You do know that Gilliard considered him a bigot. See his post speak like a conservative where he quotes Buckley:
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 in which it does not prevail numerically? The sobering answer is Yes – the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race. It is not easy, and it is unpleasant, to adduce statistics evidencing the cultural superiority of White over Negro: but it is a fact that obtrudes, one that cannot be hidden by ever-so-busy egalitarians and anthropologists.
National Review believes that the South's premises are correct. . . . It is more important for the community, anywhere in the world, to affirm and live by civilized standards, than to bow to the demands of the numerical majority.
And a great piece about Gilly over here.
Really moving.
Nice post, Jesse. Unlike many who cloak themselves in the garb of Conservatism, only to conceal the hypocrisy of their everyday lives, Buckley lived and promoted his beliefs... honestly. Which is why I believe he was comfortable with those who disagreed with him.
Unlike Limbaugh (who railed against junkies because he hated that he was one him self), or Gingrich (zealously attacking Clinton for the same bjs he was getting from his mistress at the time), or Strom Thurman (eh-hem) or any of the other do as I say not as I got caught doing Conservatives, William Buckley seemed to have no need to prove himself to others as a means of convincing himself.
I agree with much of your commentary (particularly the parallels with Steve) and while it may be a matter of semantics, I happen to have *respected* William Buckley for his passion, honesty and spirit rather than *admire* him. Admiration invokes for me a sense of honor that I do *not* hold for a supporter of segregation, however open and honest that person may have been.
Rest well indeed.
A question, Jesse Wendel:
The image "You came back ..." that introduces obits on GNB, what's the backstory on that?
It looks like a panel from "Love & Rockets" but I'm only a little familiar with that series.
And as for Wm. F. Buckley Jr., it never helps to stomp the dead, never ... especially not when they provide such a lancing critique of those who've betrayed Conservatism.
He was a bigot, Matthew.
What does that have to do with anything today?
If people can't find something nice to say about him, then they don't need to say anything (as my mother and grandmother taught me.)
What I respected about Mr. Buckley, was his commitment to what he believed, while being willing to allow you could disagree with him without being a bad person because you disagreed.
The major problem of damn near all of the current right wing (and frankly, much of the current left) is personally attacking those with whom they disagree.
I find it offensive, and we're in the process of putting an end to it here at GNB. Personal attacks simply aren't necessary.
infodog -
It's from Neil Gaiman's The Sandman graphic novels. It is the character, Death, second eldest of The Endless.
I think The Sandman is the finest work I've read in any format, in the last 20-25 years. I recommend you start with The Absolute Sandman, Vol. 1 and Vol. 2 which are available, Vol. 3 will be available this spring, and Vol. 4 will be available this fall. Printed on acid-free paper, re-inked to last, color-mistakes fixed, this is a final-edition which should last 100 years or more. It's absolutely beautiful.
Death is my personal favorite character, although in person, I draw not just from her, but from Delirium, Desire and Destiny. Dream, Destruction and Despair are not my realms, although of course I have visited them.
The seven endless, from eldest to youngest are: Destiny, Death, Dream, Destruction, the twins, Desire and Despair, and Delirium who used to be Delight. It is important to realize these are not human, but anthropomorphic representations of that which is, indeed, endless, those distinctions which were here before the beginning, and will be here in the end when the lights go out.
Death as perky goth chick. It's a grand saga. Highly, highly, most highly recommended. Don't let anyone spoil it for you.
The image "You came back ..." that introduces obits on GNB, what's the backstory on that?
It's a panel from Neil Gaiman's excellent Sandman series; more specifically, it is the incarnation of Death as a plucky young woman.
To hell with Buckley... Good riddance
The Pearlstein obit was excellent.
My own feelings about Buckley can be summed up as the converse of "I admire the artwork, but I loathe the artist as a person." He was, by all accounts, a decent and intelligent and generous individual who none-the-less unashamedly championed repulsive causes (but never demanded you accept them without question). From some of his statements over the last 8 years, I think he understood that he'd helped create a Frankenstein's monster that had no use for the sort of erudition and civil discourse for which he tried to stand. But, being Buckley, he made no apologies for it.
A very few public figures, like that scumbag Falwell, get my scorn even after death. Not William F. Buckley. From me, he gets a simple nil nisi bonum.
To be fair, though, Buckley wasn't always a gentleman or a rational debater. Gore Vidal will attest to that.
I...uhhhhh...think that any equating of Steve Gilliard's courage and brilliance in speaking up for underdogs and progressive causes in general, with William Buckley's:
"I've got mine; fuck you, Jack!"
philosophy is mistaken.
There's an enormous difference between admiring a person or not, between agreeing with his positions or not, and between on the day he dies, attacking him.
I don't agree with almost anything Buckley said, as I said in my obit. But when I work at it, as I do, I can find something to admire in almost anyone. On the date of someone's death -- usually, but not always -- I take that moment to reflect on the contribution that person made to all of humanity, not on what they did which I disagree with.
It isn't that I'm blind to what I disagree with. But I want to reach to the other side, to make friends there as well. If there is ONE TIME MOST LIKELY TO BE EFFECTIVE, it is when our shared humanity touches us all.
It is today that our ideological enemies are most likely to be reading our words. Should we not say good things about their fallen hero? They already know we disagree with him on political grounds. But if we lack nuance, the competence and commitment to keep domains uncollapsed, the capacity to separate political from personal, we truly are no better than hard right-wing Bush Republicans who practice attack politics.
Surely at the time of a person's death, we can find something good to say about his life? If not, that says more about us, than about him. Or them.
Jesse, I understand the point you are making about respecting the passion in how someone live their life but don't you think in some ways that is a stretch with people like Buckley?
If you admit that someone was a bigot that means that they spent part of their life being passionate about hating other people.
What is there to respect about passion used to promote such horrible ideas?
I think Buckley gets away with alot simply because his conservatism was much more cerebral and therefore if you didn't spend your time actively following his bigoted arguments you could get the impression that somehow his hands were more clean when it came to the GOP's racism.
Buckley was the country gentlemen in a roomful of rednecks and I think that affected his image.
At the end of the day Buckley's gentlemanliness and smarts were nothing more than a cloak used to hide the same vileness that less intellectually deft Republicans have showed over the years.
I'm glad he's gone.
It is ok to disagree as well.
At a time of someone's passing there are going to be those who will reflect on the harm they did in the world too. This man certainly did harm.
Threats of policing threads are not necessary. We should be about expressing differences and celebrating commonalities. That is how we learn.
Thanks for the "Sandman" tip; the panel looked so much like something from the Hernandez Bros' "Love & Rockets" ... just shows how long I've been away from the field.
Well, I'll happily recall something that musicians can appreciate, both for the courage and the whimsy.
At age 50, after noodling on a clavichord for years, he formally took up studying the harpsichord and, if memory serves, publicly announced his intention to perform with an orchestra within a year or two. He pulled it off, too, and over the years performed concertos numerous times in charity fund-raisers.
True, they weren't stellar performances, he'd drop a lot of notes, and he felt free to pick and choose the easier movements. But he risked terrible personal embarrassment by announcing this project, either by attempting to play and making a fool of himself or by having to back down and admit he'd bitten off more than he could chew.
That takes guts.
To Mr. Buckley's enormous delight, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., the historian, termed him "the scourge of liberalism."
I'm of two minds about him.
First, he wrote editorials and columns that were racist in the extreme, and to hell with racist motherfuckers.
Second, he was the last conservative who could be classified, in any manner, as a thinker, and he lived just long enough to see his movement completely swallowed up by mindless goons, howling jackals, and snake-oil salesmen. In that respect, it's disappointing to think that a political movement that used to be at least semi-respectable would be utterly replaced by Limbaugh's sycophantic chorus.
Tanenhaus, Sam. "The Buckley Effect," New York Times, October 2, 2005
"Today, when the right is synonymous with the Republican Party and the party itself synonymous with ideological unity and organizational punctilio, it is easy to forget thatJust what has "Conservatism" given us? A polarized nation. Empire. Endless war.
the ascendancy of "movement conservatism" came only after a brutal intra-party conflict, waged over the course of decades, in which (to borrow each faction's vocabulary for the other) "leftists" and "me too" republican elders tried to fend off a mounting insurgency of "extremists" and "crackpots.
The most articulate voice of that insurgency was Bill Buckley, the founding editor (in 1955, at age 29) of National Review, the New Right's flagship journal of ideas, opinion and advocacy."
balltogeek -
I'm not saying at all, you shouldn't have whatever reaction or opinion you have. You should have.
I am saying, when a person dies, if for no other reason, it's a classy thing to do, say something nice about the person leaving the field.
Conservatives, who hated Steve with as much passion as liberals hated Buckley, with a few exceptions which were universally condemned including by conservatives for how disgusting they were, were able to separate their political differences with Steve, from their regret that a man who fought hard for what he believed in had left the field. Those conservatives wrote stunningly wonderful obits about Steve. People who despised what Gilly's politics wrote wonderful things about him. THAT is a class act. WE liberals, accepted it as his due.
And here I am, nine months later, explaining on the death of a conservative lion, that it was NOT Steve's DUE. Not that Steve wasn't a great liberal lion -- he was. But some conservatives bloggers and writers understood to their bones something some of we liberals apparently don't, as I'm having to explain this. On the site which is descended from Gilly, no less.
It is a matter of courtesy. Of being polite. Of paying your respects. Which is drilled into every single conservative person from the day they are born; be polite to your elders. We dirty rotten hippies think it's okay to be rude and talk back to our elders, and you know what? Some of the time, it is. If I have to choose, I choose us. But that doesn't excuse rudeness, personal attacks, or saying ugly things about someone on the day of their death. And I shouldn't have to tell anyone that.
Buckley is a man who fought hard for what he believed in, and respected the other team. He played to win, but never said the other team shouldn't be allowed to take the field. And yes, I know all about the Freedom March. He was playing by the rules in place at the time. He didn't say the Democratic Party should cease to be, personally attack Senators in an attempt to reduce their party to a minority, or try and take away the filibuster. He respected the law.
These are aspects of Buckley's life I find worthwhile, while at the same time I completely disagree with his politics.
If we are unable to draw distinctions, if we can only say, "this is a 'good' person, this is a 'bad' person, then we are instantly reduced to a moralistic good/bad us right/they wrong worldview, which is precisely the worldview of the Republican right-wing, or most religions, for that matter. "I know the truth and you are going to hell because you don't."
I reject such moralistic thinking.
I am not saying, balltogeek that is what YOU are saying. I am saying that we as a Progressive movement MUST be able to work effortlessly with distinctions, at meta-levels of abstractions, and without collapsing domains of thought onto each other, such that we are left NOT STUCK with good vs bad, right vs left, us vs them. Human beings and the world is a much more complicated and interesting place than the moralists would have us believe.
Hopefully this explains more of where I'm coming from. *smiles*
He wasn't decent. A decent man doesn't stand for segregation and the deaths of civilians.
He was an old-line aristocratic northeastern conservative. The kind that George Bush was before he went to Texas to try to strike oil. These pricks think they are entitled to everyone else's wealth, even though their own is considerable. Our oil is under your land and all that. Read up on how the Indians got screwed in Oklahoma and the Black Hills if you want a history as to how this entitlement works.
He might not have been a hypocrite, but he wasn't decent. And I don't have to celebrate the negative legacy of someone just because they died. As you pointed out we all die. Some on the line in Iraq. Some quietly at the age of 82 years old in their large home in Connecticut.
Equating Steve to him made me gag.
Jesse, thank you for the explanation.
I guess that means there is a world of difference between Buckley and someone like Rove who wanted to stomp his opponents into the ground and demonize them, in a win-at-all-costs mentality.
I once saw Buckley speak at my college, to a packed hall. I disagreed with the first 2/3 of his speech, but then he spent the last 1/3 of it denouncing the drug war and calling for complete legalization (albeit with the death penalty for dealing to under-21's, with which I strongly disagree). Whatever else there is to say about him, his life, and his views, on that particular issue I can say he was light-years ahead of most of the others of his ideological ilk.
I appreciate your call for respect on the day, Jesse.
But the fact that my chocolate brown face would have frightened him, with his idiot fear of me and mine, makes me stretch to say anything about him, other than that he was a human being, and he is gone.
Jesse but some things in like absolutely are bad.
Period. And racism absolutely is one of those things.
Buckley died at the age of 82 as an ardent bigot.
And as a leading light in a right wing movement had a direct impact on the thinking of people who would go on to KILL people who look like me.
He gave philosophical comfort to a movement that resulted in the murders, lynchings and political and social exclusion of a people.
Your damn right I see that as good v. evil or right v. wrong.
Sometimes things aren't that complicated.
Jesse, I've disagreed with you before and managed to maintain the respect I had for you but this beyond the pale.
The intellectual jujitsu you are using to rationalize his bigotry is disgusting.
I thought this was a blog that held the idea of racism up to the light and didn't flinch at the idea of showing it for the danger to our society that it was.
I guess I was wrong.
I was never a fan of Buckley's politics, but I was always entertained by his obscure references and little known forms of speech and arcanities, plus his screamingly effete presentation that no one else has duplicated.
I always wondered if the lower IQ right wing watched his performances and what they actually thought of him, or even if they knew what the hell he was actually saying. The guy was perhaps histrionic and even ridiculous.
It does seem that he lived a bit too long in that he came to regret a great deal of what occurred in the last 7 years and he must have felt somewhat responsible.
And yes, I really don't see how he was at all like Steve, other than forceful about the political.
Good grief! Buckley might have been a 'gentleman'(?) in the Waspish/Club sense, but he was pretty much a bastard otherwise.
....... I mean, maybe Goering should have got extra points at Nuremberg for being a great art lover, despite the charges.
No, Buckley apparently was likeable, but the crap he espoused did the country great harm.
I will give his bones three days before I comment upon him, though I doubt I can improve on the discussion herein.
......... and to make some sort of analogy with Steve Gilliard is plain daft.
ARRRRRRRGH!
Learn to READ. STOP PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH.
No kidding. Learn to read.
I did not say Buckley and Steve were the same. Wengler said that bullshit.
I have said since my original front-page post that I reject Buckley's politics. So for anyone to attack me for Buckley's politics -- get a fracking grip. AND LEARN TO FRACKING READ.
I said, on the day his death is announced, be polite. Say something nice, or don't say anything at all.
But you rude people can't even do that. You HAVE TO GO THERE. (If the shoe fits, wear it; I don't mean all of you. Only those of you who are going there.) You can't even extend to one of the leading lights of the conservatives, the same freaking courtesy they extended to Gilly when he died.
Don't you know they HATE Steve? That we got freaking THREATS to rip his grave apart? That we still don't tell anyone where it is, precisely for that reason? Read Another Loss... from July 27, 2007, for details. Jen talks, Fran (from the Gilliard Family,) and I all talk about the CREDIBLE threats against Gilly, and against his family, up to and including disrupting his funeral.
And yet these conservatives you people hate so much you can't even manage to control yourself on the day Buckley's death is announced -- and it isn't like he's Pinochet or even President Reagan, these same conservatives in the blogosphere and press, by and large were polite and nice and said really amazing things about Steve Gilliard. But you can't even force yourselves to return the favor when one of theirs dies, who means as much to them as Gilly meant to us.
I'm ashamed of some of you today. Deeply ashamed. Including that I have to explain this to you.
They call us dirty hippies, and truly, only dirty hippies should have to have something as basic as being polite to the dead, explained to them.
If you can't say something polite about something under these circumstances, all I asked was, stay quiet. There is no moral imperative to trash someone during their memorial, when the whole world is looking. That's no different than the "Gods hates fags" people from Kansas following vets around, at funerals.
The judgment of history on this guy is secure, not to worry. You won't miss your chance to weigh in.
Jesse, I'm sorry but I fail to see what Buckley's life or death has anything to do even remotely with Steve.
And let me just say now that perhaps this is just too raw a discussion to have considering that we have approached the anniversary of Steve's own passing but let me say one last thing and them I'm done.
I think that what you miss from many of the people posting here is that Steve Gilliard was much much better man than William F. Buckley could ever hoped to have been.
As you know, Steve was a fighter devoted his life to a search for truth.
To have any part of his legacy associated with a man who held beliefs that ultimately would have wished for Steve's destruction because he was a black man fighting against right wing ideas is hard for many to take.
Men and women who learned from the Buckley school of hate were ones who threatened Steve's life and to desecrate his grave.
And there is nothing wrong or dishonorable for calling them on their evilness. Or the evilness of the man many of them saw as a hero.
I'm sorry if I or anyone else assumed you thought otherwise but that's how your post reads.
Just wanted to mention to the crowd here that I posted a diary today reflecting on a year without Steve's blogging:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/20.../548/732/
464055
This is not some mirror image to the left. Buckley was a racist. He hated black people. Hated them. He just was smart enough to not say that out loud. I find nothing to admire in Buckley.
Conservativism is the politics of selfishism. These people have trashed our country.
The final result of conservatism is American citizens floating dead, down the streets of New Orleans.
And I will say what I damn well please about anyone. It's the truth.
To attack Steve when he died, they told lies. they were nasty.
Buckley made his deal with the devil. let him be buried there.
baltogeek -
My post does not read that way.
That is how you are reading it.
A. I didn't associate any part of Steve's life with Buckley's life.
B. I made an analogy. Simply because one compares two lives in an analogy, does not mean those two lives are associated, other than through the analogy. Apple is to Banana as Ball is to Pencil.
This does not mean that Apple and Banana or Ball and Pencil are ACTUALLY connected in real life; it simply means that on the SAT test, for a moment, the designer of the test placed them together. That's called analogy, or in this case, arguing by analogy or by abstraction.
GNB is a CLASS ACT.
We will not trash anyone short of a Pinochet or a President Reagan on the day their death is announced. Just won't.
We're not those people.
d) I didn't suggest there was anything wrong or evil in calling anyone out on bigotry, evil, or wrongdoing. But doing so in every possible venue, including in someone's death announcement, turns one into a fanatic.
There is a time and a place for everything. I believe it is inappropriate to trash someone publicly in the announcement of their death, and we're not going to do it here at Group News Blog.
Feel free to share personal experiences you've had about the deceased, but please, always remember that real people are reading what you're writing. This is about someone who has just died; it isn't a place for venom.
"He was Conservative. Gilliard was Progressive. Gillard's ideas are and were as offensive to a solid third of the country as Buckley's ideas were and are to our third of the country.
No matter how strongly anyone believes their beliefs to be "the truth," any hope for true change, for genuine reconciliation between red and blue America, does not start with attacking the memory of a man who has just died."
I didn't attack his memory. I tried to say it plain as I could. He lived a long life with wealth and influence. Your comparison is for the sake of congeniality and that is fine, but you are the one that posted his obit, so don't be surprised if people disagree with you. And if saying it plain is too rude when an old man dies, then when will we ever have the time to do it?
I just watched on the news last night in Chicago about how some kid from Rogers Park just got killed in Iraq at the age of 20 after getting blown up by a roadside bomb. They said he joined the army to get money for medical school. That is indecent. That is a tragedy.
Mr. Buckley doesn't need me to say nice things about him, he will have the whole damn establishment press to do that, and besides I refuse to.
You know what they call someone who proposes to desecrate the grave of a somewhat anonymous leftwing blog writer? A psycho. I don't propose to do anything of the sort to Buckley. I'm just putting it out there that he wasn't a very good guy when it came to his policy advocacy. If he WAS a politician, rather than a political intellectual providing the framework within which politicians can justify their disastrous anti-human policies, then we would mark his death much the same as a Pinochet, or a Franco, or a Reagan. And for me there is no distinction between those that write the policies and those that enact them.
If you don't like my opinion that is fine, but don't lump me into the same category as the people that would threaten to disrupt Steve's funeral and desecrate his grave. Saying something like that IS SHAMEFUL and you gotta expect not everyone is going to put a positive spin on this person after he has died. Being personally affable doesn't mean a whole lot to me when he supported policies that did kill people and continue to kill people.
Believe me, I remember the Republicans saying nice things about Paul Wellstone after his plane crashed, while they were high-fiving each other over their pickup of that Senate seat and then later strategizing how best to use the memorial ceremony to their political advantage. I hope to never be that crass.
You read ME wrong Jesse. I have no opinion on his death, but I do have an opinion on his life work.
GNB is a CLASS ACT.
Come on! TNB would have been/was on Buckley's case like nobody's business. SG was a class act, and he would have pulled no punches when it came to Mr Buckley. Give.me.a.break.
....... bloody tags.
wengler -
You're still not getting what I said, and I did indeed, read you correctly.
You said, Equating Steve to him made me gag.
Except as I've now said for the second or third time, I did not equate him to Steve as though they were EQUAL or the SAME. I used an analogy, which means, they have no connection and never did. It was only an analogy. The apple is never connected to the banana in apple:banana except on the SAT test. They are unconnected in actual life. So it is here.
What I said is, that just as many conservatives treated the progressive well when generous comments about Steve when he died, even though they hated what Steve stood for in their world (and yes, some were vile, and I linked to a post dealing with that, above), so too, we at GNB are a class act, and during their moments of morning, we will rise above our hatred and bile. That isn't saying Steve is the same as Buckley; it is arguing by analogy that we should treat his passing at least as well as we were treated, and yes, better. Because we are better at acting as generous human beings than conservatives are. (And if not, we're going to fake it till we make it, at least on GNB.)
All I asked of people was simple: If you can't find something to say nice, don't comment. I haven't said anything about policing threads, haven't banned anyone, haven't warned anyone. I just said, we're not those people, so for this moment, please be nice.
And for this, I've received email, chat, and comments saying what a jerk I am for posting such a bad thing and how dare I besmirch the memory of Steve Gilliard, what is wrong with me, and didn't the whole Obama cult thing teach me a lesson?
Oh... so was that what it was about? To bully me? Teach me to watch my words so next time I'd be more careful?
Folks should stop trying to push me around. I don't push worth a damn.
I LOVE what my dear friend, Terri in Tokyo had to say:
But the fact that my chocolate brown face would have frightened him, with his idiot fear of me and mine, makes me stretch to say anything about him, other than that he was a human being, and he is gone.
It's honest, it's straight, and it acknowledges our common humanity. Sometimes, this is the very best we can say about someone, and I appreciate Terri giving this much. *hugs Terri*
Thank you from the bottom of my heart to everyone whom has engaged. I appreciate your honesty.
You know what? I wasn't going to weigh in on Buckley because I have had a long, and deep personal animus towards him—going back to when I was a child.
There was a program on WNET (then the flagship station in what would later be called PBS) called “Soul!”, hosted by a dashiki-ed, bespectacled Black man named Ellis Haizlip. This show boasted the BEST in Black culture—music, poetry, political discussion during that wonderful time of expression, The Black Arts Movement (1964-'73)—it was amazing. And we, my father and I—used to sit and watch this show religiously.
The problem was that it was preceded by William F. Buckley's “Firing Line”.
On one particular night, I sat close up on the TV as usual waiting for “Soul!” to come on as “Firing Line” was ending. My father sat in his easy chair behind me about four feet watching Buckley's show trail out. WFB had on that night some Ivy-League racism apologist (along the lines of “The Bell Curve”), and was helping to rationalize said apologist's heinous views with flowery speech and some serious reasoning gymnastics.
I could feel my father shifting in his chair and then...as Buckley said something especially egregious, I felt something coming—fast!
In a moment, I knew. It was one of daddy's flour-encrusted work shoes—kicked off his foot in anger. It whizzed past my head, with a lace grazing my cheek as it blasted into the TV screen and rocking it backwards on its stand.
“Go to fucking hell!”, my father yelled at Buckley as he rose and stalked off to the kitchen.
“Lemme know when 'Soul' comes on. I'm makin' me a sandwich.”
Buckley always pissed me off for his down-his-nose okaying of awful racist tropes while gussying them up in intellectu-speak.
Sadly No! ironically enough ran a batch of his really awful natterings from his ascendant years as the new, suede elbow-patched bigot pundit on the block, as well as equally puke-worthy statements by his underlings at his then-new National Review magazine—here.
There is no love lost for me on William F. Buckley.
With that said, I think exulting in his death smacks of a certain, creepy irony on the part of progressives—here and elsewhere.
I think that's what Jesse meant when he said “The model here is Steve”.
I am still pained when I think of the vicious invective spat out by the lowest of the low on the right, and how too many of their leading lights passive-aggressively okayed that venomous, verbal evil by linking to those instances. There are a few folks on that side who have “gone on” who I have despised, and instead of ragging them publicly in a schadenfreude-ey frug, I've held my tongue. A few folks on the other side of the blogospheric Prime Meridian did actually show some class and eulogized Steve with respect. I say based on that, let's opt for the classy way out on this.
Acknowledge his death and wish well to the family. Give the measure of the man and let his words—the florid and the awful speak for themselves. That Sadly No! link should give anyone with any doubts as to his policy legacy everything they need to read about his views. But...the day of his passing isn't the time for grave-dancing. We all remember the agony of being on the receiving end of that shit last June.
We're better than that. We're smarter than that. We're more human than that.
I consider him (Buckley) a kindred spirit to the likes of D.W. Griffith and Leni Rifenstahl—talented people who you can acknowledge for their ability (and Griffith and Rifenstahl were damned talented to the point of visionary), take from them what you can insofar as skill, and yes—vilify their backing of evil. Buckley had a talent you could learn from. He was a wordsmith of rare ability.
I saw him on another episode of “Firing Line” not long after the “shoe” incident where he was vilifying the late, great Rep. Adam Clayton Powell Jr. for his fun-loving excesses
He called Powell a “flaneur”.
I was offended. What the fuck was a “flaneur”? I assumed it was an awful word. French for n*gger or something, and I angrily dug out the dictionary and found the word.
It meant rake, or man-about-town.
I found that I liked the word, and have since incorporated it into my vocabulary.
I learned a word or two and more than a few phrase turns while listening to the otherwise distasteful man. I'd sometimes check him out, just to see what he'd verbally throw down every now and then. In that way, in spite of his intended mission, I still got the last laugh by using him as a learning tool—the same way filmmakers learn from the technique-changing skills of a Griffith and Rifenstahl.
One can hate—but the ultimate revenge, is to take from the hate-ee and use that shit for good. That's what maddens the Right about what we do here, and what folks like Drifty and Digby do as well. We harness the word, whip it, and make it run the way we want it to—just as Buckley did, and so few of his latter-day compatriots on the Right can, and whip them at their own game.
I don't love Buckley. I didn't even like him. But I learned from him, and use what I learned against his philosophical children.
That's the ultimate revenge. I suggest more of us do the same.
Show some class towards him and his family in this difficult time, and save the venom for those who remain on his side—and take from him that which is usable and pummel those lightweights in his wake mercilessly with their dear, departed paterfamilia's stuff.
As the Sugarhill Gang said 30 years ago in “Rapper's Delight”
“There's a time to break, and a time to chill—to act civilized or act real ill.”
Common sense says what time today, in light of this event is. Let's not go down to the troglodytes level.
I agree LM, and I agree with Jesse's broader points.
But his preemptive scolding of the readers of GNB is getting real fucking old. Whatever problems he has with people needs to be resolved with those people. To the rest of us, he needs to shut the fuck up.
LM, well said. I think what shocked people is that the gnb felt necessary to post something about the passing. given what a polarizing figure he was, it might have been better to let him pass without comment. Or something simple as terri's comment.
to wax poetic about him is what got people upset. we don't really mark the passing of every important figure that dies. so maybe in this case something more simple, or nothing would have been better...
just thinking aloud.
Jesse Wendel,
I think we are talking past each other somewhat. I meant my "equating" comment in a certain way that might not have been understood by others, and I am thinking your post was meant in a different way than I read it too.
We all get a little emotional here when Steve's name is invoked. I stand by what I said, but I'd much rather just defuse the issue and let it go. Buckley hasn't nearly been as active when I have been political conscious so I have no particular personal axe to grind. There is a broader point I was trying to make, but I don't think I have been successful in doing so. I would much rather defer to LowerManhattanite and close the thread out.
The first personal magazine subscription I ever had was for the National Review. Reading it and watching Firing Line taught me to prepare myself to be able to think analytically, critically, and to appreciate the power of language in the exposition of an argument, pro or con. I owe Bill Buckley a great personal debt because he helped to awaken in me the desire to fight against the kind of proto-conservatism that eventually grew into the neoconservative Frankenstein's monster that has rampaged across the pages of our country's more recent social and political history. He was the supreme villain, the kind I knew I would spend the rest of my life struggling against, on some level or another, as a Black man in America - patrician, erudite, arrogant, dismissive, hyperintellectual and imbued with a subversive sense of self-entitlement fueled by class/race privilege and covered in a slick, oily coating of effusive charm and disingenuity.
Thank you Mr. Buckley - now got to hell - straight to hell - do not pass go - do not collect $200.
Now - where is Gore Vidal when you need him...
wengler -
Works for me. No hard feelings either way.
This is, I think, in nine months, the first time I've ever evoked Steve's name to make a point. I've always avoided it carefully because of the emotion I know it surfaces for everyone. For example, I would never try and win an argument with "but Steve would do it that way" nor do I ever respond to people who yell at me about how "Steve would never" or "that isn't how we did it at The News Blog" or "Gilly would be ashamed of you" which I actually got a few of during the cult business.
The fact that none of the four of us are Steve and this is GNB, not TNB, never seems to matter... *sighs*
But the parallel this time I thought, was so on target, everyone would see it and go, "of course." Heh. Not. I really do live in Jesse's Blogging Dream World (Doc's BDW) sometimes. (Doc's Blogging Dream World; Doc's BDW; Copyright GNB Media 2008.)
If we were talking past each other, it certainly wouldn't be the first time.
My apologies to you and everyone, to the extent the misunderstanding was the result of my writing.
Take care.
Jesse, to channel Miss Manners, this is what comes of modern society's decades-long effort to deny death and the social necessaries that come with it.
Used to be, kids growing up would have to deal now and then with the death of a relative (hopefully not too close) and to learn from observation the etiquette of the funeral. Including the fact that, whatever you think of the character of the deceased, there are things you just do not say. Not out loud, right there in your dark suit and black tie, talking to the aunts and cousins. You may be thinking, "At last the nasty fucker's dead!!", but you don't say it out loud, not there in that room.
But a lot of people don't learn that anymore, as we've sanitized death. The minister says, "We're not here to mourn a death, but to celebrate a life." But that's wrong!!. It is right to mourn the death of someone you love. So society sends mixed signals, and diminishes the ways to honor the dead, leaving people bereft, adrift. In a situation that is naturally disturbing and upsetting, they just don't know how to behave.
The anonymity of the Internet just compounds the problem, and so we get the "haha, I'm glad he's dead!" obscenities.
Awesome story! I was reading about the Buckley's life. I didn't agree with William F. Buckley's politics, but I admired his spirit. He was a genuine conservative,
the thing i love about this place is the chance to learn from each other and with each other. I was one of the pesky people bugging jesse by chat. 
ranting is more like it.
I think passions are running high on all fronts because of the state of our nation, this difficult primary, and george bush doing his best to destroy all that is lightness and good.
but you all are great. you yell, scream, fight, talk past each other, at each other AND with each other but at the end of it all I ALWAYS learn something. (not always sure what- he he- but something)
anyway.
Here's to Humans.
He was a genuine conservative
I wonder what William Buckley thought about the way the conservative wing of American politics has been taken over by complete froth-at-the-mouth wingnuts.
Before the Southern Strategy started bearing fruit, these people were always carefully marginalized by mainstream Republicans. These days, they are the mainstream Republicans. What used to be centrist Republicans have been either absorbed or extruded.
Wow, the National (Socialist) Review and I are the same age? Like I said before, that's what I love about this place: I learn something new every day.
What to say about William F. Buckley?
He devoted his life to laying down a stream of intellectual covering fire for privilege and oppression.
I guess it's up to each of us to decide how much the fact that he did this in a gentlemanly fashion (most of the time, anyway) counts against the results of his intellectual games. He lived long enough to see the logical outcome of the ideas he advocated; at least Buckley had the good taste to appear mildly appalled at that outcome.
I was never a fan of Buckley's politics, but I was always entertained by his obscure references and little known forms of speech and arcanities, plus his screamingly effete presentation that no one else has duplicated.
I believe Robin Williams has given it a try, although his impersonation would've been from an album over 25 year ago...
I find it abhorrent you call for anyone one to celebrate Buckley, as we do Gilley.
Yer a traitor to the progressive cause.
And yer a criminal case for defaming Gilley.
You really need to stop using his name, for you shame him every time you post of him.
Gilley would NOT be proud of you.
Hubris, LM, Sara, yes.
You? Not so much.
Why don't you see if Digby or FDL can use yer sold out 1% beliefs?
Course, you COULD start yer own forum.
Brown shirts and jack boots should be yer logo.
Harumph.
LM - You're wrong on this one.
Jesse - I had little patience for u as is but this just takes the cake. Oh if the readers keep calling you in the trash you write...perhaps its not that they can't read...maybe you can't (read: don't know) write.
Baltogeek: U are so on point on this it's not even funny.
And last thing:
Jesse,
Did it ever occur to you that Buckley was a Pinochet or a Reagan to some? Or where u just to blinded by his conservative credentials?
If he doesn't deserve my respect in life why the hell should I give it to him in death?
This is not some mirror image to the left. Buckley was a racist. He hated black people. Hated them. He just was smart enough to not say that out loud. I find nothing to admire in Buckley.
Conservativism is the politics of selfishism. These people have trashed our country.
The final result of conservatism is American citizens floating dead, down the streets of New Orleans.
And I will say what I damn well please about anyone. It's the truth.
Amen
While I hear the calls for being civil I personally say what the F**k, if he was an evil bastard, that fact that he has died makes him no less evil.
The only worthy comparison with STEVE, IMO is that death comes to us all and by our legacy we shall be judged, "for what it's worth"
If a man leaves a trail of bigotry and blood in his wake then by God, spitting on his grave is IMO only fair.
If the guy hates me simply because I'm black then I shall not twitter, Oh but he was so well spoken, and he is dead now, I won't speak evil of the dead, hold my tongue if I don't have anything nice to say.
I didn't like buckly, despised everythign he stood for, every thign he was. But i respected teh man.
We are damm lucky that there are not moer of his calaber on the right. damm lucky.
"...Should we not say good things about their fallen hero?..."
"...It is a matter of courtesy. Of being polite...."
He wanted to tatoo HIV infected Gays. Gee, wonder where he got that idea?
So the answer to your question is FUCK NO, no being polite about a scumbag like Buckley. And fuck you Jesse if you find this offensive, you can keep on clutching your pearls and head on over to the fainting couch.
"...his preemptive scolding of the readers of GNB is getting real fucking old...."
yep
The Vidal v. Buckley moments in '68 perfectly illustrate his gentlemanly conduct typical of the elite. Oozing with charm as long as you are mindful of your position.
To quote the Dixie Chicks, "I'm not ready to make nice" with any of the Elephascists, living or dead.
Should we speak sweetly of Goebbels just because HE's dead?
It speaks volumes when there's no hard answer or consensus about a person's life.
I think I've written about 5-6 different comments over the past several days - here or at Chez Driftglass. each one, thankfully, deleted before hitting the publish button. Rambling expletive laced rants about ogres won't make me any more erudite than I'm already not. The man's done gone. Now the final coda, now we rake the coals looking for diamonds in the ash.
IMHO
Buckley was to Conservatism what Quixote was to Knighthood, or Typhoid Mary was to Health Care. Earnestly trying to help the cause while foolishly sowing the seeds of its own destruction.
At the very least the man helped, albeit inadvertently, to bolster progressive causes by building his foundation upon patently absurd and highly assailable ideas. Sure, it sucks that we still have to keep chipping at away at this sand castle, but, (wait for it.. )
We Fight On.
& cheers to everyone who make this site so damned addictively readable
I think one thing that has been missed in Buckley was an ordinary bigot. Hated Jews, African Americans and queers with equal venom. I'm suprised no one has mentioned that Buckley wanted to TATTOO people with HIV. Talk about supporting a leper's bell...
Just because one speaks well does not mean is cultured. Neither does learning to play musicial instruments imply discipline.
The story of his harpsicord days totally cracked me up. In my younger days, I was working, classically trained musician. The similiraties between top flight musicians and top flight athletes are legion. Musical performance is largely a young person's "game." That Buckley wanted to perform with an orchestra whilst in his 50s is just a laugh riot. You only do that IF you've been doing full-time since your 20s. It's total narcicism otherwise. (Like Michael J playing for the Wizzards--too painful to think about).
Buckley used his rank elitism as a shield against being labled a red-neck. But that neck was very, very red. I always thought of Arendt when I saw Buckley. Because he wasn't a stereotpyical ill-educated and ill-mannered bigot, he got a free pass from many people. But that made his bigotry all the more insidious.
Just because hate is dressed-up in complete sentences and that the subjects and the verbs agree doesn't mean it isn't just as deadly.
A great intellect, perverted.
You want me to say something nice about William F. Buckley?
How about: thank you for an end to your pompously polysyllabic apologetics for loathsome politics?
Nothing that incredible about gentlemanship in the genteel. Wealth & comfort can buy a lot of such so-called character. I hear Hitler was a scintillating storyteller at dinner parties too. Character does not excuse moral rot, nor the hateful & deadly consequences of its advocacy, & it never will.
Nor does one's passing give them amnesty - if anything, it seals the true nature of their legacy. Buckley's was vile, all the more so as he had the mental equipment to know better, & consciously chose not to.
Don't respect death - it doesn't care.
Respect the living - they matter more.
Jim:
Bingo! Respect the living.
BTW: Buckley also called for the total supression of MLK (I believe in 1964).
He ran with an ugly, ugly crowd.
I've been rolling with laugther watching David Brooks paint lipstick on that pig. Buckley didn't pick Brooks to be his replacement because he prefer a "Christian." (And he put this in a memo!)
Not exactly a meritocracy over there at the Buckley, Buckley.
Someone should ask Brooks about THAT litle fact.
2 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
