« Sour Grapes | Main | The Eighteenth-Century Rollback of Intellectual Property »

January 03, 2005

National Review Turns 50

Atrios wishes National Review a very happy fiftieth birthday:

Eschaton: Happy Birthday National Review! My. Has it been 50 years already? Time sure does fly. K. Lo promises a lovely trip through the archives for a celebration. I thought I might help get things started. Just in case they miss a few things. My birthday gift to them. From 1957 unsigned National Review piece, "Why The South Must Prevail." (warning -- serious cooties at link):

The central question that emerges . . . is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not prevail numerically? The sobering answer is Yes – the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race. It is not easy, and it is unpleasant, to adduce statistics evidencing the cultural superiority of White over Negro: but it is a fact that obtrudes, one that cannot be hidden by ever-so-busy egalitarians and anthropologists.

National Review believes that the South's premises are correct. . . . It is more important for the community, anywhere in the world, to affirm and live by civilized standards, than to bow to the demands of the numerical majority.

Posted by DeLong at January 3, 2005 02:26 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/cgi-bin/mt_2005-2/mt-tb.cgi/102

Comments

Does that mean I can take pot shots at today's Democratic party for some its past indiscretions?

Just askin.

Posted by: Ugh at January 3, 2005 02:35 PM


Ugh,

I'd love to see how the gorcery clerks treat you when you willy nilly bag apples and oranges together because you can't tell the difference.

Hint: The Democratic Party is not a magazine.

Posted by: ch2 at January 3, 2005 03:23 PM


Ugh,

You are right, it would be quite easy to dig up embarrasing racist statements made during the period by Democrats.

The trick would be to find ones by Democrats who have not since crossed over to the Republicans.

Posted by: Kuas at January 3, 2005 03:33 PM


Let’s cherry pick a few choice tidbits from the Nation Magazine circa 1937. It would also be nice to know the context of that (unsigned) article. I am not fan of National Review (or The Nation either), but at least as far back as the 1960’s it seemed relatively free from that kind of thing. But I’m not a regular reader, so perhaps I missed them.

Posted by: A. Zarkov at January 3, 2005 03:51 PM


"Does that mean I can take pot shots at today's Democratic party for some its past indiscretions?"

Especially if you also explain their decline once they began to turn on those indiscretions.

Posted by: actus at January 3, 2005 04:06 PM


"... prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not prevail numerically? The sobering answer is Yes..."

Good thing atheletics is neither political or cultural.

Posted by: bncthor at January 3, 2005 05:01 PM


I guess then the majority opinion rgerading homosexuals in the US shall be also enforced this being the morale thing to do?

Posted by: Thomas J. Jackson at January 3, 2005 08:06 PM


"...such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally..."

What a delicate way to talk about murder.

Have they ever repudiated this?

Posted by: George Orwell at January 3, 2005 08:11 PM


Boy, the trolls certainly are quick to equate the status of whites in the South in 1954 with the status of gays in the US in 2005, aren't they?

Scum with keyboards.

Oh, and Zarkov? I think you can guess the monogram on that unsigned edit.

W.
F.
B.

Posted by: JRoth at January 3, 2005 08:54 PM


JRoth: That’s a good guess, but it’s possible someone was imitating Buckley’s style. I would still go with WFB as that sounds like him in the 1950s. I used to read NR in the 1960s to see what conservatives were thinking, but always in the library, so I wouldn’t be giving money to them. It was far out, but not so far out as The Nation. I remember circa 1980, Susan Sontag said you could learn more about the nature of communism from reading the Readers Digest than reading The Nation. And let’s not forget that Sontag was a life-long leftie who once called the white race “the cancer of history.” But the campaign against the Solidarity Movement in Poland finally got to her. A somewhat obscure (and arty) Polish film called “Man of Marble” gives a nice feeling for what communism did to Poland. I have several Polish friends that came out of that era, and I’ve spent many hours talking about what happened to them. The good news is Poland is doing pretty well today. It has recovered nicely from the ravages of communism.

Posted by: A. Zarkov at January 3, 2005 09:32 PM


Zarkov:

"A somewhat obscure (and arty) Polish film called “Man of Marble” gives a nice feeling for what communism did to Poland"

which is better wwatched with the second part "Man of Iron". (Marble 50's and early 60's
Communist Poland, Iron late 60's and 70's).

Man of Iron is also a bit less arty if that kind
of thing bothers you, though neither is exactly French Impressionist cinema type of arty
(which tends to bother me).

Both are available on Amazon on DVD with English
subtitles.

Posted by: radek at January 3, 2005 09:44 PM


Radek: I have “Man of Marble” on videotape; it’s good to know it’s now available in DVD. I know about “Man of Iron,” and I have been meaning to get it. Amazon only seems to have it on VHS, I’ve been waiting for the DVD to come out.

I enjoyed “Man of Marble” a lot. “Arty” was a poor choice of words on my part. Godard’s “Weekend” is arty, and it put sound asleep in the theatre in 1969. But I woke up for “Battle of Algiers” which came on after “Weekend.”

Posted by: A. Zarkov at January 4, 2005 01:07 AM


I guess then the majority opinion rgerading homosexuals in the US shall be also enforced this being the morale thing to do?
**************************************************
In the 1950's the majority opinion in the US changed regarding black people, and after it changed the government changed it's policies. In the 1990's the majority opinion changed regarding gay people.
It was always wrong to persecute black people, and it was always wrong to persecute gay people, but the majority of people didn't think it was wrong.
After all, it wasn't until 1783 that it became illegal to round up all the orphans in Britain and auction them off in America as slaves till they were 21. Most of the orphans shipped to America were so badly treated that they died. The casualty rates were about 75% according to the census records.
We don't do that anymore. We have social security benefits for orphans.

Posted by: wkwillis at January 4, 2005 09:33 AM


I am at a loss as to how anyone could fall asleep watching Weekend - 'To overcome the horror of the bourgoise requires more horror!'

Posted by: Charles Kinbote at January 4, 2005 01:01 PM


Post a comment




Remember Me?