'National Review' Activity Flayed As 'Destructive Element in Party'

The publisher of the liberal Republican Advance has attacked the conservative National Review as a "destructive element of the Republican Party," charging that the magazine's attitude is "If I can't win, I'll take my marbles and go home."

Bruce L. Chapman '62 said yesterday that most of the activity of the National Review as well as that of the Young Americans for Freedom, the John Birch Society and other extreme rightist elements, is aimed at defeating Republicans rather than Democrats.

Commenting on the reply to a letter which he addressed to the Review, Chapman made it clear that he did not advocate the expulsion of conservatives from the Republican ranks.

He said, however, that "anyone, be he progressive or conservative, who feels he must oppose the party after being defeated in primary fights might do well to leave the party."

Condemns Conflicting Loyalties

"Extreme conservatives claim to be the 'real' Republicans," Chapman said, "yet some of their chief exponents such as William Buckley and William Rusher (National Review editor and publisher, respectively) abandon the Republicans when their views are defeated within the party framework."

In the Oct. 7 issue of the National Review, an editorial note addressed to Chapman admitted that "conservatives are concerned with Republican successes only insofar as they further conservative principles." There has been some speculation that Buckley will form his own conservative party in the near future.

Chapman noted current examples of the conservatives' relish for attacking progressive Republican candidates rather than Democratic incumbents: the National Review's opposition to Rep. John Lindsey (R.N.Y.); the YAF's drive to unseat Stanley Isaacs, the only Republican on the 27-member New York City Council; and the John Birch Society's efforts to defeat California's Republican Senator Thomas Kuchel in his bid for re-election in 1962.