Buckley contra Kerry

Here is William Buckley’s 1971 speech at West Point about John Kerry’s testimony to Congress earlier that year.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at February 04, 2004 12:41 PM | Send
    
Comments

“The military is to be loved or despised according as it defends that which is beloved or perpetuates that which is despised. The root question has not risen to such a level of respectability as to work itself into the platform of a national political party, but it lurks in the rhetoric of the John Kerrys, such that a blind man, running his fingers over the features of the public rhetoric, can discern the meaning of it:

Is America worth it?”

Fascinating: “The root question has not risen to such a level of respectability as to work itself into the platform of a national political party”; and yet, here we are, twenty-three years later, and John Kerry may be the nominee of a national party, with exactly that question worked into its platform; and our nation has so decayed that some good patriotic Conservatives (like many here) must wish for his victory, that the other “conservative” party might not solidify its obliteration of Conservatism.

Posted by: Paul Cella on February 4, 2004 5:21 PM

Eloquent, Mr. Cella.

Posted by: Lawrence Auster on February 4, 2004 6:08 PM

I thought it was particularly appropriate for Buckley to note that a different notion for justice and a passion for equality are not the thread that tie leftism together, but rather it is a deep alienation from and hatred towards our society, culture, institutions, and leaders.

Now for some 30 years we’ve been in a real fight with these folks—aptly named the counter-culture—and they’ve won some big battles and corrupted some of our major institutions. We need to both fight their advance and work on reconstruction all at once. It’s no easy task, that’s for sure.

But having open eyes—which the neocons and country-clubbers sorely lack—is the first step.

Posted by: roach on February 4, 2004 7:02 PM


Kerry was not doubting that America is worth it. The Vietnam War was not defending America. Kerry was in a roundabout way speaking against that war; that’s the context of his words. Was the Vietnam War worth it? No. Kerry was not asking “Was America worth it?” at any level.

Posted by: Nitin Batra on February 8, 2004 5:00 PM

Loyalty to the United States is not the assent to a universalist, ideological propisition, like the assent to Communism was in the former Soviet Union, although part of true patriotism is the desire that one’s country’s laws and actions are consistant with true morality, i.e., “the laws of nature and nature’s God”; nor is it merely the wish that United States not actually be invaded by another state, although this is certainly a minimal atribute of patriotism. True patriotism is loyalty and attachment to one’s country to the exclusion of all others; love and loyalty to its people, culture, and history; and the desire to see its interests defended, prosperity increased, and honor preserved. Edward Gibbon, in his _Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire_, saying that Europe in the 18th century could be viewed as a “great republic whose various inhabitants have obtained almost the same level of politeness and cultivation”, admitted that “it is the duty of a patriot to prefer and promote the exclusive interest and glory of his native country.”

John Kerry’s opposition to the Veitnam War, especially the way in which he opposed it, with lies, slanders, and false indictments -read Buckley’s speach- reveal in him a lack of minimal patriotism.

Posted by: Joshua on February 8, 2004 9:15 PM

Kerry’s on CSPAN a lot nowadays. Listen to one of his speeches. He never simply says, “We need to do such and such in this country.” Instead, he couches every promise and recommendation in the idea that some evil, awful, hateful people are withholding from us something that we need, and we’ve got to beat down those people. And the tone of his voice is one of unrelieved anger and resentment. That has been his tone through his entire political career, though it’s gotten worse now. It is founded on resentment of bad awful people, and his own moral superiority in opposing these bad people. He is simultaneously supremely self-important, unrelievedly ominous, and unrelievedly boring—all in all, the most unpleasant major politician I’ve ever seen. I can’t believe that he will appeal to voters outside the core of the Democratic party.

Every Democratic gathering I’ve seen on CSPAN recently has the same tone. I don’t know how people could stand being in that atmosphere of negative emotions all the time.

Posted by: Lawrence Auster on February 8, 2004 9:26 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?





Email entry

Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):