Latest news with #WilliamF.Buckley
Economist
5 days ago
- Automotive
- Economist
The economic aspect cancer prevention
Also this week, AI and the web, emissions and cars in Europe, William F. Buckley, the Big Mac index, underpants
Economist
26-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Economist
William F. Buckley, the man who put the charm into conservatism
Culture | Standing athwart history, yelling stop Photograph: Eyevine/New York Times/Redux/Sam Falk R EADY to feel lazy and unaccomplished? William F. Buckley wrote his first bestseller when he was 25. Over the next 57 years, he would write more than 50 books, including 20 novels. When he was 29, he founded the National Review, a magazine. When he was 40, he created 'Firing Line', a public-affairs tv show; he would go on to host 1,505 episodes. Buckley wrote and edited thousands of articles, made thousands of public speeches, and once, quixotically, ran for mayor of New York. (He won 13% of the vote.) This article appeared in the Culture section of the print edition under the headline 'Right on' Will it rev up new fans for the motorsport? Fenix, in Rotterdam, lets visitors make up their own minds American and Irish writers dominate the list Rachel Zegler's streetside 'Evita' reveals a lot about fame and London In this week's list, the water is not so fine In a post-apocalyptic horror sequel, monsters and mockery co-exist
Miami Herald
11-06-2025
- Politics
- Miami Herald
Left-wing antisemitism is swiftly surpassing the right
With the smoke still in the air from an Egyptian Muslim's terror attack that set non-violent Jewish protesters on fire in Boulder, Colorado, there's finally a critical mass of concern about growing violent antisemitic hate in America from somewhere other than conservatives. For my whole life antisemitism has been a fact of life for conservatives like me. Cranky retirees and bald-headed young people alike espoused conspiracy theories and hatred of Jews from the fringes of our political world. People like William F. Buckley fought to keep them out of the mainstream, but millions of conservatives voted for vile anti-Jewish haters like Pat Buchanan. So in 2018 it didn't come as a surprise that the man nearly my age who killed 11 people at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh was a right-wing crank who frequented Nazi-friendly social media sites like Gab and idolized the fringey Proud Boys. A couple years later when the Biden administration targeted the right for special attention from the Justice Department and the FBI for the potential violence of homegrown extremists, I didn't really object. Yes, there was left-wing violence like the 2017 attack on Republican congressmen at a bipartisan baseball game by a loopy old Bernie Sanders supporter, but it didn't seem like there was the same cesspool of violent hate on the left as there was on the right. That is changing. It turns out that while the Biden administration was on its politically convenient crusade against right-wing haters, they (and I) missed a parallel antisemitic culture of hate growing and metastasizing on the left. Left-wing extremism The Combat Hate Foundation, which takes reports of antisemitic incidents and categorizes them according to ideological motivation, found more than a 320% increase in left-wing antisemitic incidents from 2023 to 2024. 'The left-wing antisemitic movement has evolved into a global force,' the group writes. 'Radicalized social movements, media disinformation campaigns, and efforts to target Jewish communities under the guise of anti-Israel activism have primarily fueled this increase,' the group said. The recent murder of a soon-to-be engaged couple outside the Capital Jewish Museum is an example of such left-wing antisemitism. The alleged killer, who shouted 'Free, free Palestine!' after his attack, has ties to left-wing socialist, anti-war and anti-racist groups. Most of the nearly 4,329 incidents of left-wing antisemitism in 2024 were not so brutal, primarily involving hate speech or vandalism and not violence. Combat Hate Foundation The Combat Hate Foundation, which is funded by a donor who also funds Republican political campaigns, has a record of calling out antisemitism on both the right and the left. Indeed, the latest report says violence is more common in right-wing attacks, but the number of such events fell by half in 2024 to 461 as left-wing incidents exploded into view with campus chants of 'Globalize the intifada,' a common refrain that implies a tolerance for violence. The Combat Hate Foundation is not alone in its concern. The more-traditional and left-leaning Anti-Defamation League also raised alarms in a 2020 email about antisemitism on the left, including among Black Lives Matter leaders. The most recent attack in Boulder stems from the third font of antisemitism, radical Islam. The Egyptian-born attacker, who allegedly planned his atrocity for more than a year, carried his hatred for Jews from the Middle East, where it is both common and government-backed, to a new home in America where he overstayed a visa and then sought refugee status. This source of antisemitism, too, is rising, according to the Combat Hate Foundation. America has been a safe home for Jews for centuries. It is tragic that they now face the old threat from the right along with rising threats on the left and from Islamists who benefit from very American religious tolerance that they refuse to share with Jews.
Spectator
28-05-2025
- Politics
- Spectator
The derangement of Harvard
It is 60 years since William F. Buckley said that he would 'rather be governed by the first 2,000 people in the Boston telephone directory than by the 2,000 people on the faculty of Harvard University'. Yet even the godfather of American conservatism would be surprised at how much more attractive the folks in the phone directory appear today. Harvard is currently having a major row with Donald Trump's administration. It results from the way in which the university responded to the 7 October attacks in Israel. While the Hamas massacres were still on-going, more than 30 Harvard University student organisations signed a letter which claimed to hold the 'Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence'. You might wonder why students at Harvard have such an inflated sense of their own importance that they imagine any 'regime' or government would be waiting for their take on things. Stranger still was the students' apparent belief that Harvard was somehow central to the Israeli war effort. 'Harvard out of Occupied Palestine' was one of their demands. You would be hard-pushed to find anyone in the Middle East who believes that their lands are occupied by Harvard University, whoever else they think culpable. Since then, events on campus have become increasingly insane. Jewish students were subjected to assaults, insults and intimidation – all while the university authorities defended all this as a 'speech' issue. In a set of notorious hearings in front of a Congressional committee, the then president of Harvard, Claudine Gay, insisted that calls for 'genocide' against Jews would have to be judged based on their 'context'.
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion - Trump picked a fight against Harvard and he's already losing
President Trump and his minions are operating on the assumption that Americans harbor substantial animosity toward colleges and universities. Their premise is importantly wrong. Our institutions of higher learning are not perfect, and the public doesn't see them as faultless, but most Americans recognize their immense value and oppose Trump's attacks on them. In an AP/NORC poll earlier this month, 14 points more disapproved than approved of Trump's performance on 'issues related to colleges and universities.' Most Americans dislike what Trump is doing to these institutions. The rest of the data in that poll makes clear why: College costs are a real issue for the public, with 58 percent at least very concerned about tuition prices. In contrast, 'liberal bias' is not particularly salient. Just 36 percent claim to be concerned about ideological prejudice in colleges. A similar number, 32 percent, professes a complete lack of concern around liberal bias. Conservatives have been lambasting the liberalism of colleges and universities at least since William F. Buckley skyrocketed to fame for publishing 'God and Man at Yale' in 1951. It was less true when Buckley wrote and less true 20 years later when Seymour Martin Lipset and Everett Carl Ladd first surveyed the nation's professoriate, uncovering a liberal plurality, but not quite a majority — 46 percent described themselves as liberal, 27 percent as moderate, and 28 percent as conservative. In this century, the 2024 FIRE Faculty Survey interviewed 6,269 faculty across 55 four-year U.S. colleges and universities and found 64 percent identified as liberals, 19 percent moderate and 18 percent conservative. Different schools present somewhat different profiles, ranging from Harvard among the most liberal (73 percent), to Bringham Young University and University of Texas, Dallas where conservatives slightly outnumber liberals. A survey of Harvard faculty by the student newspaper found a similar 77 percent calling themselves liberal or very liberal, 20 percent moderate and just 3 percent conservative. At Duke, a Chronicle of Higher Education poll revealed 62 percent of the faculty to be liberals, 24 percent moderate and 14 percent conservatives. Such liberal unanimity understandably makes some people uncomfortable. Just 27 percent of Americans think universities in general do a good job of providing 'a respectful and inclusive environment'for conservatives. Interestingly, students themselves are less clear. According to a Gallup survey of students then enrolled in a four-year college, 74 percent of Democrats and 73 percent of Republicans believe their school did a good job promoting free speech. Nonetheless, in a country where liberals constitute a distinct minority, the professoriate does not reflect our ideological diversity and apparently never has. Politically though, it's key that voters don't really care so much about liberal bias, oppose the Trump approach in principle and see enormous value in these institutions. An earlier AP/NORC poll found that only 30 percent would allow state governments to restrict what is taught at state universities funded by those same governments. Sixty-eight percent would prohibit state government from exercising that level of control over their own universities. Allowing the federal government to interfere with private universities is likely to be even less popular. At the same time, voters do perceive socially redeeming value from colleges and universities. Seventy percent of adults without a college degree told Gallup they regarded a four-year degree as at least 'very valuable,' while 92 percent of college students felt confident a degree would help them get the kind of job they want. Benefits go beyond personal economic advancement. Nearly two-thirds of American adults believe universities make a positive contribution to scientific and medical research, while 63 percent believe they contribute 'new ideas and innovative technology.' So, it is no surprise that 62 percent favor 'maintaining federal funding for scientific and medical research' at universities, while a mere 11 percent are opposed. Only 27 percent favor Trump's policy of 'Withholding federal funding unless [universities] comply with requirements related to the president's goals.' A plurality oppose removing tax exemptions from colleges and universities. This issue may be a bit esoteric as a third have no opinion. Trump apparently perceives Harvard as an object of particular antipathy given his focus on that institution. But in a Washington Post poll, just 32 percent of Americans took Trump's side in 'trying to take a greater role in Harvard University's hiring of faculty, admission of students, and operation of its academic programs.' Sixty-six percent sided with Harvard which 'says this intrudes on its freedom as a private university.' Further evidence comes from a YouGov poll which found just 35 percent approve of the 'the Trump administration…trying to take a greater role in Harvard University's hiring of faculty, admission of students, and operation of its academic programs.' Half disapprove. Historically, Trump has proven politically adept in choosing his antagonists. Perhaps not this time. Mellman is president of The Mellman Group a consultancy that has helped elect 30 U.S. senators, 12 governors and dozens of House members. Mellman served as pollster to Senate Democratic leaders for over 30 years and is a member of the American Association of Political Consultants' Hall of Fame. He holds degrees from Princeton and Yale. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
