I was a fan of National Review long before I ever had the pleasure of writing for the magazine. When I was a kid, my parents didn’t subscribe to Newsweek or Time — even when those behemoths ruled the media landscape — they got National Review. I was reading William Buckley’s columns before I had any idea what he was talking about. I read the Corner the week it was launched. I have never stopped reading.
National Review is still an indispensable institution. While millions of our fellow citizens lose their jobs, and millions more remain anxious about the future, I hope that those of you who feel secure will help us during this short-term webathon to raise $100,000 by this weekend so the magazine and website can properly continue their good work in a time of crisis.
Because while National Review has always been known for its intellectual firepower and commentary, and that won’t change, it is also a reliable source of news, offering a much-needed corrective to the media’s unremitting, and worsening, bias.
As many journalistic outfits continue acting as apologists for the Chinese Communist government, National Review was busy publishing pieces exposing its nefarious nature. Only last week, Victor Davis Hanson explained the China boomerang, Bruno Maçães detailed why China wants to use coronavirus to take over the world, and Jianli Yang and Aaron Rhodes exposed the reason China is pushing a “zero” myth on COVID-19.
On an average day, Jim Geraghty’s “Morning Jolt” is a must-read for anyone interested in the wider political world, but his recent work on Chinese malfeasance has been required reading. Just for starters, Jim put together a comprehensive timeline of China’s COVID-19 lies, then detailed the trail leading back to the Wuhan labs and explained why all signs point to China.
National Review also provided pieces on other interesting angles of this likely once-in-a-century pandemic. John Fund and Joel Hay recently explored whether Sweden has found the right solution to the coronavirus, John McCormack told the story of Tom Cotton, the senator who saw the coronavirus coming, and Michael Brendan Dougherty wondered whether face masks are compatible with cultural tradition of the West.
We also shouldn’t forget that life will go on after the coronavirus. There is a presidential election approaching and a host of significant policy issues that require vigorous debate. If you’re interested in fact-driven conservative coverage of Donald Trump and the debates of the day, including the Democrats’ efforts to shove their agenda into coronavirus rescue bills, there is no better place to go.
There are far too many established writers and young voices to mention here. But Andrew C. McCarthy’s wit, intellect, and experience make his incisive writing on the Robert Muller investigation, impeachment, and other issues of the day essential. Alexandra DeSanctis is one of the nation’s most passionate and effective defenders of life. Kevin Williamson’s righteous prose — now in newsletter form — might be too much for the frail sensibilities of The Atlantic, but it’s here for anyone who values independent thinking and powerful writing.
National Review provides content that informs and challenges readers. The magazine helped invent modern conservatism, it was at the forefront of the internet media revolution, and it continues to innovate while never forgetting the timeless ingredients to a successful publication: strong and smart opinion writing.
National Review has always been part of my intellectual life, and it’s a dream come true to be published here. I still think of myself as a fan. So if you feel you’re able, I hope you’ll help us continue its important mission. Do that here.