(Despite Buckley’s commitment to free enterprise, which would have ordained an early death for National Review, he often excused his annual appeal for support by observing, “You don’t expect the church to make a profit, do you?”)

how is it that the left’s luminaries can be so ignorant of something they claim to despise? am i missing something? how is soliciting donations from individuals against free enterprise?

Navasky would do well to remember Nock’s polite but stern rebuke of “The Nation” upon welcoming “The Freeman” to “the field of liberal journalism.” Nock, a stickler for precision of meaning, took issue with “The Freeman” being categorized as anything close to a liberal rag. He went on at some length to describe the differences between liberalism and radicalism, both used interchangeably, then as now.

In closing his editorial piece entitled In The Vein of Intimacy, Nock exhibited some of the very characteristics Buckley was lauded for during his later years: clear thinking, piercing intellect, respect for one’s idealogical opponents, congeniality at the point of attack and impeccable style.

I wonder how many of the NYT readers ever encountered Nock in full, or for that matter understand the connection between “The Remnant” and his subtle, sophisticated influence of history?

I belive Nock was a true “Remnant” and his influence on history, through Buckley and many other intellectuals is not hard to detect. Where are the “Remnants” of our day?