National Review is a Joke

I posted a comment on this post at National Review. I used to be a regular there, commenting on the blog. I stopped when the execrable Rich Lowry hired some loser to moderate the site. Instantly 90% of the users disappeared. Lowry had to spend a month begging people to return. I gave it another shot, but quit again when the same nonsense started anew. Lowry and the editorial staff at National Review are just a collection of middle-class strivers with nothing much to add. The only guy at National Review worth reading is Kevin Williamson and his flirtations with taboo subjects will surely get him sent off the island. There are two things that sniveling little twerp Rich Lowry will not tolerate. One is writers with talent and creativity. The other is anything that puts his TV gig at risk. Otherwise National Review is, at best, a souvenir program for the museum of late-20th century conservatism. At worst is is a platform for hollow men like Lowry to curry favor with the ruling class.

My comment was deleted and I’m not surprised. I made the point that precious fops like Potemra live in a city where it is official policy to hassle brown people on the streets. The intent of stop and frisk is to let the NAM know he is not welcome. Since the court struck down the Jim Bloomberg Law, the city’s chattering classes have been wringing their hands of New York becoming Detroit. Now word and deed are one as the official policy of driving out the blacks is matched by the public rhetoric. Yet, we still hear the lectures and the smug condescension over race. The same people demanding their Bull Connors put the dogs on every black guy wandering into Manhattan scream about Paula Deen and George Zimmerman. None of this is shocking as liberalism is a religion with many bogeymen. The result is a stunning lack of self-awareness. Liberals, almost always, reserve their harshest venom for the crimes they routinely commit. That’s how cults work.

The issue of race is one where the Right should be scoring points. Instead, punks like Lowry lead the charge against anyone who dares raise the issue. He is not alone. Dan McCarthy at The American Conservative is following the same path. It is no small thing that National Review is celebrating the purging of Ron Unz. Birds of a feather and all that. The reason behind these moves is the claim that it is bad for business. Donors don’t like it. Maybe. What’s really going on is the liberal TV outlets don’t like it. The dream of these climbers like Lowry and McCarthy is to get a permanent TV gig. You can only do that by being a suck up or a pioneer and they ain’t got the chops to be a pioneer. That leaves them on their knees in the executive suites of whatever TV channel that employs them. That means the Left lectures the Right on race and the Right forever apologizes for things it never did or said. Hitler, Mao and Stalin counted on the career man for a reason.

The whole point of being in the opposition is to oppose the prevailing orthodoxy. To do that you have to let a thousand flowers bloom. That means putting up with some weirdos and cranks, but it also means getting interesting perspective from guys like Unz, Sailer, Derbyshire and so forth. They have their own quirks and get things wrong, but they get a lot right too. When you’re the underdog, you need to be creative and take risks. Instead, the dying husks of Amercian conservatism are purging themselves of non-conformists and begging the majority to allow them to surrender. National Review has simply become the primary outlet of the collaborationist wing of the GOP.

This post has already been linked to 2214 times!

Leave a Reply

4 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
4 Comment authors
mysterianJohn HindsDjangoGrace Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

found via American Digest .org

I stopped my National Review subscription of many years in 2009. I still view online, but I agree with you. I find I read Williamson, VDH, McCarthy, but not many others.


Lowry’s problem, and his attraction to TV, is the fact that online print is losing its economics and Lowry, et al., are looking for new fields on TV where the money is. They are all whores so forget principle and will suck up to whoever is running the network.

John Hinds

You speak the truth. I quit when Derbyshire got axed. VDH is not worth it and I don’t know Williamson and won’t get to. Lowry is a girlyman. I used to hear him on Laura Ingrham who I’ve also quit. The only radio show worth my time now is the quintessentially irreverent Walton and Johnson and, like Grace, I came here from AD.


I dropped my subscription in 2005 after more than 20 years. Their drift leftward with Lowry was remarkably quick.