Conservative Intellectual Blasts National Review’s Trump Attack: It ‘No Longer Represents Real Conservatism’

Scott Greer Contributor
Font Size:

Theodore Roosevelt Malloch, a professor at Oxford University and noted policy analyst, has harsh words for National Review and the 22 conservative figures who took part in the magazine’s “Against Trump” symposium.

In an interview with The Daily Caller, Malloch, both a proud “movement conservative” and supporter of Donald Trump, said the pundits who took aim at the Republican front-runner in NR’s latest issue have “the most to lose in a Trump victory.” (RELATED: It’s On! National Review Goes After Trump, Trump Swings Back)

“The motivation simply is: life or death,” the scholar told TheDC. “They want their cushy jobs, going on talk shows, getting free lunches and cocktails, being important and the prestige it brings. They are in fact part of the ‘ruling political class’ and that will end [under a President Trump].”

Malloch — whose latest book, “Davos, Aspen and Yale: My Life Behind the Elite Curtain as a Global Sherpa,” covers his interactions with the events and figures who shaped conservatism — believes these “old, tired voices” don’t like Trump because the businessman is “a doer — not an idle thinker or theorist. He represents a kind of national conservatism that has a popular rather than an elitist stance.”

On the other hand, according to the Oxford professor, the folks involved in National Review’s symposium aren’t accomplishing anything.

“The myth of this crowd is that they accomplished things. Largely, they have not, unless you count earning fat pay checks and wider waist lines as accomplishments. I suppose they could all write books no one will read or just be bitter,” he stated.

In Malloch’s opinion, the publication founded by William F. Buckley no longer articulates a relevant political ideology.

“NR has, unfortunately, as has The Weekly Standard, become the GOE [grand old establishment], the establishment rag and no longer represents either real conservatism or the evolving GOP. It is that insignificant,” he told TheDC. “National Review is not what it used to be! Its readership has dwindled and its editor sure ain’t no Bill Buckley, in any way, shape or form.”

“In some ways they are both removed from the travail and demands of everyday life, from economic anxiety experienced by the middle class and do not live in the flyover zone. They are captives of Washington, D.C., a one factory town, and its insidious culture and have become complete insiders, complicit in the malaise of current governing. They ‘go along to get along.’ They are, in fact, part of the problem and they all fear Trump will excise them — and he will,” he continued.

However, Malloch believes the “Against Trump” issue will do little damage to the flamboyant billionaire’s bid for the White House and may in fact help him.

“By mounting this foolish and vitriolic effort, they have probably handed Trump the fastest route to the presidency and will increase his poll standings by more than 10 percent,” he predicts. “The NR effect is negligible in all truth.”

Moreover, the political economist sees no menace to conservatism in Trump and even believes the man is making the movement stronger.

Malloch, who is a descendant of President Teddy Roosevelt, also sees many similarities between his ancestor and The Donald.

“Donald Trump is perhaps best viewed as the 21st century Theodore Roosevelt. The two leaders have much in common — from style and swagger to substance and outlook,” he wrote in a Forbes column in December.

According to the scholar, Trump is like Roosevelt in understanding “the value of capital and labor;” advocating a “strong policy of American Nationalism;” creating “another kind of conservation;” and believing “good government is rooted in good citizenship.”

Follow Scott on Twitter