Good piece on Mandela and conservatives, then and now:
William F. Buckley was the founder of National Review, and America’s leading conservative intellectual for much of the second half of the 20th century. He was also an explicit supporter of white supremacy — throughout the 1950s and 1960s he scoffed at the idea that either black Africans or black Americans were capable of self-governance.
As the years passed Buckley’s public views on the civil rights movement in the United States became more moderated, but his antipathy to popular democracy in Africa remained a constant. Here he is in a 1986 op-ed, writing just four years before Mandela was released from prison — at a time when the South African government had already begun the secret negotiations that would lead to an orderly transition to majority rule in that country:
“Western democratic fundamentalism has made things especially hard in South Africa for one simple reason, and that is that Western opinion has consolidated around the position that unless every black in South Africa over the age of 18 is given the vote, there is still injustice in the land.
“The government will not … grant political equality to everyone in South Africa. Nor should it. It is preposterous at one and the same time to remark the widespread illiteracy in South Africa and to demand the universal franchise.
“Continue our moral pressure, by all means. But … pull back on the one-man, one vote business.”
The open racism on display here is startling, of course. But so is the blatant antipathy to democracy itself. An insistence on the rightness of popular self-determination is, in Buckley’s eyes, a form of “fundamentalism” — if the black majority in South Africa, after generations of white minority suppression, is not prepared to exercise the franchise in the way, and with the results, that Buckley prefers, then it is entirely right and popular for that white minority to deny them the vote indefinitely.
Not thirty years ago one of America’s most prominent conservatives offered the opinion, unsolicited, that black South Africans would not, could not, and should not govern themselves.
That shouldn’t be forgotten.
geg6
Gawd, how I hate that man (Buckley) and all his progeny, biological and otherwise. What a stain on the American character.
rikyrah
and this surprises anyone?
the Conster
And Buckley was the reasonable one. Fuck me running, all of these people are scum.
The Snarxist Formerly Known as Kryptik
@rikyrah:
What’s depressing is how unsurprising it is.
That, the right-washing trying to claim Mandela’s legacy, and at the same time insist that he was the most dangerous man of Apartheid S. Africa because “he was a commie”.
c u n d gulag
“The white man’s burden,” is the feeling that everyone who’s not white is a burden because they are inferior to white males.
There were long-lasting major empires ruled by non-whites for thousands of years before Columbus “discovered” the “New World.” Even long before the Greeks and Romans.
And the Spanish and other Europeans defeated some of those long-lasting major empires in the America’s not by moral and intellectual superiority, but by accident’s of nature, more advanced technology, and, most importantly, the germs they carried within their own bodies.
Without horses, which were not native to the America’s, and gunpowder, invented in China, and smallpox, and STD’s, how well would the Conquistador’s and other European invaders have fared in battle?
Aimai
Ta nehisi coates has the goods on buckley. The south african government was paying buckley and others through a false front to “catapult the propaganda”. Cant link but google tnc and mandela / buckley and it should come up. On top of the generalized race hate buckley was no more gban a paid propagandist.
cleek
@Aimai:
here ya go:
Coates on Buckley
MattR
Yet one more example that shows that Republicans don’t believe in universal democracy or freedom. They only support those things for the right kind of people – primarily those who look and think like they do.
Mr. Longform
Example #100 gazillion that conservatives have always been wrong about race and always will be; meaning, they will say “keep them in their place” when that will suit their racist policies; and they will say “colorblind admissions” when that suits them; and they will say “Martin Luther King really meant unfettered capitalism is the best thing ever” once berating MLK is no longer working for them. With them there are two things. 1. all economics = IGMFY; 2. all social issues = white supremacy (well, not all. They hate women, too. and poor white people. and clean water. Nuance!)
soonergrunt
Anybody who paid attention knew Buckley was an inveterate racist. The whole reason he founded National Review was to provide a platform for anti-civil rights complainers. He as much as said so in the very first op ed.
He was articulate and could appreciate a fine wine. That didn’t make him any less of a bigot than Bubba Smith, the shift manager at the Piggly Wiggly, swigging his Lone Star under his sheet.
andy
When I was young and stupid I had a National Review subscription when he was defending apartheid back in the 80’s- but even then this stuff made me wince- you can’t pretty up racism with fancy words.
And he was supposedly the “smart one.”
Linda Featheringill
Fortunately, Mandela had a rich, full life, with lots and lots of changes to marvel at. And apparently he lived every inch of that long life.
We should all be so lucky.
raven
@soonergrunt: Bubba Smith probably wasn’t the name you were looking for.
Hal
A friend posted a link to an article on Facebook called 3 things you didn’t want to know about Nelson Mandela. Her basic point was that she felt we engage in hero worship without looking at the whole picture, but the post kind of pissed me off. I’m all for examining someone warts and all, but Apartheid South Africa was a brutal place for black South Africans, and any violence the ANC advocated or committed has to be examined from that perspective.
I just wonder if black South Africans were all Christians and ruled by a Muslim minority how America’s great defenders would have reacted.
Here’s the article if anyone’s interested. The comments section is a cesspool of racism of course.
http://thebackbencher.co.uk/3-things-you-didnt-want-to-know-about-nelson-mandela/
I am not a kook (Supreme Thought Leader)
George Washington was quite a credit to his race. Unlike most European rulers, he did not cling to power after he served his second term as president. Unfortunately his memory is forever marred by his embrace of violence in the Revolutionary War. Surely the colonial power of Britain would have negotiated better conditions if properly asked. The colonists in America were uneducated farmers, how could such people be expected to govern themselves – the whole idea is preposterous.
Washington is also remembered as a French apologist and little better than a tyrant, having accepted over a billion livres from the French crown in support of his terrorist activities in the colonies.
Linda Featheringill
@I am not a kook (Supreme Thought Leader):
Cool!
jl
I think this view of Buckley is deeply, horribly, unfair. Shame shame shame.
He also expressed deep alarm at public expressions of concern about nuclear war, denounced movies and documentaries that portrayed the horrors of nuclear war. They weakened our strength of will against the commies, which was a bad thing.
Buckley said all sorts of horrible things, an a number of topics. Don’t use Mandela’s death to paint Buckley just because of his racism and tolerance of death and destruction and misery only for that lost cause.
scav
The assumption that South Africans will instantly and necessarily dissolve into white-bashing land-stealing fascist-commie-anarchists with a broken nation once no longer under the watchful eye of Mandela is just a variant, implying the majority of South Africans, those ones you know, cannot learn, nor govern their own behavior unless there is an outsourced, honorary burdened whiteman actively doing the patriarchal schtick in the single (reluctantly) approved style. Looking at the local wreckage of governance, there’s a hell of a low bar for functional and everyone should have the right to drive into the wall, choose your wall!, under their own steam.
PIGL
@Aimai: Same as today: conservative (pseudo-)intellectuals == willingly corrupt liars for authoritarians.
raven
@jl: say what?
Belafon
@raven: I think he kind of lost his argument at the end, but I think he was trying to say that don’t pick on Buckley just because he was racist. There was so much more that he was on the wrong side of.
jl
@raven: That was snark. I was reminding people that Buckley said horrible things on a number of subjects, and his racism was part of on overall nasty package.
scav
@Belafon: Think that’s it. Wasn’t a one-trick pony in his heinousness. Genuinely multi-talented at it.
jl
@Belafon: You are correct. Sorry, on a long and pointless phone conference. I should not comment during those, and play solitaire instead.
Trollhattan
It’s never not a good time to revisit Buckley v. Vida.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYymnxoQnf8
Since it’s youtube, do not wade into the comments. Just don’t.
jl
I saw a clip awhile ago of Buckley on some panel with a young Chuck D, who was running rings around Buckley’s condescending BS. Buckley looked like an angry humorless old, but high toned and cultured, geezer, sadly also a rather slow and dim one, compared to Chuck D.
A premature geezer too, since Buckley wasn’t all that old in the clip.
Buckley was confirmed in his racism, even when he experienced total failure at being the superior race first hand. Sad.
raven
@jl: roger
David in NY
@I am not a kook (Supreme Thought Leader): Nice. (Though I’m not sure Washington personally pocketed any francs.)
Chris
@the Conster:
No, Buckley was the one who could put on a three-piece suit and speak in complete sentences, thus reassuring the Gentlemen of the Establishment that he was a Reasonable, Respectable, and Very Serious Person, unlike those John Birch Society clodhoppers.
It was Chris Christie vs Ted Cruz, 1.0.
David in NY
In 1968, I saw Jonathan Kozol on TV call Buckley an “evil man.” It was very refreshing, and I have nothing to add to it.
JCJ
@rikyrah:
“They are who we thought they were.”
Applies even better to conservatives then the original rant by Dennis Green after a football game.
I am not a kook (Supreme Thought Leader)
Some dim bulb in TNC’s comment section had obviously gotten a talking point this morning: a link to a NYT article from 1990 when Mandela expressed support for Robert Mugabe in the upcoming elections in Zimbabwe. And because of that, Mandela isn’t all that great.
Yeah, by 1990 Mandela probably knew that Mugabe wasn’t going to be progressive democratic leader, but nobody could know how disastrous he would become. But what is he supposed to do? His life’s work was to bring democracy to South Africa by any means necessary. Is he supposed to publicly denounce an ally who would continue to be in a position to support the ANC? Come on. First things first. At this point, he doesn’t know if he’s going to need military support.
Not to mention, these were the first elections in Zimbabwe with unified voter rolls. Yeah, get on teevee to say “you doin it rong, bro!”. The *white* voter referendum on apartheid in South Africa was still two years in the future.
It’s also quite a sight to see all these American right wingers become disciples of Gandhi and proponents of non-violence in the anti-apartheid struggle. Ask them if they categorically denounce taking up arms against any government now!
Chris
@MattR:
What strikes me about the article Kay posted is that it’s almost exactly what he wrote in 1957 regarding segregation in the South;
“The central question that emerges—and it is not a parliamentary question or a question that is answered by merely consulting a catalog of the rights of American citizens, born Equal—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 predominate numerically? The sobering answer is Yes—the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race.
National Review believes that the South’s premises are correct. If the majority wills what is socially atavistic, then to thwart the majority may be, though undemocratic, enlightened. It is more important for any community, anywhere in the world, to affirm and live by civilized standards, than to bow to the demands of the numerical majority. Sometimes it becomes impossible to assert the will of a minority, in which case it must give way; and the society will regress; sometimes the numerical minority cannot prevail except by violence: then it must determine whether the prevalence of its will is worth the terrible price of violence.”
That argument was quoted by Krugman in “Conscience of a Liberal” and by many other liberals, and conservatives will usually argue that it was back in the fifties, and hey, he changed his mind, can’t you give it a rest? Only, here he is thirty years later saying the exact same thing.
Fuck ’em all. “Party Of Lincoln” my ass.
Belafon
@jl:
If racists were actually superior, they wouldn’t need to be racists.
Betty Cracker
@jl:
Is there any other kind?
Chris
@Hal:
The same way they reacted in real life.
Muslims weren’t the bad guys then, fanatic fundamentalist Muslims even less so – they were one of our biggest bulwarks against “socialism” in the Middle East (that was going on long before Afghanistan, too).
Jihadis, like fascists, didn’t become bad until they went haywire and started bombing Western buildings. Before that they were our brothers in God, precious allies in the fight against communism, secularism and Godlessness.
Villago Delenda Est
@rikyrah:
Prezacktly.
Bill Buckley is racist filth in whatever afterlife he currently resides in.
jl
@I am not a kook (Supreme Thought Leader):
” Some dim bulb in TNC’s comment section had obviously gotten a talking point this morning: a link to a NYT article from 1990 when Mandela expressed support for Robert Mugabe in the upcoming elections in Zimbabwe. And because of that, Mandela isn’t all that great.
Yeah, by 1990 Mandela probably knew that Mugabe wasn’t going to be progressive democratic leader, ”
I guess U.S. conservatives would like to be reminded of all the disastrous ‘democratic’ leaders they have supported in the past, in Africa, Middle East and South America?
Cacti
Buckley’s opinion on black South Africans is entirely consistent with his position on the rights of African Americans circa 1957.
From the article “Why the South Must Prevail”:
The central question that emerges—and it is not a parliamentary question or a question that is answered by merely consulting a catalog of the rights of American citizens, born Equal—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 predominate numerically? The sobering answer is Yes—the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race. …
A white supremacist creep at all times when race was an issue.
Villago Delenda Est
@Chris:
The startling thing about arguments about gays in the military was that they essentially boiled down, word for word, to the same arguments made back in the late 40’s about racial integration in the Armed Forces.
Here’s the kicker: they came right out of the mouth of Colin Powell.
Villago Delenda Est
@jl:
That Hitler guy isn’t so bad after all. Heck, he built the Autobahns!
different-church-lady
I cannot imagine any context in which those statements could be defensible.
The only thing Buckley had going over today’s conservative pundits was he knew how to be amusing and charming. So horrible that costume concealed such ignorance.
Villago Delenda Est
@Chris:
Why, they were fellow people of God, allied with us, precisely as you said, in a struggle against godlessness.
Now Sharia law is threatening to wash over this country like a Katrina storm surge…and they worship some obscene caricature of a deity who intends to boil the baby Jesus in oil.
I am not a kook (Supreme Thought Leader)
@jl:
But that’s DIFFERENT! Because Reasons, and they MEANT WELL. Nobody could have predicted!
Cacti
Rush Limbaugh says, Nelson Mandela had a lot more in common with Clarence Thomas than Barack Obama.
Not joking.
some guy
“Western democratic fundamentalism has made things especially hard in Israel for one simple reason, and that is that Western opinion has consolidated around the position that unless every person in Israel over the age of 18 is given the vote, there is still injustice in the land.
“The government will not … grant political equality to everyone in Israel Nor should it. It is preposterous at one and the same time to remark the widespread illiteracy in Israel and to demand the universal franchise.
Continue our moral pressure, by all means. But … pull back on the one-man, one vote business.
Chris
@I am not a kook (Supreme Thought Leader):
It’s a handy little game that Western conservatives play in circumstances like this to completely shut out people like Mandela and any hope of their getting help in the West. Then, when they turn to the only people available who’ll help, the West is shocked, shocked, and says it proves they were all Lousy Stinking Commies all along. The same is said of the Sandinistas getting help from Cuba, and previous leaders like Lumumba, I believe.
Actually, the more I read about Mandela this week, the more the parallels between South Africa and Nicaragua occur to me. Both were brutal right wing autocracies supported enthusiastically by Western rightists under the theory that “it’s them or the commies!” Both regimes were eventually overthrown by those Lousy Stinking Commies and – surprise surprise – both countries then turned into fairly functional democracies, not the Stalinist death camps we were warned of.
The main difference being, I suppose, that Mandela has been turned into a saint on a level with Gandhi or MLK (deservedly so), while the Sandinistas continue to be vilified as might-as-well-be-commie bastards.
Baud
A sophisticated Glenn Beck.
Villago Delenda Est
@Cacti:
Nelson Mandela was a huge pr0n consumer, too? Who knew?
Belafon
@Cacti: Neither Thomas or Mandela were president of the United States.
Villago Delenda Est
@I am not a kook (Supreme Thought Leader):
Norman…coordinate!
pseudonymous in nc
@I am not a kook (Supreme Thought Leader):
Mandela was also friends with Gadaffi till the end, and was on good terms with the Chinese. Why? Because they had supported the ANC consistently throughout the apartheid era, unlike certain governments of the US and UK.
Seems fucking fair to me.
MomSense
Buckley was a grifter–he certainly put an aristocratic spin on it–but he was a low down grifter.
PIGL
@Baud: no, just an upper-class Newt Gingrich.
Gene108
@Villago Delenda Est:
And his rocket scientists helped NASA put a man on the moon by 1969.
The Apollo program would’ve floundered without some good old fashioned Nazi ingenuity.
Gene108
@MomSense:
From what I have read about Buckley is he did not need to and thus did not grift.
He was old money and set for life before launching his magazine.
Villago Delenda Est
@Gene108:
“Our Germans are better than their Germans.”
Xecky Gilchrist
The open racism on display here is startling, of course.
Only startling in how quietly stated it is in comparison to that of Buckley’s ideological descendents.
Villago Delenda Est
@MomSense:
Gene’s right, Buckley came from old money. He didn’t need to grift.
However, he did establish a pretty good market for the grifters who would exercise entrepreneurship in his wake.
Soonergrunt
@raven: There are enough Bubba Smiths of the other variety that I’m on pretty safe ground.
jl
@PIGL: I guess my opinion of Buckley’s opinions are lower than those of the BJ commentariate. I was going to use the ‘L-word’ to describe Buckley’s opinions. Yes, I was going to go ‘Limbaugh’, but thought that was just over the top.
But besides being a consistent racist (which might have mellowed into mere severe bigotry very late in life) , I remember seeing a clip of Buckley saying that a few nuclear wars (but, hey, maybe just start out tactical, since we should be careful) would be a good way to beat the commies, so all this agitation about how bad nuclear war is, well, that is an objectively very evile thing for people to talk about, equivalent to moral treason.
Well, that is Limbaugh territory. Buckley was far more polished and polite, but underneath, same opinions.
Only good thing I can think of about Buckley, is that he would participate in public debate, unlike our current crop of Becks and Limbaughs. Though watching Buckley perform from old clips makes me wonder how he maintained his reputation as some one worth listening to.
LanceThruster
Buckley would only approve of apartheid outside the twelve mile limit.
PIGL
@jl: I don’t disagree….I didn’t intend “upper-class Newt” as a complement, simply as a more a accurate description. Although perhaps his ideas, at bottom, are more like Rush Limbaugh’s then Glen Beck’s or Newt Gingrich’s….I mean, for all I know, those two men may not be actual white supremacists. But it’s more a question, in my mind, is one particular demon from the very center of the 9th circle of hell, or possibly does it come from the low rent fringes near the 8th?
gwangung
@Hal:
Essentially, conservatives were calling for unilateral disarmament for blacks in apartheid South Africa.
That’s not something they’d accept for themselves, but were perfectly comfortable demanding of others.
Hmmm.
danielx
I’m reminded of it every time I hear or read of another piece of legislation designed to suppress voter turnout by Those People….er, address the (nonexistent) wave of voter fraud sweeping this here U.S. of A.
No, they didn’t believe in self-government for black South Africans, and clearly they’re not real enamored of democratic participation by black people here, either.
Chris
@pseudonymous in nc:
Yep.
The world is chock-full of dictators. Therefore, you have to do business with some of them. It’s always bad when that happens, and it should be limited as much as possible (whether those dictators are on the left or the right), but it’s unavoidable sometimes. There’s nothing more inherently fucked up about Mandela dealing with Cuba, Libya or Zimbabwe than there is in us dealing with the Saudis, the Uzbeks, or [insert favorite regime here].
And that sort of thing doesn’t even have to make us enemies. It’s not like we and some of our closest allies – the British, the French, the Israelis – have never found ourselves backing opposing dictators. The relationship survived.
Chris
@jl:
Oh, wow.
I remember watching an episode of classic Mission: Impossible where the team went up against a right wing lunatic out to incite war with the Soviet Union, who I thought happened to look a lot like William F. Buckley. Now I know where they got their inspiration.
Mnemosyne
@Chris:
I’m old enough to remember when Daniel Ortega, the president of Nicaragua, was on the cover of Time magazine as the next great commie dictator ready to invade the US via Texas. And after all of that buildup, when Ortega’s party was voted out of power he … went back to serving in their parliament as an ordinary legislator. No muss, no fuss, completely peaceful transition of power once the Contras weren’t being funded by the US anymore.
Chris
@Mnemosyne:
Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala and Mexico must’ve been a little puzzled by that Cunning Plan.
Jack the Second
People keep talking about Obama winning 90%+ of the black vote as if it were because he was black. Al Gore also won 90%+ of the white vote.
The one constant has been how disgustingly racist the Republican party has been these last 40, 50 years.
Aimai
@Hal: just look at how long the IRA were supported bt congressman peter king, R NY. White irish terrorism had plenty of supporters.
smintheus
In the heyday of classical Athenian democracy, a lot of Athenians were not really literate either. We’ve excavated ostraka cast during ostracisms that were filled out in advance by various political ground-operations to assist voters who couldn’t write out the name of the politician they wanted to expel.
But I suppose wfbuckley would have been opposed to the Athenian democracy as well.
Ruckus
@Belafon:
Exactly
Mike in NC
Where is Bill Buckley buried? Just in case I’m in the area and have a full bladder to empty.
Ruckus
@Mike in NC:
It’s a good thought but what if he’s on fire in the casket? Would you piss on him then? I think not.
Smiling Mortician
I saw that episode of SNL. It wasn’t bad.
mai naem
I went to college with a guy who was a Republican and intentionally put on a Willam F. Buckley affect. Looking back now, it was such douchey thing to do and he came across as such a self important prick. He actually seemed like a nice guy underneath but he was a Reagan Republican Gen X’r. I haven’t kept up with him but I know from a friend that he that he ended up at HP and then other telecom stuff in Silicon Valley. I just wonder how well a Reagan Republican/ Buckley wanna be goes down in Silicon Valley.
Mnemosyne
@Chris:
This is how I can tell you’re too young to remember Reagan: the man seriously, and with a straight face, claimed that we had to fund the Contras because Brownsville, Texas, was only “two days away” from Nicaragua (scroll to the bottom for the exact claim).
I still don’t understand how anyone came out of the Reagan years not a liberal, because the man spouted the most idiotic lies that only a fucking idiot would buy into. And yet millions of people did.
JustRuss
@c u n d gulag:
Pretty well, actually. Contrary to popular belief, the Aztecs weren’t so impressed by Cortez’ horses and guns that they just let him stroll into the capital and kidnap Montezuma. He and his men fought a number of pitched battles against insane odds and won handily thanks to superior tactics–having steel armor and swords didn’t hurt either.
But yeah, that other stuff was pretty significant too, esp. smallpox.
Roger Moore
@Villago Delenda Est:
And a lot of the attempts to undermine marriage equality look like attempts to derail integration. Rather than accept integrated public services, whites in the South decided to privatize. Now they’re threatening to eliminate marriage benefits for straight couples so they can legally deny them to gay couples. Malicious fucks are still malicious fucks, 60 years later.
Roger Moore
@smintheus:
He didn’t really believe in democracy of any stripe, which makes him an intellectual ancestor of today’s Republican Party.
SFAW
@Cacti:
I think what the DAPCCLMF* meant was that neither one has/had ever taken part in any questioning or discussions at the SCOTUS.
*DAPCCLMF = Drug-addicted, pedophilic, closet case, lying motherfucker, of course
SFAW
@Roger Moore:
Well, what did you expect, when his (perhaps) most famous quote is “A conservative is someone who stands athwart democracy, yelling Stop!”
Jay C
@mai naem:
So, in other words, he nailed the shtick…..?
Matt McIrvin
@Cacti:
Oh, that’s what he says now?
I remember taking a cab around Arlington, Mass. (I no longer remember why, maybe it was after I crashed my car) around 2000 or so, and the driver was playing Limbaugh’s show on the radio. Some caller was talking about the many poverty-related problems being faced by the post-apartheid South African government (it would have been under Thabo Mbeki, I guess,) and Limbaugh’s response was just “It just goes to show you, the liberals will always screw it up.”
Takeover by “the liberals” in his mind being democracy in South Africa. That was the only frame in which those people could think about it. Everything was fine until the liberals screwed up South Africa.
Death Panel Truck
@Soonergrunt: I doubt too many white Southern racists would be willing to share their name with a black Hall of Fame defensive end.
Michael C
@Gene108: Not old money. His father made it in Mexico in the oil bidness. That may explain some of his preening, pretentiousness, and love of criuelty.