Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Review: William F. Buckley Jr.
Review: William F. Buckley Jr.
Dec 27, 2025 10:10 AM

Lee Edwards calls William F. Buckley Jr. “The St. Paul of the conservative movement.” No other 20th century figure made such a vast contribution to the intellectual force of political conservatism. He paved the way for the likes of Ronald Reagan and all of those political children of Reagan who credit the former president for bringing them into politics. He achieved what no other had done and that was his ability to bring traditional conservatives, libertarians, and munists together under the same umbrella. Late in life, when asked why he continued working so hard despite fame and wealth, a surprised Buckley said, “My Father taught me that I owe it to my country. It’s how I pay my debt.”

Lee Edwards offers an excellent story of Buckley’s founding and overseeing of the modern conservative crusade in William F. Buckley Jr.: The Maker of a Movement. Edwards traces the roots of those who influenced Buckley, from libertarian author Albert Jay Nock, conservative political scientist Willmoore Kendall, the munist Whittaker Chambers, and political theorist James Burnham. Buckley fused together these right of center factions that were often feuding with each other more than with mon foes, the statists. Kendall, Burnham, and Chambers were all closely associated with National Review, launched by Buckley in 1955. Russell Kirk was also an essential conservative voice in the mix who agreed to e a contributor to the magazine. Buckley purged Ayn Rand and her anti-Christian and morally bankrupt philosophy of Objectivism from mainstream conservatism. He dismissed anti-semitism from the movement by dismissing it from his publication. The conservative historian George Nash simply said, “Much of the history of American conservatism after 1955 is the history of the individuals associated with the magazine William F. Buckley Jr. founded.”

A significant aspect of this book, and one that has received more attention since the death of Buckley, was his magnanimous personality and financial generosity. It is estimated that since he was paid a nominal salary by National Review, he diverted $10 million to the magazine because he forwarded speaking fees, lecture fees and other fees to National Review’s coffers. He waived his speaking fee for the Acton Institute in 1992 because according to Edwards, “He was taken with the idea of an organization dedicated to explaining the relationship between-free market capitalism and Christian morality.” Edwards offers other points of generosity:

He once visited a young man in a Texas hospital recovering from wounds in Vietnam. The soldier’s doctors had told him he would never see again. Buckley paid for his flight to New York City, where after an eye examination by one of the world’s leading eye surgeons and three operations, the young veteran’s eyesight was restored.

Buckley’s wit, sunny personality, and charm was infectious. Edwards tells a story about how Buckley was wildly cheered by Harvard students at a debate because of his biting wit and intellectual prowess. It became apparent that Buckley was cut from a far different mold than the stereotypical angry or dour faced conservative.

The weight of mitments to National Review, Firing Line, his column and book writing, lecture schedule, and assisting other conservative organizations was staggering. He even found time to run for mayor of New York City in 1965. Buckley wanted to raise national awareness of conservative and libertarian ideas and when asked what he would do if he won he famously quipped, “Demand a recount.” He called for welfare reform in the campaign, saying recipients should work for assistance, outlining the ideas future Republican lawmakers would embrace in their own calls for reform. He supported free enterprise zones in ethnic minority neighborhoods long before Jack Kemp would popularize the idea. Buckley shocked many pundits with a respectable showing in the race, garnering support from many ethnic, Catholic Democrats and middle class Republicans. These, of course, were the same groups Ronald Reagan would later tap into in his presidential campaigns.

Buckley’s Roman Catholic faith was intricately tied to his conservative views. He believed in human liberty but understood that liberty itself could not lead to an earthly utopia. He penned a meditative account of his Catholic faith in Nearer, My God. Edwards reminds us his munist views stemmed “not just because it was tyranny but also because it was heresy.” When he was asked by Playboy Magazine what he wanted as an epitaph, he replied, “I know that my Redeemer liveth.”

Buckley’s friendship with Ronald Reagan was deep and abiding, even among the occasional political disagreements. Both men shared a passion for not merely munism but defeating it. Buckley called Lech Walesa, Alexandr Solzhenitsyn, and Andrei Sakharov the great heroes of the 1980s and they had earned their place in “freedom’s House of Lords.” But the political leader was Ronald Reagan, with his strategic vision. Reagan too praised Buckley saying at the 30th anniversary celebration of National Review:

You and I remember a time of the forest primeval, a time when nightmare and danger reigned and only the knights of darkness prevailed; when conservatives seemed without a champion in the critical battle of style and content. And then, suddenly riding up through the mists, came our clipboard-bearing Galahad: ready to take on any challengers in the critical battle of point and counterpoint. And, with grace and humor and passion, to raise a standard to which patriots and lovers of freedom could repair.

No less praising is the truth Edwards articulates when he says Buckley, who was born into wealth, could have simply been a playboy of the Western world. But Buckley ferociously served and sacrificed in order to raise up the conservative cause and place it into the mainstream of American politics. He uplifted the intellectual debate of conservatives and the country, and always asked probing questions of the direction of the movement, most recently questioning the continued conflict in Iraq before his death. But never a quitter his last ment on the war was “stick it out,” despite his skepticism of nation building in the Middle East, which he called “Wilsonian.”

William F. Buckley Jr. was a conservative icon. Generations of young conservatives grew up learning from him and tried to emulate his ideas and values. One of the greatest losses to conservatism with his death is the power of his ideas in times such as these. Many conservatives are reminded of this when we hear or read the anti-intellectualism and lack of critical thinking echoing from talk radio or the blogosphere. Buckley was the one who not only made conservatism respectable and mainstream, but reminded us too that it could tower over the liberals of the academy.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Innovation in Nepal: Lessons on economic freedom from a farmer-entrepreneur
Agriculture is a way of life for the people of Sugauli Birta, a small village in Nepal. But while farmers invest much of their time and energy in their crops, they often spendlong hours traveling across the region to have their grain and rice ground by regional mills. Such journeys are a drain on productivity and opportunity, diverting attention and resources away from their land, families, munity. Fortunately, a local entrepreneur, Lorik Prasad Yadav, had an innovative idea that would...
Boris Johnson: Where there is a vision, the people flourish?
Newly elected UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson eliminated half of Theresa May’s Cabinet members during his first day on the job. That es as Johnson presents a unique vision of economic liberty at home and independence from the European Union, writes Rev. Richard Turnbull in a new essay posted at the Acton Institute’sReligion & Liberty Transatlanticwebsite. Rev. Turnbull notes Johnson’s mitment to economic liberty, a view that has not been so strongly embraced since the time of Margaret Thatcher. After...
Why do we hate whistleblowers?
Americans claim to hate fraud and corruption. Yet we also tend to despise and discourage those who “snitch” and expose such crimes. How do we reconcile these contradictory positions? Today is “National Whistleblower Appreciation Day,” an observance to celebrate people e forward to raise the alarm about a problem within government or a public organization. In honor of the day I mend watching this video by Kelly Richmond Pope, an accounting professor turned documentary filmmaker, who considers why we hate...
Inadequate: Catholic magazine explains why it published Communist propaganda
If Dean Dettloff’s “The Catholic Case for Communism” were intended to be thought-provoking, it raises only one question: Why did America magazine facilitate this mendacious PR exercise? Editor Fr. Matt Malone, S.J.. felt a need to explain “Why we published an essay sympathetic munism.” (Read our analysis of the original article here.) Fr. Malone likened the article to the magazine bashing Senator Joe McCarthy, which he said took place after America “spent much of the previous 50 years loudly munism.”...
Brazil needs a right-wing intellectual movement
That Brazil experienced a surprising political movement and elected a right-wing government after decades of a democratic socialist regime, many people already know. However, a political movement is not enough to change the future of a nation. The reality is that Brazil is missing the most important element needed to root out an ideology of tyranny: an intellectual movement. The lack of a right-wing intellectual movement can cause dangerous consequences in Brazil. In the book The Intellectuals and Socialism, Friedrich...
French-language readers of transatlantic learn of free-market environmentalism
The Acton Institute continues our outreach to the Francophone world with a new translation of one of our articles on the pivotal issue of environmental stewardship. The latest offering illustrates how the free market cares for creation better than government intervention. Our friend Benoît H. Perringraciously translated Joseph Sunde’s article “Free market environmentalism: Conserving and collaborating with nature”; the resultant “Une écologie de marché pour collaborer avec la nature” may be read at Acton’s Religion & Liberty Transatlantic website. Sunde...
First Things Interviews Samuel Gregg about his new book
In a newly released interview, senior editor at First Things, Mark Baulerein, sits down with Samuel Gregg to discuss his new book, Faith, Reason, and the Struggle for Western Civilization. Gregg discusses the relationship between reason and faith among other topics that he addresses in his book. Gregg states: One of the things I try to argue in this book is that if you want to understand a civilization that has taken things like liberty, rule of law, creativity, justice,...
Explainer: What you should know about the federal government’s two-year budget deal
What just happened? Yesterday the House of Representatives passed a passed a two-year budget and an agreement to once again raise the debt limit. The bill, known as the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019, is expected to be passed by the Senate next week. What does the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019 do? The legislation amends the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 to establish a congressional budget for fiscal years 2020 and 2021. The main actions...
Viktor Frankl on the error of the pleasure principle
Aristotle asked what made the good life? Was it pleasure, material wealth, honor, or virtue? He argued that while pleasure, wealth, and honor were a part of a good life and human happiness, they could not constitute it. Pleasure is fleeting, wealth is always always acquired for the sake of something else–a big house, a nice car, influence –and es from other people and can be taken away from you. Real human happiness and a good life could only obtained...
No, millions of Americans are not living on less than $2 per day
Over the past five years some welfare advocates have been promoting an eye-opening claim: more than 3 million U.S. households—including 1.65 million households with children—are living on less than $2 per person, per day. That sounds horrific, and it is: horrifically misleading. New research published by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) finds that more than 90 percent of the 3.6 million non-homeless that had previously been classified as living in extreme poverty were misclassified. Shockingly, more than half...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved