Age may have forced him to cut back on his five-mile ski runs, Buckley says, but he’ll continue to write his weekly column and his annual novel. He’ll also promote his newly-published memoir, “Miles Gone By” (Regnery, 2004.) Buckley spoke with NEWSWEEK’s Peg Tyre about the rise of the Right, the degradation of political debate and the burdens of growing older. Excerpts:
NEWSWEEK: How has the state of conservatism changed in the more than 50 years since you wrote “God and Man at Yale?
William F. Buckley: Since that time, conservatism has gained as a result of immense scholarly research and the collapse, or near-collapse, of socialism.
You’ve written about your admiration for Bush Sr. and his presidency. What kind of relationship do you have with George W. and the current White House?
I am friends of friends of the president, and know him slightly. I communicate my own advice through my columns and what was, until Wednesday, my magazine.
How do you feel when people describe you as a father of modern intellectual conservatism?
What do I “feel”? Nothing. I am proud and happy for any recognition of what I and my magazine have done.
You write a weekly column, hosted an Emmy-winning television show and publish a book every year. What is your secret for maintaining your prodigious output?
Well, I have a wonderful staff and have managed for 40 years to secrete myself, with my wife alongside, in Switzerland, where I agree, in solemn pledges with myself, to write 1,500 words every day–which is easier, I forlornly discovered last year, than to continue to ski five miles per day.
What was your goal in writing “Miles Gone By?”
I wanted, in my autobiography, to put it all together, do so without any preaching at all, and try to reward those interested, with good writing, [something] fun to read.
You are renowned as a both a host and for your eclectic mixture of friends. Can you describe the oddest assortment of people you ever entertained?
There was a party, I remember, in which my brother’s python was a guest. I would happily have invited Elvis to one of my parties, but he died before I discovered him.
Were you surprised at the depth of the public response to Ronald Reagan’s death?
I was surprised at first, but then thought: Why should I be? He was so extraordinary. And this I think overcame most partisan resentments of him. The single best story on him was NEWSWEEK’s cover reporting on the funeral.
You have long been an emblem of both nuanced conservatism and elevated debate. Is there a place for thoughtful intellectual conservatism in the era of Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and Michael Moore?
You are making a sneaky point, dear Newsweek. If I answered you in the spirit of the question you asked, I’d be complicit in your suggestion that O’Reilly and Rush aren’t nuanced. I think they are. You have to listen hard. But what’s wrong with that?
Without pointing fingers, then, do you think that there has been a coarsening in the tone and form of political debate?
Yes, I think it’s so. I worry most that true eloquence should not be acknowledged. This hasn’t happened, but it threatens, and yes, television and dumbed-down education are primarily responsible.
Does it matter?
Yes. It isn’t absolutely obvious that if the Gettysburg Address were given today, it would instantly rivet the world. It’s ironic that an increase in literacy doesn’t bring a corresponding increase in quality speech.
What do we need to do to bring back thoughtful debate?
What’s always needed is the cultivation of impatience–and even contempt for–ideologically abbreviated declamation. You have to put cotton in your ears when the national conventions come on.
How would you make a name for yourself as a conservative thinker if you were graduating from Yale this year?
By solving the global warming crisis, or maybe establishing that it isn’t a threat after all.
Would it be possible to start a magazine like the National Review now?
It’s easy to start a magazine–there are always writers who aren’t making it in existing magazines, and some of them are very good. But you will need to raise money, which means that your readers have to be enthusiastic enough to sustain you.
How did your life change after you left the day-to-day operations of the National Review in 1990?
Life changed in that other work moved into place, and got swifter attention.
How do you expect your life to change now that you have passed the torch at the National Review?
I’ll continue to write my column and my books and to oversee the shortcomings of the 21st century.
Many people talk about the burdens of growing older. What responsibilities come with age?
Mostly you have to watch against impatience, which is a creeping affliction of age. When I discover how to do this, I will call.
