
William F Buckley, gentleman revolutionary and word-drunk dandy
Buckley's father, William F Sr, a south Texas lawyer of Irish Catholic descent, made a considerable fortune in the oil business, and married a much sought-after beauty, with whom he had ten children. Most of the Buckley brood were bright, some were brilliant, and all were, like their father, arch-conservatives who believed their country was going to hell in a handcart being vigorously propelled by liberals, Jews and opponents of black segregation. They grew up in two great and beautiful houses, one in rural New York state, the other in Camden, South Carolina. They were a fun-loving lot, although deeply religious, and were seriously determined to refound America as one nation under God and the Wasps.
They would have deplored Donald Trump as a vulgar arriviste, but by jingo they would have voted for him. In fact, they would support anyone, any scoundrel, crook or tyrant, who they felt could be depended on to further the conservative cause and fight communism wherever it reared its collective head. Buckley Jr cultivated the Red-baiting senator Joseph McCarthy, the egregious lawyer and future Trump enabler Roy Cohn, the diehard segregationist senator George Wallace, although he found him personally repulsive, and General Augusto Pinochet, the Chilean despot and mass murderer. Pinochet was judged to have been responsible for the violent deaths of thousands of his opponents, but Buckley would have none of it; the general 'told me otherwise', he said, and as his biographer observes, 'for Bill Buckley that was good enough'.
Although Buckley, born in 1925, was a 'radical conservative' from his earliest days, he did not show any particular early promise as a political mover and shaker. In his high school years, Tanenhaus writes, 'apart from music, which he worked at with discipline and zeal, his enthusiasms — horses and … sailing — seemed those not of the future leader of an intellectual movement but of a country squire's pampered younger son'.
However, at Millbrook private school, in Dutchess County, New York, the 'Young Mahster', as one of Buckley's sisters dubbed him, came under the considerable influence of Edward Pulling, an inspirational teacher for whom 'community service was nearly a fetish', Tanenhaus writes. 'Responsibility,' Pulling told his pupils, 'cannot be learnt only by hearing about it; one must actually experience it.' And indeed throughout his life Buckley fulfilled diligently his various obligations, as he saw them, to his family, to his religious faith and to his country, right or wrong.
He had not the slightest doubt that America was the world's greatest nation, and that its greatest task was the defeat of international communism. If some moral corners had to be cut in carrying out that task, so be it. At 14, in 1940, he became 'an ardent member' of the America First Committee, part of the isolationist movement 'remembered today', Tanenhaus notes, 'for its antisemitic and pro-Nazi associations'. The committee's specific aim was to fight Roosevelt's Lend-Lease scheme, under which the US sent warships to join in the British fight against Nazi Germany.
• The 9 best politics books of the past year to read next
At Millbrook, under Pulling's tutelage, Buckley proved a brilliant public speaker — throughout his life his greatest and most persuasive gift was for intellectual debate, even if at times he reduced his contests to the level of slanging matches. This was the case most famously in a TV prizefight during the 1968 presidential elections in which he was matched against the redoubtable Gore Vidal. At one point Buckley flew into a rage and snarled at Vidal, 'Now, listen, you queer. Stop calling me a crypto-Nazi or I'll sock you in your goddamn face and you'll stay plastered.' Vidal, of course, was delighted to hear his despised rival losing it in such a coarse fashion on national television. As for Buckley, the incident haunted him to the end of his days.
Oddly, perhaps, it also provoked speculation as to Buckley's own sexual orientation. His wife, Pat, the socialite empress of Manhattan, asked by a journalist how she was holding up in the aftermath of the televised debacle, said ruefully: 'I'll tell you how I am. Two hundred million Americans think William F Buckley is a screaming homosexual.' Tanenhaus quotes A Scott Berg, the biographer of the America First leader and aviator Charles Lindbergh, saying of Buckley: 'He's so gay.'
That televised display of fury was an aberration. Buckley, unlike his thuggish hero McCarthy, for instance, was usually the epitome of New England suavity and southern charm. He had a gift for friendship, and not just among fellow conservatives; some of his allegiances were highly improbable. He was close to the economist and liberal intellectual John Kenneth Galbraith, and he had the highest regard for the novelist Norman Mailer, whose pugnaciousness he prized and whose prose style he revered — 'He makes the most beautiful metaphors in the business.'
His own literary style was elegant, indeed dandyish, elaborate and word-drunk. His first language was Spanish — he grew up in Mexico, where the family lived for some years, and Spanish was the language of parents and children alike — which may be part of the reason why throughout his life he gloried in the riches of the English tongue. He was a logophile, and loved obscure and little-used words, such as logophile.
• Searching for the roots of Trumpism? Go back to 1992
At Yale in the late 1940s he wrote for and eventually took over the Yale Daily News. He proved himself an excellent journalist, and used his position on the student newspaper to excoriate the university itself for its liberal outlook and its tolerance, as he saw it, of left-wing academics. It was good training for the project that would be his lifelong love, and the pulpit from which he could preach the doctrine of radical conservatism: the magazine National Review, which he founded in 1955 and edited until 1990.
He used his widely read column in the Review to back the ultra-conservative Barry Goldwater in his disastrous presidential campaign in 1964, and helped his old pal Ronald Reagan to win the White House in 1980, a victory that ushered in the conservative remake of America that Buckley had been advocating for so long. He and his staff at the Review were euphoric, to the point of delusional grandeur. When the winning result came in, the magazine warned its readers that from now on there would be no more levity in its pages: 'We have a nation to run.'
Was Buckley the political and social force in American life that Tanenhaus takes him to have been? Certainly in the National Review, and in his popular weekly TV talk show Firing Line, he promoted the conservative cause relentlessly, using wit and a polished style to charm, flatter and, he hoped, win over his readers and viewers. He was surely not the only begetter of, as Tanenhaus's subtitle has it, 'the revolution that changed America', but certainly he was as politically influential as anyone could be who did not hold political office.
Buckley is a magnificent work of history as well as of biography, and is as relevant to these parlous times as it is revelatory of Buckley and his times. Tanenhaus, a former editor of The New York Times Book Review, and Buckley's choice as his biographer, has an encyclopaedic grasp of his subject, his prose is clear-running, unassertive and elegant, and his judgments are sound throughout. Not the least of Buckley's attractions is that not only is it beautifully written and scrupulously edited, it is also that rare thing nowadays, a model of the book-maker's craft — and it is printed on acid-free paper, so it will last for generations. Well done, Random House.
Buckley: The Life and the Revolution That Changed America by Sam Tanenhaus (Random House £33 pp1040). To order a copy go to timesbookshop.co.uk. Free UK standard P&P on orders over £25. Special discount available for Times+ members
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Guardian
43 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Ron DeSantis enters the chat: governor eyes chance to redraw Florida maps
With Gavin Newsom and Greg Abbott, the respective heavyweight governors of California and Texas, trading blows over plans to gerrymander the 2026 midterms, it was always kind of inevitable that Florida's Ron DeSantis would enter the chat. The Republican sees his state, the nation's third-largest by several metrics, not least its 28 congressional seats, as pivotal in the redistricting wars for control of the House. So few were surprised this week when DeSantis gave his full-throated endorsement to two projects to try to save the Republican majority: Donald Trump's call for an unprecedented mid-decade census that could blow things up nationally; and state Republicans' efforts to redraw existing district maps in their favor, similar to Abbott's scheming in Texas. 'We have 28 now, we might have 29, 30, 31, maybe. Who knows?' DeSantis said at a press conference in Melbourne on Monday, expressing his belief that a new national population tally that excludes undocumented immigrants could expand Florida's congressional delegation. Currently, 20 of those 28 seats are held by Republicans. Even without a census, DeSantis and allies including the Florida house speaker, Daniel Perez, have concluded that tinkering with existing boundaries and dumping blocs of Democratic voters into heavily Republican districts could net them several more. Perez, bolstered by a Florida supreme court ruling in July that approved DeSantis's wholesale stripping of Black voters' influence in the north of the state, is convening a 'select committee on congressional redistricting' to do the same in the south. The long-serving congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Trump bete noire Jared Moskowitz are two of the prominent south Florida Democrats in DeSantis's crosshairs. 'We are going to have to do a mid-decade redistricting,' DeSantis said. 'Obviously you would have to redraw the lines. Even if they don't do a new census, even if they don't revise the current census, I do think that it is appropriate to be doing it.' To Florida Democrats who have promised to fight the emerging threat to the eight House seats they do still hold, DeSantis's maneuvering is a stereotypical power-play by a governor who has frequently been able to bend the state legislature to his will. 'This isn't about drawing lines on a map, this is about who gets hurt and who gets silenced in this thing we call democracy, or in this democratic process,' said Shevrin Jones, a Democratic state senator whose district covers parts of downtown Miami and Miami Beach. 'Floridians were extremely clear years ago when we voted on fair districts that the redistricting process should be fair and transparent, that it should be reflective of the people and not the political ambitions of those who are in power. Yet that's what we're seeing right now.' To many critics, the Florida supreme court's ruling, authored by the chief justice, Carlos Muñiz, a DeSantis appointee, was a sleight of hand: it stated that the districts drawn – by Republicans – that ensured fair Black representation violated a 2010 voter-approved constitutional amendment banning partisan and racial gerrymandering during redistricting. Yet the effect of the ruling was to essentially nullify the amendment by validating DeSantis's manipulation of the northern districts to the Republicans' advantage, and to give him a green light to do the same anywhere else. Nikki Fried, the chair of the Florida Democratic party, said the governor had seized on the ruling to blatantly attempt to rig the 2026 midterms. 'After gutting representation for Black Floridians and stacking the court to uphold it, he wants to further gerrymander and suppress the vote of millions of Floridians,' she said in a statement. 'If Ron DeSantis spent half as much time solving real problems as he does scheming to steal elections, maybe we wouldn't be in the middle of a housing, insurance and education crisis.' Republicans hold a supermajority in both chambers of the Florida legislature, so any walkout by Democrats, similar to that seen in Texas where lawmakers fled the state to deny quorum, would be ineffective. Instead, Jones said, his party, at state level at least, will continue to call out what they see as underhand efforts by the DeSantis administration to join the national Republican drive to save its House majority in support of Trump's agenda. 'I understand where Gavin Newsom and a great deal of Democratic governors are coming from when they say fight fire with fire. That's fair, we can't continue as Democrats to show up to a gunfight with slingshots,' he said. 'I also understand that the Republicans are in power, and I understand they have no scruples about what they're doing, I get that. The question is when or how can we find the alliances that exist to push back on the bullshit that the Republicans are doing, because it's an absolute threat to not just democracy, but an absolute threat to our national security and our future.' Jones said that DeSantis, a lame-duck governor about to enter his final year in office before being termed out, had leapt upon the opportunity to inject himself back into the national picture. Still wounded by the humiliating collapse of his pursuit of the Republican presidential nomination a year and a half ago, DeSantis has seen himself eclipsed in the 2028 race by emerging hopefuls including Vice-President JD Vance and secretary of state Marco Rubio, the former Florida senator. 'This isn't just about Florida, it's about national political positioning. The only way Ron DeSantis can prove that his voice is still loud is doing or saying asinine things like this to continue to kiss ass to Trump,' Jones said. 'I think the governor is trying to restart a failing campaign that lost gas quickly, and I think he's trying to fill it back up. But that car doesn't work any more, and I don't know any mechanic that wants to work to fix it.'


North Wales Live
4 hours ago
- North Wales Live
DWP explains how it will stop people fraudulently claiming £749 monthly payment
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has recently confirmed it remains "committed" to combating fraud and error within the benefits system, including recouping debts arising from Personal Independence Payments (PIP). Conservative MP Sir John Hayes questioned the DWP about what measures it is implementing to "tackle people fraudulently claiming PIP". In a written reply, DWP Minister Andrew Western outlined fresh measures being rolled out to "prevent fraud entering the system based on the types of cases and trends we have seen". This encompasses "introducing more rigorous checks for customers changing personal details, including bank accounts". Mr Western stated: " DWP is committed to tackling fraud and error in the benefits system and to the recovery of debts, including those generated by Personal Independent Payments. Working closely with counter fraud experts, the DWP has introduced measures to prevent fraud entering the system based on the types of cases and trends we have seen," reports the Daily Record. New DWP measures to tackle benefit fraud These include: Strengthening the Identity and Verification Process to prevent fraudulent cases entering the system Introducing more rigorous checks for customers changing personal details, including bank accounts Delivering awareness sessions for Case Managers and Healthcare Professionals, reinforcing action to take when suspicious cases are identified - for example, fake documents The Minister continued: 'DWP is delivering against key counter fraud activity, including investing in counter fraud professionals and building data analytical capabilities. The new Fraud, Error and Debt Bill will bring forward new measures to tackle fraud in the system. 'Details on the measures the Government will be legislating will be presented to Parliament in due course.' The DWP pays benefits to nearly 24 million people across Great Britain, including 3.7m on PIP. The latest DWP report shows £330m was lost to fraud and error in the PIP system last year, up from £90m in 2023/24. Fraud and error in the welfare system cost the taxpayer £9.5bn in overpayments last year, compared to £9.7bn in 2023/24. Fraud This guidance on explains that this relates to claims where all three of the following conditions apply: the conditions for receipt of benefit, or the rate of benefit in payment, are not met the claimant can reasonably be expected to be aware of the effect on their entitlement benefit payment stops or reduces as a result of a review of the claim. Claimant error These are overpayments where claimants have provided inaccurate or incomplete information, or failed to report a change in their circumstances which has led to an overpayment, but there is no evidence of fraudulent intent on the claimant's part. Official error This is where benefits have been paid incorrectly due to a failure to act, a delay or a mistaken assessment by the Department, a local authority or His Majesty's Revenue and Customs, to which no one outside of that department has materially contributed, regardless of whether the business unit has processed the information. PIP changes in circumstances There are several changes in circumstances people receiving PIP must tell the DWP about or risk losing their benefit entitlement and having regular payments paused or stopped. It's important to be aware that changing your name, doctor, health professional or address do not need to be reported to the DWP and will have no impact on your payments or your award - but it is worthwhile ensuring the details DWP holds on file is up to date. However, leaving the country or planning to leave the country for a period of more than four weeks - even just for a holiday - may affect entitlement. Guidance in the current edition of the PIP Handbook on states: 'This change may affect the claimant's entitlement to PIP. We will need to know the date the claimant is leaving the country, how long they are planning to be out of the country, which country they are going to and why they are going abroad.' If you're due to travel abroad over the next few weeks, make sure you contact the DWP with the details they have asked for as soon as possible - and keep it in mind when booking for summer holidays this year. How to report a change of circumstances to DWP Contact the PIP enquiry line on 0800 121 4433 to report a change of circumstances - lines are open from 9am to 5pm, Monday to Friday. Changes to daily living or mobility needs You should tell DWP if, for example, you need more or less help or support or the condition will last for a longer or shorter time than you previously told DWP about. This change may affect entitlement to PIP, the amount and the period of the PIP award. Leaving the country or planning to leave the country for a period of more than four weeks - even if this is a holiday This change may affect the claimant's entitlement to PIP. The DWP needs to know the date the claimant is leaving the country, how long they are planning to be out of the country, which country they are going to and why they are going abroad. Stays in hospital or similar institutions DWP guidance states both components of PIP cease to be payable 28 days after the claimant is admitted to an NHS hospital. Privately funded patients are unaffected by these rules and can continue to be paid either component of PIP. If a claimant is in hospital or a similar institution at the date entitlement to PIP starts, PIP is not payable until they are discharged. Care homes The daily living component of PIP ceases to be payable after 28 days of residency in care home where the costs of the accommodation are met from public or local funds. The PIP mobility component can continue to be paid. People who fully self-fund their placement are unaffected by these rules. If a claimant is in a care home at the date of entitlement, the PIP daily living component is not payable until they leave. Linked spells in hospital and a care home Spells in hospital are linked if the gap between them is no more than 28 days. The daily living component for spells in a care home is also linked if the gap between them is no more than 28 days. There is no link for the mobility component because payment is not affected when in a care home. Both components of PIP will stop being paid after a total of 28 days in hospital. The daily living component of PIP will stop being paid after a total of 28 days in a care home. If a claimant moves between a hospital and care home, or the other way around, these periods will also link. Imprisonment or claimant held in legal custody This change may affect the amount of PIP that can be paid to the claimant. The DWP needs to know the date the claimant was taken into prison or legal custody and the length of time they are expected to be there, if known. Detained in legal custody PIP ceases to be payable after 28 days where someone is being detained in legal custody. This applies whether the offence is civil or criminal and whether they have been convicted or are on remand. Suspended payments of benefit are not refunded regardless of the outcome of proceedings against the individual. Two or more separate periods in legal custody link if they are within one year of each other. Change of name This change will not affect payment or eligibility for PIP, but it is important the DWP has the most up-to-date details for the claimant. This change needs to be reported in writing - if the claimant phones to give these details, the DWP will ask for these details to be put in writing. The written notification must contain: full details of their previous name their new name details of any changes made to the bank or building society account into which PIP is paid, such as the name of the account or the account number their signature on the letter Change of account PIP is paid into The DWP needs full details of the of the name and address of the new bank or building society along with details of the new account including the name of the account, the account number and the sort code or roll number. Change of person acting for the claimant This refers to an appointee or someone with power of attorney for the claimant. This change is important so the DWP can make payments to the right person at the right time. They need the full name, address and contact details of the new person who is acting for the claimant. If the person acting for the claimant has moved or has different contact details, the DWP just needs the new details. Change of address This change, providing it is not a hospital or nursing home will not affect eligibility or payment of PIP. It is important the DWP hold the most up-to-date details for the claimant. They need full details of the new address the claimant has moved to, including the postcode and the date they moved. Change of doctor or healthcare professional This change will not affect payment or eligibility for PIP and is not mandatory once a decision on the PIP claim has been made. However, if the change happens during the claiming stage it is essential the DWP have the most up-to-date information. This will make sure the assessment provider has the right contact details to gather any further details they may require. The DWP needs the full name, address and contact details of the new doctor or health care professional. online handbook here.


The Independent
4 hours ago
- The Independent
Trump rows back threat of ‘secondary tariffs' against India and China after Putin summit
US president Donald Trump has played down the prospect of imposing so-called 'secondary tariffs' on buyers of Russian oil after his meeting with Vladimir Putin in Alaska. Trump had proposed the levies as a new way of pressuring Russia's war-time economy if it failed to stop its invasion of Ukraine, and they were largely due to impact China and India, by far the two biggest buyers of Russian crude. Mr Trump earlier this month doubled duties on Indian products to 50 per cent after imposing an additional 25 per cent tariff for buying Russian oil, kicking off from 27 August. New Delhi was facing the risk of even higher tariffs if Mr Trump's summit in Alaska failed to end Russia's war in Ukraine after the US treasury secretary Scott Bessent said Wednesday that 'secondary tariffs could go up' if things don't go well at the meeting. In recent days, Mr Trump has expressed his anger with India for its refusal to stop buying oil from Russia. He has accused India of financing Russia's war in Ukraine by purchasing discounted crude from Moscow. China remains the largest market for Russian oil exports. However, raising tariffs on Beijing threatens to break a delicate truce deal between China and the US after it was extended for another 90 days. The truce saw both countries lowering tariffs on each other's goods after the trade war between the two biggest economies threatened to upend global markets. On board Air Force One on his way to meet Mr Putin in Alaska, Mr Trump still appeared undecided on whether he would impose secondary tariffs or not, saying they would be 'very devastating' for China in particular and suggesting Russia had already 'lost an oil client' in India. ''If I have to do it, I'll do it. Maybe I won't have to do it,' he said. After the nearly three-hour-long meeting with Mr Putin, Mr Trump hailed the Alaska summit as a 'great and very successful day' although 'we didn't get there' on agreeing an immediate ceasefire. He instead endorsed Russia's longstanding position – that Kyiv and Moscow would need to agree a full peace deal while fighting continued in the background. And in a post-summit interview with Hannity, Mr Trump said he would hold off on imposing secondary tariffs on China for buying Russian oil after making progress with Mr Putin. He did not mention India directly. "Because of what happened today, I think I don't have to think about that now," Mr Trump said of the tariffs. "I may have to think about it in two weeks or three weeks or something, but we don't have to think about that right now." India has previously said that it needs Russian oil to meet the energy needs of its fast-growing economy. The country has been sourcing nearly a third of its oil from Russia since the Ukraine war began in early 2022 and Moscow started offering it at a discounted rate. New Delhi has decried the double standards of the US sanctioning its oil purchases while continuing to buy Russian uranium hexafluoride, palladium and fertiliser. Narendra Modi's government called the US tariffs "unfair, unjustified and unreasonable" and vowed to "take all actions necessary to protect its national interests'.