Over the course of this year, the centenary of William F. Buckley’s birth, we will republish an article by him weekly. This week’s article features Buckley in pugilistic form, defending his nascent publication from its ideological peers and foemen.
The current (July) issue of The Progressive features a full-dress assessment of National Review in which we are charged with all manner of offenses against the light and the truth. It arrived on the heels of a very long and very involved attack in Commentary, in the April issue; and Commentary’s article followed, by only two months, an extended analysis — or rather, psychoanalysis — of National Review in Harper’s magazine. All three journals seem to resent the mere existence of National Review — not, understand, because they are intolerant of dissent (there is nothing they would welcome more than genuine dissent); but because it pains them to be bored by it, and when they are not being bored by it they are being affronted by its vulgarity, appalled by its insouciance, or dismayed by its ignorance. Nothing, absolutely nothing, is more urgently needed than a real conservative magazine; but, alas, ours is not such a thing, and they must, accordingly, continue to scan the heavens for it.
Comments