Noam Chomsky: Well, first of all my sole contact with Buckley, which was of no particular significance, as far as I was concerned, was that he invited me to be on a talk program that he ran called, “Firing Line.” And yes I was invited, and was there for one program, that was it.
You can see that program; I understand it’s been now appears on the internet. At the end he said he was pretty angry, he said he would invite me back. But of course, I never heard from him again.
He was maybe the leading figure in the so-called conservative movement. I don’t think the term “conservative” is appropriate, but what’s called the conservative movement. He was maybe its leading figure, he was maybe its leading intellectual. His journal was “The House Journal.” He was considered, not by me, but he was considered to be witty, articulate, knowledgeable, and so on, and much respected. Again, not by me. But I’m giving a general impression.
By calling his successors, I assume you mean so-called neo-conservatives. I mean they’re even further from conservatives. They are just extreme radical nationalists; [Paul] Wolfowitz, [Richard] Pearl, [Dick] Cheney, and rest of them. It’s defaming conservatism to associate them with conservatism as an honorable tradition, but it’s not that.
The same is true of [Ronald] Reagan. Reagan believed in military violence and destruction. Central America, he virtually destroyed. He supported South Africa’s apartheid regime in violation of Congressional legislation. He supported its attacks on neighboring countries, which killed a million and a half people. He supported the Israeli atrocities in Lebanon, which killed ten of thousands of people, and so on.
And internally, he was in favor of large-scale government intervention in the economy. Reagan was the most protectionist President in postwar American history; the whole protectionist barriers. He called on the Pentagon to rescue deficient American managements, to teach them modern management techniques so that they could save the economy from Japanese takeover. To call these conservatism, this is a bad joke. And the neo-cons, so-called, are even more extreme. So by today’s standards, Buckley looks pretty modernist.
Recorded on: March 21, 2008
Discuss
Steven Sturdevant on March 27, 2008, 6:00 PM
Buckley was the most disgusting quasi-celebrity I ever encountered. I was a Republican for over forty years and a one-time subscriber to his magazine. I watched him several times on his TV show and could never fathom the depth of his conceit. I canceled my subscription to National Review upon receiving the issue that featured the portrait of Chelsea Clinton. What a sadistic bastard. I had no love for the parents but what did a little girl have to do with anything. It was as sick as McCain's famous joke.
While I think the world is better off now that he is dead, I think the world would be much, much better off if he had never existed.
Steven Sturdevant on March 27, 2008, 10:00 PM
Buckley was the most disgusting quasi-celebrity I ever encountered. I was a Republican for over forty years and a one-time subscriber to his magazine. I watched him several times on his TV show and could never fathom the depth of his conceit. I canceled my subscription to National Review upon receiving the issue that featured the portrait of Chelsea Clinton. What a sadistic bastard. I had no love for the parents but what did a little girl have to do with anything. It was as sick as McCain’s famous joke.
While I think the world is better off now that he is dead, I think the world would be much, much better off if he had never existed.
black 666 on May 28, 2008, 9:36 PM
and the same can be said about you t. rasa…people have a right to different notions and ideas, even if they are despised. i understand your anger , however a closed mind/system doesn't allow for change. To deny the very existence of another lends to indifference about you and your opinions,thoughts, and notions and in worse case scenerios yours or mines very existence when left to others with different ideals of how there world should or shouldn't look..
namaste,
black666
black 666 on May 29, 2008, 1:36 AM
and the same can be said about you t. rasa…people have a right to different notions and ideas, even if they are despised. i understand your anger , however a closed mind/system doesn’t allow for change. To deny the very existence of another lends to indifference about you and your opinions,thoughts, and notions and in worse case scenerios yours or mines very existence when left to others with different ideals of how there world should or shouldn’t look..
namaste,
black666
kida kida on June 21, 2008, 7:48 PM
His loss won't make the world a darker place since his spotlight always pointed in the same direction – that of Washington's dictate.
Buckley was just another 'commissar' and it's quite interesting to see how his "intellectual stature" was reduced to that of a mere censor constantly interrupting and not letting Chomsky articulate his positions.
kida kida on June 21, 2008, 11:48 PM
His loss won’t make the world a darker place since his spotlight always pointed in the same direction – that of Washington’s dictate.
Buckley was just another ‘commissar’ and it’s quite interesting to see how his “intellectual stature” was reduced to that of a mere censor constantly interrupting and not letting Chomsky articulate his positions.
Matthew Wood on August 23, 2008, 11:15 AM
Chomsky..our most developed analytical mind shows buckley to be a crude bullying ideolouge
Matthew Wood on August 23, 2008, 3:15 PM
Chomsky..our most developed analytical mind shows buckley to be a crude bullying ideolouge
Steven Sturdevant on September 27, 2008, 10:48 PM
My goodness, black 666. You not only state the obvious
of course the same could be said of mebut you jump to the conclusion that I am expressing anger. “Why are you so angry?” has become so clichJim Stiene on April 24, 2009, 5:28 PM
A Democracy only thrives with the sound of many voices, and he was one of the voices that shaped public perception. Many have become to interested in hearing their own thoughts reflected back, rather than opposing thoughts giving them fodder for reevaluation of ideas.
There is not growth when the mind is closed. Not much learning when people surround themselves with yes men or similar minds where the only variety is the way they express their ideas rather than the ideas themselves.
The parties are like a maternal and paternal figure in which one coddles, the other practices tough love. Together they create a sense of balance. Without them we become too soft or too hard.
There really are two sides to every coin, and Buckley aptly expressed one of them.
Rian Mark Gorey on June 4, 2009, 10:26 AM
Buckley is a great mind of the 20th century that will be greatly missed and is missed already.
It is amazing that the question about his passing is posed to an accomplished academic linguist who is a political dissident, libertarian socialist and anarchist, anti-Catholic who met Buckley once. Buckley, an entrepreneur, leading conservative thinker, and Catholic. Suprise? Chomsky disagreed with did not like Buckley. This is an incredibly stupid question and mindless peice for “Big Think.”
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register