These are exciting times for National Review.
In his book Conservatism: An Invitation to the Great Tradition, the conservative philosopher Roger Scruton wrote that National Review “remains the most convinced and convincing of the many conservative journals that have arisen in America since the war.” In 2018, I asked Scruton what we might do to preserve that legacy. His answer? “Attend to the themes that are fundamental to conservatism, and which practicing conservative politicians continually neglect: culture, literature, architecture, the city, the values of ordinary everyday American life.”
I am proud to work for such a storied institution, and among such talented colleagues, who day in and out do exactly that. Which is why I’m asking for your help as part of our ongoing fundraising appeal, to support this work. Readers already have shown tremendous generosity in helping us reach our goal of $100,000, yet another reminder that we could not do this without you. (Thank you!)
Indeed, National Review writers bring the “values of ordinary everyday American life” — opportunity, decency, honesty, and freedom — in their writing on everything from domestic policy to foreign affairs.
Just this week, Kathryn Lopez wrote to remind us of the “mediating institutions such as churches and other faith-based entities” that frequently offer “the most hopeful and loving” support for the vulnerable. Jay Nordlinger warned against “numbness” to the plight of Ukrainians, a hopeless attitude of “Ho-hum. Yet more Ukrainians massacred in cold blood. What’s for dinner?” And Kevin Williamson offered a piercing analysis of Boris Johnson’s downfall — the issue was character (or lack thereof).
Some people read to have their opinions validated. But we at National Review don’t patronize our readers, who we know are in the market for good writing. And good writing challenges, invigorates, informs, surprises, and entertains.
Of course, it’s not just how we write but what we write. And there is perhaps no issue more fundamental in American life than the issue of life itself. I deeply admire my colleague Alexandra DeSanctis for her dedication to advancing the pro-life perspective in a culture that largely demonizes such efforts. In her piece in support of this webathon, Alexandra also thanked her editors, who “encouraged and supported” her pro-life coverage because the issue “matters deeply to them, too.”
This has been my experience. When I told my boss, Rich Lowry, I wanted to go off to Los Angeles and report on sex trafficking, he could have said “Oh, nobody cares about that.” Or even, “It’ll upset the libertarians!” But instead, he gave me his full editorial and moral support and made sure to express how much he admires journalists who report on heavy topics. And where other publications avoid upsetting LGBT activists at all costs, Rich and the editors at National Review have offered me unfailing support in tackling the transgender issue head-on. Rich put my story on the social and medical scandal of child transition, “The Tragedy of the ‘Trans’ Child,” on the cover of National Review in 2019 — several years before mainstream outlets, such as the New York Times, would even acknowledge the controversy.
These are exciting times for National Review. We have brilliant in-house political reporters such as Jim Geraghty and Dan McLaughlin. We have a first-rate news team, with excellent original reporting by Ryan Mills and others. And the magazine, under Ramesh Ponnuru’s leadership, has entered a vibrant new era. But this liveliness — and indeed our livelihoods — depends on your generosity. Please consider honoring us with your support.
