Reagan: Almost Revolutionary
In honor of the centennial of Ronald Reagan's birth this month, much has been made about his role as a forebear of modern American conservatism. Yet I don't think his legacy will ultimately be judged by his unwavering ideological purity.
I've written columns (here and here) on just this topic, which enraged conservatives, given that I pointed out that Reagan signed an abortion bill, provided blanket amnesty in disastrous fashion, started withholding taxes in California, and raised them while in Washington, while fleeing Lebanon and not responding to various terrorist incidents. No need to touch upon Iran-Contra, which proved to be an ungodly disaster.
But perhaps in Reagan's defense we should ask 'compared to what'? We forget that statism of that age was not really questioned in his time, when a Nelson Rockefeller or even Jerry Ford was, in today's terms, not all that different from mainstream Democratic ideology of a large redistributive state and acceptance of the Soviet Union as a historical certainty. Until Reagan, the conservative movement in political terms was considered fringe and not so serious.
In retrospect, Reagan often, it is true, looks moderate (though efforts to reinvent him as a sort of proto-Obama are infantile), but if we ponder the times in which he operated, he seems almost revolutionary in his distrust of more taxes, bigger government, student protests, the Soviet Union, and on and on. That is why he was vilified to a degree comparable to Nixon or George W. Bush. We forget the sky-high tax rates and the unquestioned assumptions behind federal spending in 1981 when he took office, and how radically that had changed by by 1988, even though, detail wise, government and spending actually grew under his tenure and his agenda had become more rhetorical than backed by hard reality. In other words, he was the beginning not the end of the discussion, but a beginning that hitherto had not been considered possible. I remember Reagan's press conference on the PATCO strike, thinking "Is he nuts?—he won't dare touch that union and will surely back down on second one of their strike"--only to learn he matter of factly said they had quit, were essentially out of a job, and was moving forward. It seemed surreal given the union's cachet in those day. He didn't budge an inch and won the public relations war. Quite stunning when the odds were all against him.
- Comment (13)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Jun '10
Re: Reagan: Almost Revolutionary
Nobody, not even the President of the United States can do more than nudge history in one direction or the other. But over time, the nudges can add up to something major, as was the case with FDR. FDR didn't invent federal government overreach, but he made government so big that when it does happen, you feel it.
May '10
Re: Reagan: Almost Revolutionary
Well, well, well, looks like Harlech wasn't so crazy after all.
Jul '10
Re: Reagan: Almost Revolutionary
I would assert that it was not Reagan who was the beginning of the conservative discussion, but William F. Buckley, Jr. and Barry Goldwater.
Jun '10
Re: Reagan: Almost Revolutionary
I agree. Reagan may not have been ideologically "perfect," but he cast a vision of America in a way that appealed to many who had not cared to listen before. You have to have both: vision, and a pragmatic strategy that moves things toward that horizon. Too often, we have seen one without the other. We need both.
Jun '10
Re: Reagan: Almost Revolutionary
I agree with Dr. Hanson. First, particularly in his California years, Reagan was not as conservative as he was later (the fact that he became more conservative and not less speaks well of him--many go the other direction). But he became extremely conservative in his presidency (especially compared to someone like Richard Nixon), and should be revered by American conservatives.
Second, Obama is not Reagan reincarnated. We could list all their differences, but it would take too long. Here's one thought experiment: Can you imagine Barack Obama giving the Boys of Pointe du Hoc speech (either in its American exceptionalism rhetoric or its length--about 13 minutes)? Me neither.
Jun '10
Re: Reagan: Almost Revolutionary
One more thought experiment: Can you imagine Reagan calling the proposed Wisconsin legislation an "assault on unions"? Not in a million years.
Jun '10
Re: Reagan: Almost Revolutionary
A final thought experiment: Can you imagine Reagan treating enemy combatants as criminal defendants? .
Edited on Feb 22, 2011 at 10:14amMay '10
Re: Reagan: Almost Revolutionary
But Hanson isn't saying we should revere Reagan...
Oct '10
Re: Reagan: Almost Revolutionary
God we should revere. Reagan we can admire.
Like Jefferson, Lincoln, Kennedy, and other deified "great men" who have inhabited the Executive Office, Reagan was a skilled politician who acted, as much as possible, according to his idealogical precepts. Like all successfull Presidents, he was a master of realpolitik. Reagan never got to far ahead of his base and of the people in general. In that respect, his, and every other presidency, will have a mixed record from a purely ideological perpective.
Dec '10
Re: Reagan: Almost Revolutionary
Good Berean
Like Jefferson, Lincoln, Kennedy, and other deified "great men" who have inhabited the Executive Office, Reagan was a skilled politician who acted, as much as possible, according to his idealogical precepts. Like all successfull Presidents, he was a master of realpolitik. Reagan never got to far ahead of his base and of the people in general. In that respect, his, and every other presidency, will have a mixed record from a purely ideological perpective.
Well said.
In the practical and pragmatic real world of politics Reagan was as overtly conservative and libertarian as he could be and still both 1) win the elections he won and 2) accomplish something substantive in office.
Overt uncompromising idealists and ideologues almost never win elections beyond the local level. They almost never even get nominated. Even Obama had to pretend to be a moderate.
Oct '10
Re: Reagan: Almost Revolutionary
Nickolas
Good Berean
Like Jefferson, Lincoln, Kennedy, and other deified "great men" who have inhabited the Executive Office, Reagan was a skilled politician who acted, as much as possible, according to his idealogical precepts. Like all successfull Presidents, he was a master of realpolitik. Reagan never got to far ahead of his base and of the people in general. In that respect, his, and every other presidency, will have a mixed record from a purely ideological perpective.
Well said.
In the practical and pragmatic real world of politics Reagan was as overtly conservative and libertarian as he could be and still both 1) win the elections he won and 2) accomplish something substantive in office.
Overt uncompromising idealists and ideologues almost never win elections beyond the local level. They almost never even get nominated. Even Obama had to pretend to be a moderate. · Feb 22 at 11:19am
The question of the day: where is our Republican champion?
Dec '10
Re: Reagan: Almost Revolutionary
I remember the 1980s. Immediately prior to that, we had a president that had donned a cardigan sweater in the winter, as his response to the OPEC oil embargo. Given the world as it was, then, given a Democratic House and Senate, Reagan still managed to act like a Chief Executive and not a complete patsy.
We are right back then, in some ways, facing great troubles and "Necessarily skyrocket"ing energy costs. I expect to see the Current Occupant in a cardigan, or perhaps a hoodie, any day now.
Reagan was different, because he fought back (nicely). In that, he differed from Ford, because Ford tried to work with his long time pals in Congress and tried to cure our economical ills with more of the same, (plus his famous WIN button, "Whip Inflation Now"). Nixon was a big government guy and tried using the power of the federal government to foist wage and price controls on society. Those old enough, remember, his "Phase I", "Phase II" etc, nonsense? Remind you of the current Occupant?
Obama is certainly not Reagan. Obama is more a hybrid of Nixon and Carter.
Jan '11
Re: Reagan: Almost Revolutionary
Poor Harlech...
Certainly, the lens of history has come down very favorably on Reagan. He certainly wasn't perfect. He came well short on beating government back into the abyss, though he won mightily on taxes and against labor. Of course, many economists smarter than this non-economist would say that tax cuts without government cuts would lead to quadrupling the national debt; that same debt that we're trying to beat down today.
Looking at the numbers, people are certainly happier with him now, than they were when he was around. Maybe it's that they see things clearer now, maybe not, but that's how the ball bounces.