Joe Sobran, one of the finest minds at National Review, wrote a few articles somewhat critical of Israel. WFB fired Joe Sobran after waning him that "you can't offend those people!" Buckley was very conscious of where the money for National Review came from.
Joe Sobran, one of the finest minds at National Review, wrote a few articles somewhat critical of Israel. WFB fired Joe Sobran after waning him that "you can't offend those people!" Buckley was very conscious of where the money for National Review came from.
William F. Buckley Jr. was deeply sensitive to the issue of anti-Semitism, as evidenced by his landmark essay and subsequent book, In Search of Anti-Semitism. In this work, Buckley scrutinized the writings of several figures, including Joseph Sobran, a longtime colleague and friend. While Buckley did not explicitly label Sobran an anti-Semite, he concluded that Sobran’s “tendentious” focus on Israel and related topics could reasonably lead others to perceive him as such.
Buckley’s handling of the matter was nuanced. He dissociated himself from Sobran’s writings on Jews, Judaism, and Israel but acknowledged Sobran’s broader contributions to National Review. This careful approach reflected Buckley’s commitment to combating anti-Semitism while maintaining intellectual fairness.
Given Buckley’s rigorous examination of the issue and his reluctance to make accusations lightly, his concerns about Sobran likely had a legitimate basis, even if they stopped short of outright condemnation.
Joe Sobran, one of the finest minds at National Review, wrote a few articles somewhat critical of Israel. WFB fired Joe Sobran after waning him that "you can't offend those people!" Buckley was very conscious of where the money for National Review came from.
William F. Buckley Jr. was deeply sensitive to the issue of anti-Semitism, as evidenced by his landmark essay and subsequent book, In Search of Anti-Semitism. In this work, Buckley scrutinized the writings of several figures, including Joseph Sobran, a longtime colleague and friend. While Buckley did not explicitly label Sobran an anti-Semite, he concluded that Sobran’s “tendentious” focus on Israel and related topics could reasonably lead others to perceive him as such.
Buckley’s handling of the matter was nuanced. He dissociated himself from Sobran’s writings on Jews, Judaism, and Israel but acknowledged Sobran’s broader contributions to National Review. This careful approach reflected Buckley’s commitment to combating anti-Semitism while maintaining intellectual fairness.
Given Buckley’s rigorous examination of the issue and his reluctance to make accusations lightly, his concerns about Sobran likely had a legitimate basis, even if they stopped short of outright condemnation.