Would William F Buckley be a Democrat in 2018?
During my childhood I really spent a great deal of time studying the ideology of William F Buckley. I really feel if he was alive today, he would be a Democrat because the conservative movement he championed has left left him for super nationalism were he never supported. And, a president that only cares about his ego and other negative lifestyle. Buckley was over educated for the common conservative of our era. Buckley was really interested with educated members of the left. Buckley never spent time winning over the uneducated conservatives. Buckley, never decided to build scandals with a house of cards.
You must have been a very young child because clearly you didn't understand the conservative Mr. Buckley. Where to begin?
First, Buckley was an old-fashioned aristocratic conservative forged during an era in which American society was relatively stable with low immigration rates and a melting pot of more or less white ethnics with blacks as the only significantly sized minority, and when separate "identity politics" for women was nearly non-existent. As such his conservatism was Burkeian reaction to mass democracy and the faceless mass man. Buckley's beliefs arose out of the belief that voluntary society is an organic entity whose stability and common values arise from evolution by shared experience, not revolution or top down dictates. To that end, for him conservatism arose from America's religious roots and the best values of Western Civilization, its respect for decentralized community and local government, its reliance on free market and voluntary relationships. Why Buckley started out as a sort of patrician, a member of the Nockian elite living in an age of rude and the lowest common denominator of democratic "mass man", but in time he grew to trust the common man far more than intellectual and social elites. (Hence his famous quip about his rather being ruled by the first few thousands names in the NY telephone book than any groups of ivy league academics).
Second, Buckley's specific policy prescriptions and values are almost 100 percent in opposition to contemporary Democratic party values. He was a strong anti-communist, cold war supporter, and believer in a strong national defense. And while he rejected 'de jure' segregation he also believed the 'de facto' segregation from free choice to be utterly sensible - as such he was also an opponent of busing. He was against the great society (and even questioned social security), supported Goldwater, thought Nixon to be too liberal domestically, and opposed the welfare state (and I assume Medicare). The only "liberalism" he demonstrated was in his nod to libertarianism, believing that marijuana should be decriminalized, free speech mostly protected (against the fairness doctrine), and supported giving Panama control of the canal.
Last, Buckley's politics didn't change. He had a special relationship with Rush Limbaugh, criticized George Bush Jr. for being temperamentally conservative but not "a conservative", and was a life long defender of ideological conservatism. To be sure, he didn't like Trump styled populism or the sort of John Birch nationalism (and paleo conservatism) that tended to seep around the edges of the Republican party, but there is no reason to suppose he would be a Democrat - if anything, much like George Will, he would choose a third course (as his brother did in getting elected to the Senate under the "conservative party").
Sadly, your op, in spite of your readings, demonstrates how little you understood Buckley, which for someone who became a socialist is not unusual.
