opportunity cost to make serious contributions to wikipedia are a real hassle and completely ridiculous. 216.157.212.250 ( talk) 05:33, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
It appears - from the references already provided in this article - that this is not really a controversy, even though there have been several edits on the subject.
The original feud appears to have ended with Vidal paying WFB's COURT costs. This is not the same as "legal fees," which was pointed out in an editorial note which has since been removed. (I am not commenting on that edit, just noting it here. The point is, that "court costs" are not the same as "legal fees.")
However, it appears that, at a later date, Esquire published the original essay that had gotten them in the soup the first time, and WFB's attorneys contacted them AGAIN, and they agreed - the second time - to pay his LEGAL FEES associated with forcing them to stop doing what they'd already agreed not to do decades earlier.
So, from my read of the references, the first time, Vidal paid WFB's COURT COSTS, and the second time, Esquire magazine paid his LEGAL FEES.
Right?
Isaacsf ( talk) 20:51, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
The reference to Buckley renouncing racism comes pretty much verbatum from a blogpost. Does anyone know of a better citation for this?
66.179.113.135 ( talk) 20:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
This article says his father's family was Irish and Catholic. I never heard him described as of Irish origin. I seem to remember reading his book on his Catholic faith in which Buckley discussed his family's long tradition among English Catholics. At the very least, it suggests his family were Scots and Catholic.-- Parkwells ( talk) 19:27, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone have any firm citation(s) for childhood in South America / Texas / Europe / Mars? He's said to have learned English later in his childhood...where did he live that this was the case? Frank | talk 21:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
In the intro of his book "Nearer Thy God" he explains that he was born in Mexico City and lived there until the age of 4 (his first language was Spanish). He was then sent to live in Paris, (his second language was French). He didn't start using English as his primary languagae until the age of 6, when he was sent to live at a boarding school in England. I remember in a Q&A session someone asked him why he spoke with an accent --- he replied testily (basically explaining the chronology above) and then asking, "how else should I talk?"
Did Wm. Buckley invent an economic term or did he simply discuss it? The term I'm referring to describes the choices that consumers make when they pay $100 for a dog's haircut as opposed to giving $100 to charity.
Some would find fault with the former choice while others would say that that is what happens in a free market.
Eclecticeducation (
talk)
01:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)eclecticeducation 08-02-2008
I have heard that wikipedia discourages "trivia" sections in their articles, but I recently read an interesting fact about WFB that I thought might be appropriate for the article. In 1987, as detailed in a The New York Times Magazine article, WFB wrote about riding in a specialized submarine to view the wreckage of the Titanic. While this may be trivia, it is damn interesting trivia.
Lborchardt ( talk) 08:42, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I was reading this article (William F. Buckley Jr.) and it states that near the end of his life he supported the surge and the "[ensuing military success.']" I think that this phrase should be edited because by no means has the surge been given time to be evaluated, and there are many who argue that the surge was not the causal factor in the reduction of violence in Iraqi cities but rather ethnic cleansing (the information I have seen seems to suggest this). With that in mind I again suggest that this particular phrase in this article be amended until further notice. 141.211.221.137 ( talk) 22:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
I entered this edition into the article because the section did not fully communicate Mr. Buckley's position on the surge. The current status of the section seems to likewise fail. I am no military expert, but Mr. Buckley, based on certain manifest successes of the surge, thought it worthy of continuation. The section as it now stands does not reflect that reality. It was so reported in the WFB Memorial issue of National Review (3/24/08). With that in mind I suggest that some reflection to his later support of the surge be included to reflect biographical accuracy. -- NebraskaDawg ( talk) 22:15, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
The article states: "Academy Award winner Dustin Hoffman modeled the voice of his character after Buckley's when he played the title role in the Robin Williams feature, Hook."
The article linked to for this trivia is rather ambiguous about this point at best. It states: "As this New Age revision goes, the middle-aged Peter (renamed Peter Banning) goes up against a Captain Hook played by Mr. Hoffman with a kind of campy villainy that owes much to William F. Buckley Jr." In the article it seems that any similarity to WFB exists in the mind of the reviewer, not in Hoffman's acting approach. Lborchardt ( talk) 06:41, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I have a colleague who is planning to record a spoken version of this article, but doesn't know how to pronounce "Aldyen". Any pointers? Thanks. howcheng { chat} 03:30, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
"Buckley's primary intellectual achievement was to fuse traditional American political conservatism with laissez-faire and anti-communism, laying the groundwork for the modern American conservatism of U.S. presidential candidate Barry Goldwater and President Ronald Reagan."
Buckley called for a "totalitarian bureaucracy within our shores" (his exact words). Hardly a definition of "laissez faire" by any stretch of the imagination. Josh ( talk) 10:46, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Also, why is he in the category "American Libertarians?" Josh ( talk) 03:19, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Once the context of his quote regarding the totalitairan bureaucracy (fighting Communisism) and the entire body of work from his career is examined, his laissez faire and libertarian leanings become manifest. His brand of conservatism was heavily influenced by libertarianism; partly producing the fusionism referenced in the article.-- NebraskaDawg ( talk) 03:14, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Context is irrelevant. No one can both call for a "totalitarian bureaucracy" and be a libertarian at the same time. The context doesn't matter. No libertarian of any variety would call for centralization of all power in the nation's capital, totalitarian bureaucracy, etc. Also, Buckley's extreme hawkishness kind of contradicts the non-aggression principle, which most libertarians subscribe to. Just because he calls himself a libertarian doesn't make him one. After all, Hitler called himself an "arch-democrat," but no one in his right mind would call Hitler a democrat, let alone an "arch-" one. Josh ( talk) 09:00, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Context absolutely matters. He viewed Communism to be the greatest foreign threat to our security at the time (especially at the time the quote you referenced was made). As I said earlier, when the context of his career is juxtaposed to this one quote you are noting, his political philosophy is obvious. He, along with Meyer, fused traditional conservative principles with libertarian principles to produce Modern American Conservatism; which unfortunately was abandoned by the Republican Party during the Bush Administration. Using one quote of WFB is not sufficient ground to bring Hitler's "democrat" values in the conversation.-- NebraskaDawg ( talk) 22:28, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
All I'm saying is that calling yourself something doesn't make it so. Josh ( talk) 09:33, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
That is indeed true, but likewise, taking one quote over the course of someone's career does not constitute evidence of the individual's worldview, particularly when context is not considered or acknowledged. Regardless of our respective points of view on this question, we cannot forget that life in the United States in the 1950s was a far cry from what it is today. No one knew with certainty that the Sovite Union would when it did. Consequently, any modern American Conservative (traditionalism + libertarianism + anti-communism) would fear that their laissez-faire perspective would be worthless if the freedom enjoyed in the United States fell to the tyranny of communism. WFB also recanted his support for the Vietnam Conflict, with the benefit of retrospection. -- NebraskaDawg ( talk) 18:44, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Suggested in his essay "Algeria Warned Us" published in National Review that Alisdair Horne's book A Savage War of Peace, which advocated the use of torture against the Arabs, was right and that the insurrectionists in Iraq cannot be defeated by any means that we would consent to use. http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/wfb200410261311.asp
If there are doubts about Buckleys advocacy of torture, the interested reader should consult Horne's book which contains a section entitled "How Effective Was Torture?" Horne cites Edward Behr as saying that without torture the FLN Terrorist Network would never have been defeated and the Battle of Algiers could not have been won. rumjal 01:37, 5 February 2009 (UTC). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rumjal ( talk • contribs)
I have edited this section to ensure clarification on WFB's opinions. While Christopher Buckley has advocated a more libertarian philosophy, as was demonstrated in his Chris Matthews' interview, he did not always agree with his father, particularly on the abortion issue. This disagreement was observable during a joint appearance at the Goldwater Institute in 2004; the video is available on YouTube. Buckley did, however, advocate drug legalization or decriminalization. So I have edited the section to read "socially Conservative/Libertarian or libertarian-leaning." I also clarified his position on the Iraq Surge and provided a National Review reference link.-- NebraskaDawg ( talk) 21:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Could someone knowledgeable about his biography please edit the section on his early life? Perhaps in the interest of brevity, it omits essential details that make it difficult to follow.
1. We see he is born in "New York City" but his next location is moving "from Mexico". Presumably he moved "to Mexico" at some point, but when? Was his family living in Mexico when he was born, and just in New York traveling?
2. We see he moves with his family from Mexico to Sharon, Connecticut, and then he starts school in Paris. Did his family move to Paris? Or was he only there to go to school? The he "received his first formal training in English at a day school in London" at "age seven." Also, this seems to (possibly) say that his family lived in New York, Mexico, Connecticut, France, and London all before the age of 7 or so. Doesn't that amount of moving seem unusual enough to warrant a note of explanation?
3. It's not clear what he and his family are doing before and during the early years of World War 2, or where they are. Shortly before the war he is at day school in England (presumably day school means that he is with his family, although he could be living with another family). Then his family takes in Alistair Horne as a "war evacuee" - but this could be a domestic evacuee (from London to the English countryside), or presumably an evacuee from England to the USA. Then he graduates from high school in New York, but again it's not mentioned that his family ever moved to New York, so it's not clear whether he is with them or not.
4. His early language learning is also not clear. Late in the article, it explains that his first language was Spanish, learned in Mexico, and his second French, learned in Paris. In the section on his early life, we learn, "by age seven, he received his first formal training in English at a day school in London." But was this his first significant exposure to English? Or just his first schooling? What did the family speak at home, considering that both parents were American, and neither is obviously a native Spanish or French speaker? In general this topic doesn't make much sense: a couple years as a toddler in Mexico, presumably with a Mexican nanny, followed by (at most) a couple years as a preschooler in Paris, presumably with a French nanny, with parents speaking English at home, does not result in a native speaker of Spanish or French. Children who learn a language at that age, with no opportunity to build upon it, normally remember a few words of preschooler vocabulary, and have an easier time if they try to learn that language in adolescence or adulthood, but they're hardly fluent just from that brief exposure. This is especially true when the entire rest of his childhood and adolescence he is living in English-speaking countries. So what's going on here?
Darkstar8799 ( talk) 16:34, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
The introduction here seems impressive in its compactness and organization. Two questions. (1) Is it considered permissible to make the statement "Buckley's primary intellectual achievement" without attribution to a source? I don't question its relevance, but wonder about sourcing, and my question is genuine since I didn't study that guideline. (2) I wonder about the meaning of "Buckley came on the public scene" particularly 'public scene'. I can't suggest alternative words because I wonder what to aim for in this instance, but it seems ambiguous. See Words to Avoid. -- 207.172.94.79 ( talk) 19:01, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
I tagged this section as POV since it clearly means to show some kind of conspiracy view of the universe.
William F. Buckley Jr. had nine siblings, including sister Maureen Buckley-O'Reilly (b. 1933 d. 1964) who married Gerald A. O'Reilly, the CEO of Richardson-Vicks (makers of Vicks Vapo-Rub) which sponsored the H. Smith Richardson Foundation and their projects related to the CIA's MK/ULTRA Mind Control programs, sister Priscilla L. Buckley, author of Living It Up With National Review: A Memoir for which William wrote the foreword; sister Patricia Lee Buckley Bozell, who was Patricia Taylor's roommate at Vassar before each married; brother Fergus Reid Buckley, an author, debate-master, and founder of the Buckley School of Public Speaking; and brother James L. Buckley, a former senior judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and a former U.S. Senator from New York. William and James appeared together on Firing Line. Buckley co-authored a book, McCarthy and His Enemies, with his brother-in-law attorney L. Brent Bozell Jr. (Patricia's husband) who worked with Buckley at The American Mercury in the early 1950s when it was owned by Clendenin Ryan, Jr. The American Mercury took an editorial turn to the hard right during the Buckley and Bozell tenure there when eventual American Nazi Party leader George Lincoln Rockwell also worked there. Ryan had sponsored both Col. Ulius Amoss and Maj. Carleton Coon, a recipient of Pioneer Fund financing from Wickliffe Draper in their successful efforts to develop MK/ULTRA trained, mind controlled programmed assassins like Robert Emmett Johnson, and to convince a Polish MIG pilot to defect to France while flying his MIG jet. Ryan later sold The American Mercury to Rev. Gerald B. Winrod, known as the "Jayhawk Nazi", from Wichita, KS who was indicted during World War II for violations of the Alien and Sedition Act. Winrod was an associate of Rev. Gerald L. K. Smith who helped to form the isolationist America First Committee with the owners of Buckley's publishing house, Regnery Press, spearheaded the Hollywood Blacklist campaigns and formed the McCarthy-inspired America First Party with H. L. Hunt, a lifelong friend of William F. Buckley, Sr.
Seriously. Trying to connect the subject with the American Nazi party without documentation is a dead ringer for some kind of craziness. Could someone please edit this section? 04:04, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
To imply that these citations are either conspiratorial or Jewish-sponsored is pretty lame in fact and quite reprehensible. If you do not know your facts, try not to pose as some sort of expert.
Here are some citations from the Wikipedia "American Mercury" section.
These 2 URLs will contain page screen shots from American Fuhrer about Rockwell supporting The American Mercury citations:
http://www.wordhyperlinks.com/GLR1.rtf http://www.wordhyperlinks.com/GLR2.rtf
One of these URLs cites letters exchanged between GLR and William F. Buckley, Jr. as well. Read them and weep.
From Wikipedia:
Huie's experiment
William Bradford Huie — whose work had appeared in the magazine before — had gleaned the beginning of a new, post-World War II American conservative intellectual movement. He sensed correctly that Ryan had begun to guide The American Mercury toward that direction. He also opened the magazine's pages to more mass-appeal writing, by the like of the Reverend Billy Graham and FBI director J. Edgar Hoover. With boldness if anything, Huie seemed en route to producing what one of his staffers would have an easier time producing a few years later — the young William F. Buckley, Jr., whose God and Man at Yale was a best seller, worked for Huie's Mercury, invaluable experience for his 1955 creation of the longer-living, more deeply respected National Review. Buckley would succeed at what Huie was unable to realise: a periodical that united the nascent but already differing strands of this new conservative movement.
Huie found himself facing financial difficulties sustaining the Mercury as he pursued the new direction, and was forced to sell to a sometime financial contributor, J. Russell Maguire, in August 1952. George Lincoln Rockwell, later head of the American Nazi Party worked for Russell Maguire at The American Mercury for during that period. It was at this point that the new owners of The American Mercury took that periodical on a journey into the nether world of national socialism. That sale spelled the end of The American Mercury as a respectable mainstream magazine, though it would survive, steadily declining, for nearly 30 more years.
Within a very short time, Maguire steered the magazine “toward the fever swamps of anti-Semitism”, as National Review publisher William A. Rusher would describe it. Various interest groups which began only with the Anti-Defamation League accused Maguire's Mercury of ongoing and increasing Jew-baiting, particularly when it drew a number of purportedly anti-Jewish comments from the writings of Mencken himself back for reprint. The influences of both George Lincoln Rockwell and later the Rev. Gerald B. Winrod and General Edwin A. Walker, on the editorial policy of The Mercury resulted in anti-semitic, white supremacist, and pro-Fascist articles becoming commonplace in the magazine. Control of the American Mercury had passed from the respectable journalistic anti-establishment into the domain of extremist factions, and the editorial policy never attempted to regain credibility within mainstream intellectual circles.
Maguire did not remain long as the magazine's owner/publisher, but what he started other owners continued for the rest of the magazine's life. Maguire sold the Mercury to the Gerald B. Winrod-owned Defenders of the Christian Faith, Inc. located in Wichita, KS in 1961; Reverend Gerald B. Winrod, was known as "The Jayhawk Nazi" during World War II and was once tried and convicted for violations of the Sedition Act of 1917. The DCF sold it to the Legion for the Survival of Freedom of Jason Matthews in 1963, and the LSF cut a deal in June 1966 with the Washington Observer that telegraphed a merger with Western Destiny which was a Liberty Lobby publication owned by Willis Carto and Roger Pearson a well known neo-Nazi who headed up the World Anti-Communist League during its most blatantly pro-Fascist periods. At that time, Gen. Edwin A. Walker who led the American insurrection called: "The Battle of Oxford, Mississippi" also wrote for The American Mercury when it merged with Western Destiny. By then The American Mercury was a quarterly with a circulation of barely 7,000, and its editorial content was composed almost entirely of attacks upon Jews, African Americans, and other minorities.
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DraperMan ( talk • contribs) 18:25, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
These are diametrically opposed ideas. Why are they put together with a slash mark as if they are neighbors or identical? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.191.152.253 ( talk) 02:11, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Social Conservatism and Social Libertarianism are only "diametrically" opposed in certain contexts. It is dependent upon which "conservatives" and "libertarians" are being examined. Mr. Buckley, and other Conservatives (capital "C" Conservatives), hold differing social positions on certain issues than the Libertarianism of the Libertarian Party, for example, but they come to those differing views as a result of their inherently shared philosophy, that is, the innate desire for individual liberty and freedom. The most graphic example of this is the position on abortion. The Libertarian Party would say that the true libertarian position would be that abortion restriction infringes upon the individual liberty of the mother, whereas Conservatives would say that abortion infringes upon the individual liberty of the unborn (the Creator-endowed, unalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). So inspite of differing conclusions, they result from shared philosophy. And honestly, the issues separting Conservatives from the Libertarian Party are minimal at best, and again, stem from shared philosophy and worldview. NebraskaDawg ( talk) 16:57, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm going to remove the POV tag from the Mayoral candidacy section. There's been no discussion here since it was added in June. Looking at the history I see attempts by IP editors to add conspiracy theories about Buckley's campaign manager (related, I think, to the contemporaneous attempts to add bizarre, half-gibberish claims elsewhere in the article about Gerald L. K. Smith et al.). None of this remains in the section now, which to me is currently a pretty straightforward recitation of the facts with a couple of sources. (Disclaimer: I have made edits to this section in the past.) YLee ( talk) 08:20, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
This passage is simply wrong. It misinterprets the sources [84] - which say he spoke "funny" because of British influence, and it misrepresents reality. Buckley's first language was English, spoken exclusively in his family BEFORE he moved to Mexico, as well as during his stay in Mexico. Learning other languages at an early age certainly had an effect on his verbal development, but he was an English speaker first and foremost, from the earliest age.
"Buckley was well known for his command of language.[83] Buckley came late to formal instruction in the English language, not learning it until he was seven years old (his first language was Spanish, learned in Mexico, and his second French, learned in Paris).[10] As a consequence, he spoke English with an idiosyncratic accent: something between an old-fashioned, upper class Mid-Atlantic accent and British Received Pronunciation.[84]"
82.224.103.123 ( talk) 22:42, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
This article has been reverted by a bot to this version as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) This has been done to remove User:Accotink2's contributions as they have a history of extensive copyright violation and so it is assumed that all of their major contributions are copyright violations. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. VWBot ( talk) 05:33, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Although the focus is on Buckley in this article, the previous text had stated that 'National Review' had "written out" of the conservative movement philosopher Ayn Rand with Chambers's negative review. This is belied by the fact that no less a figure than Reagan, after its publication, called himself a Rand "admirer" and by the fact that Rand never considered herself a conservative. Both are factually false implications of the previous text requiring either correction or a removal of all mention of Rand. Also, previous text had not even stated that the review was a negative one.- Pelagius2 ( talk) 19:41, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
It is my understanding that WJB Jr. acknowledged that he experimented with marijuana once in international waters in order to satisfy his curiosity. If I'm correct that this was the extent of his use, then I question whether characterizing him as a "user" is an accurate portrayal. (MTP) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.116.36.205 ( talk) 16:05, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
The following paragraph is factually incorrect:
The editorial in question, which is not cited or named, is called "Why the South must Prevail" and was published in his National Review magazine on August 24, 1957. In it, Buckley (for the record the editorial was unsigned, but there appears to be little disputing that Buckley was largely responsible for it) makes the claim that the cultural mores held by the white population of the south was superior to that held by the black population. He goes on to argue that this situation must be rectified by freeing the black population from the cultural decay which enslaves them.
Wikipedia's own page on White Supremacy describes it thus (The wikipedia quote above bizarrely doesn't even link wikipedia's White Supremacy page; it instead links to wikipedia's page on racial segregation in the US):
A full and honest reading of Buckley's editorial will show he supported no such thing.
It therefore follows that this article's characterization of Buckley's backtracking and renouncing of racism is politically motivated hackery, as he needed to do no such thing. -- Frochi ( talk) 07:24, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
I have removed the offending paragraph, however a section I added documenting this egregious editorial and academic failure on the part of Wikipedia and other media sources was also removed. The editor who removed my section advised that I use the talk page for discussion, so I will include my proposed section here for review. I envision that this should be added under the "Politics" heading:
Several media sources [3] [4] [5] [6], including previous versions of this very article [7], have used their platforms to lie about Buckley's position on race in the United States. Particularly in the case of this Wikipedia article, the claim has been made that Buckley was a white supremacist. This claim is fraudulent. The basis for this and other similar misrepresentations is usually an unsigned editorial commonly attributed to him which was published in his National Review magazine on August 24, 1957 [8]. The following quote is an example of that which is usually used to support the claim:
The following quotes are rarely, if ever included alongside:
...
Here it is easy to determine that the white supremacy charge is blatantly false given Buckley's vision of "genuine cultural equality between the races". Credibly recognized proponents of white supremacy such as the KKK and other WWII-era nazism movements would also find this passage objectionable because the basis for their claim of race inferiority arises from a supposed faulty physiological composition. This condition is therefore not subject to rectification via adoption of a different set of mores or cultural norms. This view, known as
Materialism, the culture is explicitly informed by race, as opposed to Buckley's view that there is little if any causal relationship.
This materialist view is exemplified by the following excerpts from a translation of Adolf Hitler's "Mein Kampf"
[9]:
…
...
Thus, a complete evaluation of Buckley's position shows this widely held view of him and by extension, many of his supporters to be dishonest at best, and academic fraud at worst.
--End of proposed section
I'd like to address the concerns brought up by the editor who removed my change.
1. Use the talk page for discussion - Done. This section has been up for over a week now, without comment.
2. Do not use
Circular references - This section does not represent the use of circular reference. That is to say, it does not use a Wikipedia article as a source to support a claim. This is an example of using Wikipedia as a source of information on itself, as referenced in the Wikipedia section on the subject.
3. Do not give
"undue weight" - what is meant by this is unclear. Can someone please expand on this point?
--
Frochi (
talk)
13:21, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
( edit conflict) It is important to note that the page secondary source is an article about the concept of secondary sources, and does not represent Wikipedia policy at all. You are much better off using WP:PRIMARY as the policy of record in this matter. Regardless of what preference might exist elsewhere, to use primary sources in this case is really not within policy. Frank | talk 21:45, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
While I find no fault with the section on Vidal, it does seems a bit overweighted when compared to (say) "Firing Line" which occupied a bit more of his time. Student7 ( talk) 21:49, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
The description of his verbal altercation at the 1968 convention describes Buckley as rising several inches from his seat as he launches into his "queer" diatribe. From the video you can clearly see he doesn't rise from his seat until after he finishes his threat. A very minor point, but clearly he gets far more worked up and threatening after he threatens to sock him. Brprivate ( talk) 02:26, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
97.87.29.188 ( talk) 00:11, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
The photo used makes him seem scary and pale and sickly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:EA00:104:1800:8025:9445:8D25:E939 ( talk) 18:33, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
While his on-air persona was noted for "ten dollar words" (NYT) his writing (such as his spy novels, was not so noted by the NYT or reviews thereof. Thus his WRITING had a "wide vocabulary" and not a "sesquipedalian vocabulary" even per the NYT. Cheers. Collect ( talk) 20:58, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
I have untangled as notes 42/43 two parts of the former three-part note 42. This makes clear that the note(s) actually provide nothing but links to two recent online reprints of the 1957 review by Whittaker Chambers, both without even a one-line preface.
The third part of note 42 was a link to http://whittakerchambers.org/ without comment, simple misuse of the authorlink field of {{ cite web}}. That Whittaker Chambers website may provide some comment on the incident but a link to the homepage is not sufficient. (A homepage glance shows that the site does reprint articles by Whittaker with short prefaces by David Chambers.) -- P64 ( talk) 20:15, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
On the occassion of Gore Vidal's death today ( 31 July 2012), myself and others will recall the Vidal/Buckley exchange of 'crypto fascist' / 'I served in the infantry in the last war' / 'no you didn't' etc
The narrative of Buckely's military service is unreferenced. The timeline would seem to be: graduation from Millbrook School ca June 1943, aged 17 / attendance at UNAM from 1943-1944 / "The following year upon his graduation from the U.S. Army Officer Candidate School, he was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the U.S." / "after the War" returned to Yale, ca. Sept 1945
OCS was at the time a brand-new 12 week training program at Ft Benning, Georgia. Buckley is apparently listed in the OCS Hall of Fame.
There's a lot of rapid jumping with no connecting narrative, and some of this does not make intuitive sense. Can someone with greater knowledge of the biography clarify dates and circumstances of OCS attendance and date of commission? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smcewincarr ( talk • contribs) 15:47, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Apparently there was a significant period of time that Buckley spent in Mexico, but this article doesn't even go into it. The first sentence in the section "Early Life" states, "Buckley was born...in New York City...", and then in the next sentence it says he "moved as a boy with his family from Mexico to Sharon, Connecticut." There's a gap of a couple thousand miles here. How, when and why did he go from New York to Mexico? Later in the article it is stated that he went to school in Mexico, and it is implied that Spanish was his first language, not learning English till he was seven years old. If Mexico was that significant a part of his story, can someone please elaborate? Eastcote ( talk) 02:25, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Buckley favored Ronald Reagan in the United States presidential election, 1980 over the Libertarian Party (United States) who nominated Ed Clark for President and David H. Koch for Vice President.
When, in 1980, David Koch ran for vice president on the Libertarian Party ticket—a race he also funded—his platform called for the abolition of Social Security, minimum-wage laws, gun control, all personal and corporate income taxes and much else. A worried William F. Buckley Jr. called it "Anarcho-Totalitarianism." [10] [11]
99.181.134.121 ( talk) 01:01, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
{{
cite web}}
: |first=
missing |last=
(
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: date and year (
link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
{{
cite web}}
: Check |url=
value (
help)
The main picture for this person is hardly one that conveys a neutral impression ... they caught his really, really bad side, in the middle of something. Could we use another one that doesn't make him look like quite as much of a psycho? 74.141.69.51 ( talk) 03:59, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:William F. Buckley Jr./Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Needs general filling-in. WFB played an important role in the Cold War, modern conservatism, and has published writings that fill hundreds of archival boxes at Yale's library. Some more could be written. Rkevins82 20:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC) |
Last edited at 20:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 16:06, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
User:Collect today deleted Henry George from the list of influences with summary "rm unsourced and not in biography" ( diffs).
{{ Infobox writer}} no longer supports the fields influences and influenced. Its template documentation now instructs (twice): "No longer supported. Please move cited/citable instances into prose."
Here are the parameter values (cut and paste, modified to display the one deletion and the one reference):
The scope of the reference is clear only in covering Weaver and excluding Voegelin.
-- P64 ( talk) 18:53, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
William F. Buckley, Jr.. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 02:08, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
William F. Buckley, Jr.. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 18:08, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 9 external links on
William F. Buckley, Jr.. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:22, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Why is it that, in an article about William F. Buckley, we see a whole section dedicated to one quote made by Carl Sagan? It's irrelevant to Buckley being a part of the debate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.205.30.34 ( talk) 20:33, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
A "Search Wikipedia" for Buckley did not produce William F. Buckley. However, a search for William F... did. I have never been unable to find any other famous person by their last name and been forced to search by their first name. I don't have any idea how to edit the search capabilities of wikipedia so if this is going to be corrected, someone else is going to have to do it. Thanks, 209.12.141.34 ( talk) 19:32, 28 November 2016 (UTC)David Curbo
His Wikipedia article says he was Bill Buckley's younger brother. If true, he should be listed in this article's info box along with James L. Buckley.
HowardMorland ( talk) 03:32, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
hey there ! here: http://youtube.com/watch?v=aGBFqcPzgT4&feature=related you can see, that Buckley was an 'creationist' or at least 'evolution sceptic' I think that may derserve to be mentioned.
pa_an
His birthplace is given as NY, NY, but the source cited has nothing by way of documentation. I tried to track down every lead or source from which that source appeared to derive its information and found nothing. JohndanR ( talk) 23:25, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on William F. Buckley Jr.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:18, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
I have removed the claim that opposition to the civil rights movement was a core part of WFB's fusionism. It was not. If anyone feels otherwise and wants to have a discussion, please advance your argument here.
-- 24.188.35.161 ( talk) 18:41, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on William F. Buckley Jr.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:19, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
I note that there are fifteen names listed in 'Category: Buckley family'. It might be appropriate to have a page on the family as such, to overview where the individuals fit in. Valetude ( talk) 23:00, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
The final sentence of the third paragraph contains both an unsourced fact (Buckley's "primary" contribution) and an unsourced opinion that is based on a false premise (that a "rightward shift" occurred in the Republican party). This is indicative of a subtle, yet still nuanced bias that the Republican and Democrat parties shifted positions on the political spectrum. Although this might currently be taught by some academic circles, the very definitions of politically "left" and "right" from their inception have never supported such a premise. To maintain a neutral point of view on this subject, I suggest that the sentence either be removed completely, or at least rephrased in a way that does not imply that the parties shifted their positions. If the connection to Reagan and Goldwater really needs to be emphasized, change the wording to say something similar to "Buckley is known to have influenced some of the more prominent politically-right people, such as Goldwater and Reagan," and then complete it with a proper citation. Otherwise, it's mere speculation that he influenced them at all. If there's no allegation of influence by Buckley on either of those men but that he, instead, influenced the base of the Republican party by explaining and defining its rightward principles, then this needs to be explained in more detail (with multiple sources cited) and removed from the introduction section — by either moving it to its own section or including it in the "Death and Legacy" section. But at the very least, the wording needs to be changed to maintain a neutral point of view. JimSchuuz ( talk) 14:23, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
It was the issue of Aug 20, 1945, where he argued that being a Catholic does not mean he, or others, are against our alliance with the USSR. "We" are against communism because it is atheistic, but not against the country or individuals"
Simply signed William F. Buckley JR Lieutenant, USA Camp Gordon GA
I was tickled when I came across this, and is probably not in digital form, so I would have to put it on my personal blog, and use that as a link. Not sure it's even meaningful.
alvrdb-brt@yahoo.com
The Buckley in question is Reid Buckley, not Bill Buckley. It's a big family, and while Reid and Bill do share a similarity in looks and probably a common ancestor, they are in reality two different people.
Source: The link at the bottom of the Wikipedia page. Reid Buckley is identified on the first page.
-- davidtwery _at_ comcast _dot_ net (not a Buckley)