A Conservative View: from the National Review - Mercedes-Benz Forum

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 3 (permalink) Old 12-05-2008, 12:15 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
mcbear's Avatar
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
A Conservative View: from the National Review

As an aside to the article, this is one of the real sources for conservative thought and opinion, not talk radio or the Murdoch ventures who are more interested in ratings or spewing dogma.

The Question of Style
Some thoughts on opinion journalism.

By Jason Lee Steorts

Today I would like to speak more personally than I did yesterday or the day before. What I say will be personal in two senses. First, it will be about, and partly directed toward, those who make a living telling people what to think. The second sense will be obvious, and I will let it speak for itself.

I begin with a confession: I don’t like opinion journalism very much. There are of course many opinion journalists I respect and admire. You may rest assured that I think highly of your favorite opinion journalists; or, if you are an opinion journalist, you may rest assured that you are my favorite. (Colon. Close parenthesis.) But on the whole, opinion journalism seems to me not quite a respectable thing to write. Or at least it seems so as often written.

There are two things about the way it’s often written that bother me. Both are simple to describe but hard to correct, and both have afflicted my writing. One defect is intellectual, the other moral — though in opinion journalism, as in life, there is no sharp division.

The intellectual defect is that we too often preach to the converted. This defect is intellectual because it undermines the rigor of our arguments. We don’t write in a way that engages the objections of the toughest critics, because we aren’t writing to the toughest critics. We don’t offer justifications that speak to the uninitiated, because we aren’t writing to the uninitiated.

I see this tendency on all sides, but it is an acute danger if your side is in power. It is a danger even if you are the farthest thing on earth from a populist rabble-rouser. When you’re out of power, you’ve got your principles. When you’re in power, you’ve got your principles — and you’ve got an audience of the powerful. You will want to address them, giving practical counsel on the exercise of power. You will want to do this because you will want to see your principles successfully applied. When the powerful stray from your principles, you will dissent forcefully, as this magazine has done frequently over the past eight years (for a nice summary of our dissents — thank you, Jonah — go here). But there will remain a risk of becoming excessively strategic, even tactical, and insufficiently philosophical. Should that happen, those who don’t already agree with you will stop listening.

The second defect is, to my mind, more serious, and it is this: Opinion journalism tends toward shrillness, mean-spiritedness, and insincerity. I feel no need to elaborate on that claim, because if you read or hear or watch even a little opinion journalism, you know what I mean.

I think the shrillness, mean-spiritedness, and insincerity of our discipline reflects the shrillness, mean-spiritedness, and insincerity of politics. Politics being what it is, I don’t expect our discipline to change. But I will say this: Barack Obama, though occasionally imperious, is a highly civil politician. He has sharp elbows — as successful politicians must — but he also has manners. He does not raise his voice. He gives an impression of earnestness and sincerity.

We could learn from this style. It is a style that resonated deeply with a great many Americans, who are in the main an earnest and a sincere people.


I’ll tell you who my favorite opinion journalist is. I can do so tactfully because he is dead: William F. Buckley Jr.

Anyone possessed of that much cleverness might easily deploy it predatorily, or manipulatively, or condescendingly. But that wasn’t WFB’s way, because that’s not the kind of person he was.

He wanted to have fun, and he wanted you to have fun reading him, whether you agreed or not.

And he was generous.

One aspect of his generosity was that he did not simplify himself. This was partly because he sought to influence the influencers — to make conservatism morally and intellectually defensible in the elite circles where it wasn’t. He was after converts in high places.

But he paid the masses the compliment of taking their intellects seriously. He talked to them the way he talked to everyone. He dazzled them with his never-ending vocabulary, and I think this actually helped them understand what he said: They had to make sense of it before reacting.

Another aspect of his generosity was that he listened carefully when people disagreed with him. This struck me when I observed him in conversation. He understood first and rebutted second, which meant he rebutted well.

And a third aspect of his generosity was that he was civil. He exuded civility.

I saw him embarrassed just once. I was helping him assemble a video montage of his TV appearances, and, reviewing the tapes, we came to the one occasion when his civility lapsed in public. He was being interviewed along with Gore Vidal, to whose provocations he responded by calling Vidal a name and threatening to punch him. I had seen the clip before and had even thought it cool — to my mind, Vidal was asking for it. But Bill, looking down, muttered, “We don’t need to see this,” and pressed fast-forward.

That taught me something important.


Will you allow me to speak even more personally?

I feel I am able to write well only to a certain kind of audience. Only when I expect that someone will read with equal measures of wisdom and compassion. These are also the qualities I wish to offer when I write. Perhaps the way for me to write best is to imagine such a person, and imagine myself in conversation with him.

Opinion journalism seems almost to forbid my writing this way. One feels one must either bludgeon the enemy to death or cynically perform tricks for the crowd. (Why “cynically”? Because the crowd rarely sees, as you do, how tenuously your argument perches atop a questionable assertion.)

What should matter to us, if we would read and write with these qualities, is a shared desire to understand our beliefs, and a shared desire to help one another. These are the ends to which the virtues of wisdom and compassion relate.

What interests us, then, is the meeting of kindly disposed minds. We pursue the truth as a way of getting to know one another, and we get to know one another in order to pursue the truth. We are on a hunt, and while our pursuit lasts — which will be as long as we do — it is its own reward. I would not hunt with someone who thought me his enemy, or whose intelligence and character I did not respect — and neither would I reason with him.

Part of hunting well is to admit it honestly when one has lost the tracks. And one thanks one’s companions for pointing them out again, insofar as this is done with kindness.

If being an opinion journalist meant going on such a hunt, then I should feel very glad to call myself an opinion journalist.

People loved Bill not for his ideas (which were after all not his — that was the point), nor still for his cleverness, but because beneath all that cleverness he was humane. This is not to say he did not attack. He attacked ferociously — when his humanity required it. What was clear, however, was that this fearsome intelligence preferred to be kind.

I would like people to think that what I believe is humane. And this may require abandoning the name “conservatism” and simply reasoning with them in good faith, from the ground up, about what it is we believe, and how our beliefs should inform our actions.

What I should most like to see emerge, no matter its name, is a shared commitment to preserve that which is beautiful, and refined, and conducive to happiness — that which is humane — against decay.

And to protect it from the predations of the vandals.


When I survey my landscape from a height, what I see is that savages attack my civilization as my government bankrupts itself. I see that disordered states are proliferating weapons of terrifying power and cultivating relationships with those who would gleefully use them; that an illiberal superpower is rising in the east; that a fallen superpower is voting away its democracy; that the ancestral grounds of liberty are disinclined to defend themselves.

Meanwhile, we tear one another apart over Sarah Palin’s wardrobe.

I think this needs to stop. I hope you think so too. There isn’t much we can do to stop it, but we can reason together, in honesty and kindness, hoping that others listen.

Over the course of the next year, I will write you from time to time about the foundations of my beliefs. I will not be interested in the technical details of policy, but in the decision-making frameworks that guide our choices among policies, and in the values that set policy’s ends. My goal will not be to get you to accept my values so much as to help you understand why I hold them — and to shine what light I can on yours.

Sometimes I will talk about particular issues, and the positions we take on them.

Sometimes I will talk about subjects whose relevance is not obvious — about my latest trip to the mountains, or the music I heard last night. I will do this because values tend to be grounded in a form of life, and also because everyone needs occasional respites from seriousness.

And sometimes I will talk about the deep-down questions at the bottom of it all. I might tell you what I think about God, about life and death, about right and wrong.

My views — particularly on the deep-down things — are not uniformly conservative. I hope this will help make our conversation interesting and fruitful, whether your views are conservative or not. I also hope it will help people see that they need not be traditionalists, or even conservatives, to find value in conservative thought.

Throughout, I will write to my friends — the ones who don’t agree with me as well as the ones who do. I will select a handful of them and ask them to read and reply to my words. To the extent possible, I will involve their words in mine.

And I will also be writing to you: whoever you are, wherever you are reading this, whatever you believe. I ask only that you listen with compassion, and tell me if you think I’ve lost the tracks.

— Jason Lee Steorts is managing editor of National Review.

The Question of Style by Jason Lee Steorts on National Review Online


Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
Sponsored Links
post #2 of 3 (permalink) Old 12-05-2008, 01:34 PM
gerkebi's Avatar
Date registered: Oct 2005
Vehicle: 107, 115, 116, 123, 124, 126
Location: E-I-E-I-Ohio
Posts: 5,920
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Great piece, thanks.
gerkebi is offline  
post #3 of 3 (permalink) Old 12-05-2008, 08:02 PM
BenzWorld Elite
A264172's Avatar
Date registered: Mar 2005
Vehicle: 1967 Irish/ Pole
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 3,938
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
"What should matter to us, if we would read and write with these qualities, is a shared desire to understand our beliefs, and a shared desire to help one another. These are the ends to which the virtues of wisdom and compassion relate."

How lovely.

I can now see Buckley's smiling eyes in my thoughts.

I'm going to steal this over to a... other forum... as it deserves the exposure.


"...pour out of one vessel into another; and as those old Romans robbed all the cities in the world, we skim the cream of other men's wits, pick the choice flowers of their tilled gardens to set our own sterile plots."
-a Richard Burton
A264172 is offline  
Sponsored Links

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:


  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode

    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    Jayhawk shocker! William F Buckley's son endorses Obama,resigns from National Review! FeelTheLove Off-Topic 7 10-15-2008 03:18 AM
    National Review endorses Romney mcbear Off-Topic 5 12-12-2007 08:40 AM
    Survey: How do you view this forum -- Table view? Thread view? Sort by? RLO R170 SLK-Class 4 06-04-2002 07:28 PM
    Frank, any chance of expanding 'table view' to 30 pages like the 'threaded view'? TomL R170 SLK-Class 1 03-28-2001 10:07 AM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On


    Title goes here

    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome