William F. Buckley Jr., the founder of this magazine and one of the most important figures in American conservatism, was no stranger to controversy during his life, and even after it. But it is a bit more unpleasant to see him coming under fire from those ostensibly on his side, with volleys launched by those who find him or his vision for conservatism lacking, inadequate, or outdated.
Well, leave it to the incomparable Neal B. Freeman to set them straight. Writing for the American Spectator, Freeman — who is, among other things, a former editor of and columnist for National Review, producer of Firing Line, and aide to Buckley’s 1965 mayoral campaign — defends the Buckley legacy in the style of an interview with himself. (“I’ve been told that I’m the only person still living who worked closely with William F. Buckley, Jr., in his prime. A firsthand account might be useful,” he writes.) A sample:
TAS: The New Right seems to think that Buckley’s “standing athwart” approach was insufficient in his day and would be even more so in our day.
NBF: Buckley would agree with the latter part. His day and our day could not be more different. From the early ’50s to the late ’60s — Buckley’s prime — Democrat party-style liberalism advanced virtually unchallenged. Somebody had to draw a line in the sand. There was no call for philosophical nuance. Today, we seem to have room, at least in the fundraising space, for an infinite number of prefixed conservatisms — neos, nationals, paleos, revivalists, integralists, and the rest.
TAS: You sound skeptical about the prefixed conservatisms.
NBF: I am. They haven’t done their homework. Buckley read the Constitution and understood how James Madison had rigged the American political game. Buckley knew that, by Madisonian design, coalitions win and factions lose. He understood that, to join his coalition, every faction — every prefixed conservative — must believe that he had more to gain as part of a winning coalition than he stood to lose by sacrificing a measure of independence. Buckley’s conservatism was almost always procedural, rarely doctrinal.
TAS: And Buckley made the factionalists believe?
NBF: He was the most persuasive man I ever met. But it didn’t hurt that he was selling the best political product ever brought to market — ordered liberty.
There’s more where that came from. Read the whole thing here.