With Friends Like These – William F. Buckley’s Betrayals

William F. Buckley was responsible for moving National Review away from its early stalwarts, such as Joe Sobran, Sam Francis, John O’Sullivan, Peter Brimelow and other nationalist and anti-immigration authors. He was largely silent during the gross attacks on Mel Bradford by Norman Podhoretz and his crew when Bradford was nominated by Reagan to head the NEH in 1980. He publicly attacked Pat Buchanan and Joe Sobran in the book-length screed, “In Search of Anti-Semitism”.

Below are a series of quotes from rightwing intellectuals on Buckley’s betrayals and purges, as well as, the decline of National Review.

With a friend like this, who needs enemies?

Joe Sobran on Bill Buckley: “His conservatism is a conservatism of image, show business, public relations, stock mannerisms; big words, anfractuous grammar, repetitious Latinisms, implying a depth that isn’t there.”

“In these episodes, Buckley’s genteel, Ivy League concern for fitting in always seemed to triumph over his more pugnacious (and ethnic) peers like Sam Francis, Sobran, and the entire gang that went on to form the American Conservative and Chronicles.”–Roman Dmowski

“Worse than merely moderating its conservatism, Buckley allowed National Review in the 90s to become the voice of unadulterated, bellicose neoconservatism. Gone were the Catholic “just war” theorists uneasy with contemporary “total war.” Gone was any intelligent criticism of Israel. Gone too was any intellectual criticism of our steady reinvention as a nation through sustained non-European immigration. To mention the latter fact in particular became taboo, even though, National Review as late as the 1970s openly opposed less dramatic social engineering initiatives like school bussing and the ERA.” —Roman Dmowski

Related image

“And though it attracted intellectual sojourners, this movement for the most part was a strategy for fighting Communism combined with a cult of personality. That it later fell into the hands of New York social democrats, who had given themselves a partial facelift, is not surprising. What the neocons swallowed up was thin gruel, and if it was necessary to make it thinner while accepting new direction from the left, very little of substance was thereby lost…By now “conservative” foundations and publications have to carry out a double responsibility, cheering for the Republican Party or vilifying their Democratic rivals for government patronage; while genuflecting before neoconservative icons, who have all the freshness of Egyptian mummies. The shortcoming of my relevant works on these matters is that they don’t do full justice to a ludicrous “movement,” which is a collection of careerists who have tried to differentiate themselves from their counterparts in the Democratic Party. This non-movement did not start out as much but has managed to deteriorate nonetheless, as an effective force against the Left that it is trying to please while offering “moderate” opposition. But looking at the bright side, Mr. Buckley has gone through life making socially acceptable friends. As for the others, he has thrown every one of them off the bus.” —Paul Gottfried

“As I have mentioned before, a ‘castaway’ is someone like Robinson Crusoe who managed to save himself after the ship on which he was traveling was wrecked . . . It is not someone cast out or away from a ship. That is called being marooned (Ben Gunn in Treasure Island is an example, as was Alexander Selkirk on whom Crusoe is based).  The word ‘castaway’ as applied to me by [Buckley] implies that the conservative movement was the ship in which I was traveling, that it wrecked and I survived.” —Sam Francis

“But not the least evidence of Buckley`s unmistakable effeminate streak was a viciousness that showed in his flouting of such comforting conventions—for example in his 1995 obituary of the libertarian economist Murray Rothbard, which the Mises Review`s David Gordon fairly described as “malicious spite.” Buckley`s rationale (presumably) was that those of us who live by opinion must be prepared to die by opinion. If so, in this area at least, I agree with him. Just as the gangsters in The Godfather reassured each other that their bloody clashes were just business, not personal, I`d say that my disagreement with Buckley was fundamentally political, although I do consider his character to have been among the most contemptible I have encountered in public life. However, in Buckley`s case, the political was personal and vice versa. It was his personal failings that ultimately accounted for the four-decade fizzle of his once-brilliant career—and for the fact that, regularly credited with the making of the modern conservative movement, he must also be indicted for its breaking.” – Peter Brimelow

“For all the sentimental back-slapping of Buckley by  conservatives, what exactly are the accomplishments of the  conservative movement in the past half-century? A smaller federal government? Fiscal responsibility? The protection and advancement of liberty and freedom? What are the lasting achievements of the conservative movement? An alternative media? Stopping America’s cultural slide to the far Left? The single most important beachhead for liberalism is the vice-like grip on our cultural and social institutions through public education and the mass media. Conservatives have punted to reverse what James Burnham once referred to as the “Suicide of the West.”–Kevin Lamb

Image result for Stand Athwart History cartoon

“Let’s make a list of people purged from (or gagged at) neocon National Review since its inception: Revilo Oliver, Russell Kirk, John O’Sullivan, Ann Coulter, Pat Buchanan, Murray Rothbard, Jared Taylor, Sam Francis, Joe Sobran, Chilton Williamson, Clyde Wilson, Thomas Fleming, Peter Brimelow, Edwin Rubenstein, Paul Gottfried, Steve Sailer, John Derbyshire, Robert Weissberg, etc…Looking at the names above, one can quickly see that National Review, over the years, has in essence purged all of its most talented writers. Since the function of National Review is not to confront the left but to police the right, as commenters have noted, it’s no surprise that National Review is repulsed by talent. National Review today is a three-ring circus of blathering fools like Jonah Goldberg or Ramesh Ponnuru, insane invade-the-world/invite-the-world interventionists like, well, almost everyone there, or non-entity fratboys like Rich Lowry. How many readers do they have left with IQs above 90?”

By the way, Buckley was a CIA agent.

-Originally published at Identity Dixie.

32 Comments

  1. Bill Buckley, the original respectable conservative. They let the left set the limits of their opinions and collect a handsome paycheck for it. Money and recognition come before loyalty to their own people, backstabbing anti-Whites.

    • Freemasonry on display. Southern Aristocrats for decades loved and supported Freemasonry never being able to realize they were the members of the very Anti-White Anti-Christian Death cult that was secretly destroying them. Talk about a Jedi Mind Trick!

      Still to this day in some quarters in Dixie, being a Freemason is considered a GOOD thing

      • They voted for Bush and McCain in the South Carolina primaries. The South is a deeply conflicted place. Sending its sons to fight for the occupation government.

        • Great comment.. Just like Arizona is very conflicted by voting for two treason cucks in Mccain and Flake as their senators. Back to South Carolina, this state also votes for Lindsey Graham consistently and had Nikki Haley as their governor.. Very bizarre.

          • We have open primaries though.

            And I’m pretty sure we receive more per capita immigration than any other state. Wealthy neighborhoods of Charleston metro area brag how a Southern accent won’t be heard anywhere. And Greenville metro area has gone Yankee also.

      • I talked to a guy from South Africa. He seemed to think Masons were crazy and dangerous. I forget, but I think he told of a supposed sacrifice, which I didn’t believe. My point is folks in SA don’t seem to like Masons.

  2. Silas the William Francis Buckley who worked for the CIA was born in Medford Mass in 1928 and died in Beirut Lebanon in 1985. William F. Buckley Jr. was William Frank Buckley, he was born in NYC in 1925 and died in 2008. Two different guys. The Father of William F Buckley Jr and his brother Senator James Buckley of NY was William Frank Buckley Sr. the scion of an Irish-Canadian family who had migrated from Ontario to Texas where Buckley Sr. was born. Buckley Jr. was born into Oil Wealth, which connected him directly to the Bush Crime Family. Buckley’s mother came from an old New Orleans family, thus he had Southern Connections.

    William Frank Buckley Jr. was the first so-called Conservative who established a movement that auspiciously was a new movement that countered the Eisenhower-Nixon Triangulation Rockefeller Republican types. He called it Conservatism, but it was in effect Globalism in Conservative Rags. In other words they would espouse the ideas of Silent Cal Coolidge, but would meanwhile push forward Free Trade and Globalist Military Entanglements, something Silent Cal would have fought with his last breath of life. What Buckley figured out was to use the Culture War to clothe his true motives in thus taking Joe Six Packs eyes off the globalist economics and military involvements while he shoved globalism through hoping Joe Six Pack wouldn’t notice. In this the Rockefeller Republicans were more honest, at least Ike and Nixon were honest in their Globalist beliefs.

    The one thing Buckley Jr. did and George Lincoln Rockwell strongly condemned him for this was to forever destroy the McCarthyites and Protectionists in the Republican Party. In other words Buckley placed the John Birch Society firmly in the crosshairs. The Birchers understood and said it from day one. Racial Integration was the first step in full on Globalization and the dismemberment of our society and the government was riddled with Communists at every level. Buckleyism seeked to make their Trotskyite Communist friends safely ensconced in power and looked at the long goal, impose Communist Globalism but use the culture war to hide the fact that they were doing it.

    TRAITOROUS SLIME. Undoubtedly he was a 33rd Degree Freemason as well. Freemasonry is still loved and honored in Dixie like Mama, but it is an ANTIWHITE DEATH CULT. We must purge the Masons from our midst

    • Interesting side light but according to Eustace Mullins the Birch Society was founded with Rockefeller money. The latter bought Welch’s candy company for 10 times what it was worth.

      • Mullins is right. The JBS was set up as controlled opposition back in 1958. Revilo Oliver resigned from the National Council of the Society in 1966 when he found out along with a lot of big supporters. The late “Birdman” Bryant did a full expose on this at his now defunct website.

      • The John Birch Society, which I personally believe was a set-up job myself, was used as a vehicle to belittle and silence anti-Communists and Conspiracy Theorist types. What they did was funnel them into the JBS then proceed to make the JBS and by extension them look ridiculous. George Lincoln Rockwell said about the JBS years ago that they would identify the problem but they had no solution for it, which Rockwell said the only solution was National Socialism. In hindsight GLR was right. He still is today

      • The CIA William Francis Buckley and William Frank Buckley Jr of the National Review are TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE. That being said William Frank Buckley Jr. was likely a CIA asset of some sort and was pushing the narrative in the direction (((THEY))) needed it to go!

  3. Being a Yale man Buckley was in the CIA and probably Skull and Bones as well. He made conservatism “respectable” (kosher) by purging it of the Coughlinites and Birchers. At the same time Buckley founded the NR his arch nemesis Willis Carto founded Liberty Lobby. Carto gave refuge to the populists and America Firsters whom Buckley had marginalized. Buckley claimed to be an ardent, practicing Catholic but that may have been an affectation, like his snobby accent and mannerisms.

    • Buckley’s mothers family was old New Orleans, likely a French Catholic family, his father I believe was Irish/German Catholic as near as I can figure. This is the irony considering how much the Northeast Yankee Establishment HATES Catholics that he effect their mannerisms, speech and outlook. Almost as if he was trying to OUT YANKEE the Yankees.

      Buckley’s father’s family originally came from Canada to Texas where Buckley Sr. was born, Buckley’s mother was old New Orleans, thus he had deep Southern connections that somehow he disavowed at some point.

    • There’s a video up of Buckley grilling Wallace. Buckley asks how many “conservative intellectuals” have backed Wallace. Wallace says he doesn’t know what the heck Buckley’s talking about, haha.

      Since so much is down now from YT, I dunno if it’s still up. It highlights how much of a fraud Buckley was, though. “Conservative” to him was some sort of cult.

  4. I don’t think Buckley liked the coloreds. His National Review occasionally flirted with racism in order to keep the pro-White nativists from defecting over to Carto.

  5. GLR pointed out to succede reachout a wide audience. This Buckley was a one horse town. his finess attracted an audience of upper crust.Meanwhile Hollywood, sports,comedy shows capture general population while inserting sibliminally 5% trash hence;Truman desegregation army.1957 brown v board of education.1960unpopular civil rights and third world.

  6. Buckley was a fatuous old fart, hiding behind words that had to be looked up in the dictionary. A traitor of the highest order.

  7. I remember seeing him on PBS occasionally as a boy of 10 or so (mid 70s). It was so bloody obvious to me, at 10, that the guy was a poseur, windbag, and clown of the highest order that, 40 years later, I can’t believe that anyone believed (and still believes) that Buckley was a leader of conservatives in any way, shape or form.

    Take a few minutes to watch any old video. He was an obvious clown act. No one with an IQ above room temperature could have done anything but burst out laughing at his act.

    Bootlicker pretending to be an aristocrat.

    • I agree with you. I was *never* attracted to classical liberalism.

      Some people got really into this bs movement.

      What surprises me is some geniuses wrote for NR. It wasn’t entirely without merit. Weaver and Kirk, to name two. And Burnham and Nisbet are both worth reading. Wikipedia has an impressive list of past contributors.

Leave a Reply