Follow the Flagship
An Appreciation for National Review
Dear Friends,
Congratulations to the Arizona Diamondbacks for their triumph over the Philadelphia Phillies! A stunning—stunning—achievement. They looked dead in the water after losing the first two, and fought back only to be forced to go into the lion’s den known as Citizen’s Bank Park to win two must-wins against a very scary lineup. What an epic upset!
And thank you, Texas Rangers, for also figuring things out in the nick of time (e.g., “stop throwing pitches to Yordan Alvarez”) to send the Houston Astros packing. Those were two memorable Championship series!
Jenna Ellis, the outspoken evangelical Christian lawyer who, along with Rudy Guiliani, Sidney Powell, John Eastman, and others, sought to overturn the official results of the 2020 Presidential election, has pled guilty of doing so in Georgia. She had previously been sanctioned by the Colorado Bar Association for similar instances of making false claims. She is one of four co-conspirators to plead guilty in the Georgia indictment of Donald Trump.
In a statement to the Judge, Ellis expressed, with tears, deep remorse for her actions and recanted her previous belief that the election lacked integrity.
A couple of things to be noted. We are constantly being told by folks on the MAGA right that the Georgia prosecutor is overreaching, has no case, is engaged in a “witch hunt,” and that sort of thing. But many of the co-defendants seem to think they are in serious legal (or at least financial) jeopardy, even if the former President doesn’t. Don’t make rash assumptions about the strength of this indictment. Second, now that many of the lead players in the “stolen election” hysteria of 2020 are recanting, we might wish that the former President’s supporters might start to have the teensiest bit of doubt creep into their minds that maybe, just maybe, their man really did lose an election to a guy in need of a nursing home. Okay, you can stop laughing now. They’ll never doubt their man. Third, this bodes very ill for Donald Trump, since these plea agreements are likely in exchange for testifying on behalf of the state. Will Powell and Ellis get on the stand and sing like canaries, telling a jury how everyone involved knew their claims of a “stolen election” were lies? That will be “Must-See TV.”
Stay tuned.
The U.S. Customs and Border Patrol San Diego Field Office issued a memo alerting its agents to the potential of Hamas and Hezbollah fighters seeking to infiltrate the country by way of the southern border. If you think that sounds far-fetched, keep in mind that so far this year there have been 169 people encountered by Border Patrol who are on the terrorist watch list. It is pretty unlikely that they “encountered” every single one, isn’t it? You don’t think Hamas would like to do to an American suburban neighborhood what they did to Israeli suburban neighborhoods?
It’s a good thing our country has strong leadership and isn’t distracted or anything.
What I am about to write is going to read like an advertisement, and that is because it is. I assure you there is nothing whatsoever in it for me. It is just that I have become more impressed with and grateful for this product over the last six or eight years and I think you should seriously consider making use of it, if you don’t already.
I am referring to National Review magazine. Famously founded in 1955 by William F. Buckley, Jr., it has ever since been the flagship publication of movement conservatism. In his words, National Review would “stand athwart history,”—that is, the Hegelian progressive version of personified History—“yelling Stop!” This month the magazine made a major shift, becoming a monthly rather than bi-weekly publication. The issues are longer, packed with a wide diversity of articles, and the actual print quality and paper is vastly improved. But none of that matters if the content isn’t any good. So let me say some things about that.
I am in awe of Editor-In-Chief, Rich Lowry. As I stare, dumbfounded, at the wasteland and carnage of what is left of American conservatism and its various institutional and media organs, National Review is pretty near the last thing standing with integrity. Rich managed to steer this magazine and its opinionated and sometimes fractious personalities through the tumult of the Trump years without losing the plot, and I have no earthly idea how he managed it. Nearly every other publication went one of two directions: full-on MAGA propaganda outlet (e.g., Claremont), or the “useful idiot” route of becoming a house organ for the Democrat Party (e.g., The Bulwark). The Weekly Standard is no more, and its co-founder Bill Kristol is somewhere off telling people—I wish I was making this up—how awesome Joe Biden is. National Review is, remarkably, still National Review.
There are some honorable mentions, of course. The Washington Examiner puts out a very good product. The Dispatch is a solidly conservative group (and the yearly subscription is worth it just for the writing of Kevin Williamson, and you get Jonah Goldberg thrown in for free). But they began their institution in the aftermath (we hope) of the Trump years. Rich Lowry had to steer a well-known and beloved ship through those waters and come out on the other side intact. He succeeded beyond my wildest hopes. National Review was a sane and sturdy ideological and political “home” before, and I am profoundly grateful that it didn’t burn down during the recent conflagration. It is homier than ever.
Here’s a sampling of what you’d find if you had your November issue in hand: A truly inspiring reassertion of its foundational principles; a sprawling essay on the continued importance of Thomas Sowell by Wilfred Reilly; brilliant essays on the future of conservatism by Jonah Goldberg, Matthew Continetti, and Yuval Levin; a bracing essay on America’s foreign policy by Noah Rothman; book reviews, a film review, and even some poetry. I am halfway through the issue and can tell you something remarkable: I’ve read every single word. It is all worth reading. There is little to no fluff in an issue of National Review.
And that is just the print magazine. NR also has a powerful online presence, and you really should subscribe to the “bundle”—the print magazine and NRPlus, a feature that allows you complete non-paywalled access to their website with (and this is very important) almost no ads. Suffice it to say, the print magazine, excellent as it may be, is the tip of the iceberg of what NR offers.
I said that National Review is a “home,” of sorts. That means that in that home dwells a family, also of sorts. And the characters in this happy but sometimes fractious family are people you should get to know through the printed word or any number of their podcasts. I can’t name them all, but I pity the person who doesn’t regularly read Charles C.W. Cooke, Jim Geraghty, Noah Rothman, Dan McLaughlin, Ramesh Ponnuru, Michael Brendan Dougherty (he’s the lovable “worrier” of the family), Andy McCarthy, Dan McLaughlin, Jay Nordlinger, Madeleine Kearns, and many others. It really is a delightful bunch, even if and when you find yourself disagreeing with some of their opinions. Which you will, inevitably.
Who do you trust in the cacophony that is modern media? Well, if reporting and analysis of daily headlines is what you’re after, I don’t think there is a better guide than Jim Geraghty and his “Morning Jolt” newsletter—I am amazed at what he produces every single day. Do you wonder about legal issues? What should we think about all these indictments and court cases? Former career Federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy is practically a one-stop shop of no-B.S. analysis, but NR gives you even more: Dan McLaughlin! What’s going on in the Alphabet world, and the raging “trans” issues? Madeleine Kearns has got you covered. What about foreign policy and our increasingly dangerous world? Noah Rothman will give you the straight dope, along with strong hawkish opinions (and Michael Brendan Dougherty will counter with his characteristic dovishness; it’s a great tandem—Rothman the “warrior” and MBD the “worrier.”). What should you think about economic issues? Oh, my. What an embarrassment of riches has National Review. Dominic Pino. Ramesh Ponnuru. David Bahnsen. And I really am just scratching the surface here because every time I finish one of these sentences another comes to mind. For example, no one in public life tops the sheer rapier wit of Charlie Cooke; wit, and it’s refreshing to read and listen to a Brit so besotted with America.
National Review has more than earned a subscription from me, and they will do so for you. Having come through the last tumultuous decade with such a strong stable of writers and thinkers (even while amicably losing luminaries like Goldberg and Williamson along the way—both off to The Dispatch), coupled with a continued commitment to its own founding principles and vision, I am prepared to say that whatever the future of American conservatism ends up looking like, National Review will be leading the way. It is the populist demagogues who sneer at NR as “establishment” who will be left behind in the end. Believe it.
Okay, that’s enough trying to convince you to subscribe to somebody else’s publication. Am I a terrible self-promoter, or what? Hit the button below before heading on over to NR, and have a great rest of your week!
Charlie and David alone are worth the cost of an NR subscription. The others are welcome lagniappe.
When are you going to have another article there?
For a better perspective on threat of terrorism through the so-called "open" border, read Alex Nowrasteh. The annual chance of being murdered in a terrorist attack committed by a foreign‐born terrorist from 1975–2022 is about 1 in 4.3 million per year.
https://www.cato.org/testimony/terrorist-entry-through-southwest-border
For philosophical cud to chew about how to secure the US border, read this piece about the spectactular failure of Israel's high-tech border defenses.
https://unherd.com/2023/10/israels-illusion-of-security/
We classical liberals, with our democratic republicanism, need to prayerfully understand this. There is no security policy or edifice under the sun which will serve as a technological override to Psalm 127:1-2.
NB this is a weakness of ours and the populists are exploiting it. Tucker Carlson famously made an appeal to prayer, even humbly saying "I'm Episcopalian, we don't normally do this." Would the NR staff admit that a wall is useless unless our whole nation turns its eyes to God? I hope so.
Couldn't agree more, especially about NR — but the rest too!