he was very close with william f buckley. he was a senior leader in the john birch society through the mid 1960s. you know, so and for me, that posed a question of, okay, well, that means something. it doesn't mean that, you know, the conservative movement is fascistic necessarily, but it does mean that they're adjacent in intertwined, interconnected in ways that i don't think. certainly not at the time. this is before trump rose to national prominence. most people fully sort of appreciate it or understood so i can i think about trumpism in 2024 as the acceleration of trends that had been existing in politics and in the conservative political tradition in a very for a very long time. nancy. i'm sure i'm not going to talk how we got here. i'm going to talk about the here because could because i think that what our book governing is identifying destination and happy destination that hasn't been acknowledged as a unified thing as opposed to popular authoritarianism or what it's going to talk about. so on governing is an unfamili

he was very close with william f buckley. he was a senior leader in the john birch society through the mid 1960s. you know, so and for me, that posed a question of, okay, well, that means something. it doesn't mean that, you know, the conservative movement is fascistic necessarily, but it does mean that they're adjacent in intertwined, interconnected in ways that i don't think. certainly not at the time. this is before trump rose to national prominence. most people fully sort of appreciate it or understood so i can i think about trumpism in 2024 as the acceleration of trends that had been existing in politics and in the conservative political tradition in a very for a very long time. nancy. i'm sure i'm not going to talk how we got here. i'm going to talk about the here because could because i think that what our book governing is identifying destination and happy destination that hasn't been acknowledged as a unified thing as opposed to popular authoritarianism or what it's going to talk about. so on governing is an unfamili

in my 12-year-old heart i knew he was right so i was very passionate conservative and william f. buckley i read the national review. during my junior year i read aboutt the describes it and i told her i did one here by the end i thought the word sounded so that was the da vinci brought a speaker who talked about libertarianism and i thought that seresto conservative i could vote for that and by my last year at northwestern i took a seminar on libertarianism so at that point byni my senior yer in college i was a libertarian and as the book explains i had written a fan letter and when i went to harvard law school he gave it to a classmate of mine and they met the whole libertarian intellectual circle and eventually joined the board all while i was a law student. i've been a libertarian for a long time. >> what the difference between being ade conservative and beina libertarian? >> it depends on what kind of conservative youou are. it's very amorphous for a lot of different reasons. if you want to oversimplify things there's a liberty-based conservatism that are traditionalist religious-bas

in 1972 the future prime minister, shimon peres, appeared on the original "firing line" with william f. buckley jr. and he appeared at a time when there was a tide of isolationism in the united states and he made the case for democracies. take a look at what he said. - short of the size and geography, there are many similarities in the way the united states was created and israel was born, the same spirit, the same convictions, the same outlook, and the same desire to do a positive service to other people. the russians are here, trying to take over the middle east, trying to make the middle east a new page in the russian glories, in the russian history. and israel, a tiny little nation, is standing in the face of soviet russia, without losing her nerves, without demanding that anybody else to fight instead oher, but simply to maintain the necessary strength so she won't be overcome by either threats nor by arms. - how does defending democratic nations abroad strengthen our country here at home? - the united states is not just a territory or a nationality, it's an idea. and that idea is that hum

. - in 1973, william f. buckley jr. hosted a discussion on impeachment and the question of how to hold a president accountable. take a look at this clip from 1973. - there's no sense in trying to treat the president like everybody else because he's not like everybody else. the evolution of our institutions are such as to have fused the office of chief of state and the office of chief of government. the impeachment instrument, in my opinion, ought to be used not to punish a president, but to remove him. if you think that the safety of the state requires that the president be removed, then you invoke it, but you don't invoke it for high crimes and misdemeanors without recognizing that the principal casualty is ourselves rather than the president. - this debate about impeachment and removal from office coincided with a time where your father was the first republican to stand up to richard nixon in the house of representatives and say that he should resign from office because of the watergate scandal. my question actual

pretty pronounced degree anti-intellectual ism in conservative politics, you know, very famously, william f buckley said that he would rather be ruled by the first thousand people in the boston phonebook than by the faculty at harvard. you know, the difference i think one of the important differences, though, is that there's still was a a degree of committee meant to, again to go back to reveal oliver, the fact that he had a ph.d. in classics and taught at a major american university. that's something that john birch society very deliberately cultivated. they loved having him despite the fact that he was a lunatic, in addition to being a neo-nazi, claimed one point that jfk was assassinated by, the communist conspiracy. because kennedy himself was a communist and was not delivering america to communism fast enough. this wrote this in 1964, shortly after the it almost got him fired from his tenure position. but it still mattered that he had sort of academic credentials and expertise. and i think you're right that something changed in i was talking this with a friend of mine actually in the greenroom

i knew he was right and so i was a very passionate conservative i was a william f buckley. i read national review. and then when i got to college during my junior year, i ran across libertarianism. the book tells the story about how i became introduced to libertarianism actually at first a friend of mine told me about it and i told her, you know, i'd want to hear about this. and the reason why is that the word was weird weird, and i thought it sounded so that was it. but then she brought a speaker to the residential college. we in who would explain libertarianism. i was listening to it and i thought, wow, a rational conservatism. i could go for that. and by my last year, northwestern, i taught a student accredited on libertarian, libertarian ism. so at that point, by my senior year of college i was a libertarian then the book, as the book explains where i went as a first year law student, i had written fan letter to murray rothbard, and when i went to harvard law school, he gave it to a classmate of mine. that guy brought me down to new york and i met the whole libertarian

you recall our government friend william f buckley wrote many years ago. a nation would religion is sunk. families without religion are sunk. it breaks the whole country, he never said which, die tie dei is not a higher power. that is the problem here. >> free society, you have to have two wings, one is freedom the other is virtue, without freedom the other does not work. a couple years ago republican electives were scscared of this issue, suddenly the light bull be bulb went off. larry: this is a common sense view if you ask me, biological men should not play in women's sports, is that asking too much? it is not a religious issue, this is a common sense issue eit is a losing issue for those who support it those in brown and one in wisconsin, tester, in montana that is not montana values, i am kissing him good by, the other is more interesting they are stuck with that, that is is a bad losing issue. >> so bad in texas calling allred who got attacked in senate campaign over ted cruz over this issue had to cut a new ad saying i'm not in favor. >> he said boy

and i think that that most dramatically it started around william f buckley jr and nash the founding of national review now this happened in the 1950s because of of several of the of the early shimmering that were happen happening you know as a direct result of the of the new deal world war two etc., etc. and i won't into that today but i believe firmly that by the 1960s there was a a substantial and growing pushback. and and i think that that bill buckley, the editors of national review and, many of of their allies in real time did something very important both in politics and culture. i would argue that without national review, there may well never, never have been a reagan presidency, but i also think there are many unstated cultural successes that, national review and that nascent growing conservative movement successfully employed. the second thing is that, and i write about this in stumbling toward utopia is that many of the people i mentioned a moment ago were very well funded by by very famous americans. i write about them at length and i'll use just one example. the rockefel

i agree, i am aware of that, but i'm also aware of what william f buckley once said, that he'd rather be governed by the 1st 100 names, new york telephone book than a 100 people off the harvard faculty american, the american academy use out of touch with the american people, and that's one of the things that you're seeing reflected in this the election. um, there are a lot of people who are in the academy in politics and in the media in this country who look down there now. does it donald trump in his voters? and i think that's not only shocking, but insulting. i know that doesn't say i agree with everything that trump stands for, but trump represents. i think a group of people who feel for a very long time that both parties have abused their interest on behalf of a certain special select groups. whether they're defined by the city are defined by economic students and are leaving the rest of people to the founder, which is why, for example, that if you check the polls that the immigration issue post so highly getting this election. because the perception is that america is being overr

he was very close with william f buckley. he was a senior leader in the john birch society through the mid 1960s. you know, so and for me, that posed a question of, okay, well, that means something. it doesn't mean that, you know, the conservative movement is fascistic necessarily, but it does mean that they're adjacent in intertwined, interconnected in ways that i don't think. certainly not at the time. this is before trump rose to national prominence. most people fully sort of appreciate it or understood so i can i think about trumpism in 2024 as the acceleration of trends that had been existing in politics and in the conservative political tradition in a very for a very long time. nancy. i'm sure i'm not going to talk how we got here. i'm going to talk about the here because could because i think that what our book governing is identifying destination and happy destination that hasn't been acknowledged as a unified thing as opposed to popular authoritarianism or what it's going to talk about. so on governing is an unfamili

i knew he was right and so i was a very passionate conservative i was a william f buckley. i read national review. and then when i got to college during my junior year, i ran across libertarianism. the book tells the story about how i became introduced to libertarianism actually at first a friend of mine told me about it and i told her, you know, i'd want to hear about this. and the reason why is that the word was weird weird, and i thought it sounded so that was it. but then she brought a speaker to the residential college. we in who would explain libertarianism. i was listening to it and i thought, wow, a rational conservatism. i could go for that. and by my last year, northwestern, i taught a student accredited on libertarian, libertarian ism. so at that point, by my senior year of college i was a libertarian then the book, as the book explains where i went as a first year law student, i had written fan letter to murray rothbard, and when i went to harvard law school, he gave it to a classmate of mine. that guy brought me down to new york and i met the whole libertarian