The
National Review is the crown jewel of conservative magazines of opinion in the U.S. Released bi-weekly, it contains articles of topicality as well as assorted letters, book and movie reviews, and extended essays of interest by a wide variety of authors. The NR is important reading for anyone wishing to be informed on American political affairs regardless of party or philosophical affiliation.
(Truth in lending disclosure:: the author is a died-in-the-wool conservative, but feels the same way about the leftist New Republic despite that magazine’s oft wrong-headed views.)
Fresh off the heels of his
God and Man at Yale, NR was founded by conservative gadfly William F. Buckley, Jr., as an antidote to what he saw as very disturbing liberal tendencies in the U.S.media and academia. With the imminent failure of the borderline anti-Semitic
American Mercury and desiring a place for the respectable display of anti-Communist views, Buckley saw NR as “standing athwart the path of history, yelling ‘Stop’”. He envisioned a crisply written, incisive, and biting magazine that would serve as a counter-weight to the
New York Times’s of the world. That the magazine has survived for fifty years and is still prospering is testimony to the success of Buckley’s efforts.
Each bi-weekly issue begins with fifteen or twenty of 100-250 word pieces on various very current issues, e.g. White House and Congressional politics, Supreme Court nominees, terrorism, economics, etc. These articles are occasionally more lengthy and are supplemented by WFB’s “Notes and Asides” bit in which he answers letters or mouths off in general. There are then usually a half dozen or so two or three page articles and a four or five page cover article on whatever is bugging the editors at present. The “Books, Arts & Manners” section contains anywhere from three to six book (and occasionally movie or music) reviews. “On the Right” contains WFB’s three most recent syndicated newspaper columns. Finally, there will be the odd column such as Florence King’s always entertaining “Misanthrope’s Corner” or Mark Steyn’s “happy warrior”.
NR is unabashedly conservative: you get what you pay for. Anyone looking for an even-handed treatment of the issues should go elsewhere. On the other hand, the writers are generally fair and much more reasonable than their execrable counterparts at
The Nation (a truly loathsome magazine, see my review
http://www.epinions.com/mags-review-3666-CBBB1F1-3A3BACEA-prod1 ). The writing is very high quality and the views perceptive. Authors run the gamut of rightists, ranging from op-ed types like John O’Sullivan and Dartmount College prof Jeffrey Hart to present and ex-adminstration officials to Milton Friedman, Paul Johnson and Roger Kimball. The magazine is particularly strong on economic and taxation issues while it occasionally falls down on foreign policy matters.
NR has come under some flack in recent years from the paleo-con right as having been seduced by the neo-cons. I’m not entirely sure this is true, although I would concede that Pat Buchanan types will not nearly be as comfortable here as they would be at
The American Spectator. As I said earlier, it is very reliable on economic matters and should be read for those positions alone. Regardless of where the right-winger stands, this is an important part of the conservative’s monthly reading. (As before, liberals should be reading it as well, just as GOP types need to read
The New Republic and
NYT.
buffoonery’s magazine and newspaper reviews:
Wall Street Journal
Commentary
The Economist
National Review
The Nation
Chicago Tribune
Chicago Sun-Times
First Things
The American Spectator
The New Republic
Guitar World
Guitar World Acoustic
Guitar One
Guitar Player
