This is not to say that if Reagan were alive he would endorse America's current domestic and foreign policy--or even that he would endorse the Republican alternatives. In light of what has happened at home and abroad since he left office, his actions as president seem restrained. In contrast to George W. Bush, he looks like a reluctant warrior and anything but a militarist. Whatever his achievements, and they were many and deserve our respect, it is worth asking whether Reagan's optimistic rhetoric and vision for America helped perpetuate the liberal agenda rather than preserve or recover anything resembling, say, Burkean conservatism or the Founders' philosophy of limited government.Reagan's speeches abounded with themes that were anything but conservative. He aligned the Republican crusader more closely with America's expansive liberal temperament. In particular, his brand of evangelical Christianity, combined with fragments of Puritanism, enlightenment optimism, and romantic liberalism, set Reagan apart in key ways from historic conservatism.
And:
The history of his presidency ought to lead us through a process, however painful, of self-examination. Reagan as conservative icon must not become a way to shut down debate within the conservative movement. Tag lines from his speeches must not serve as shortcuts to credibility for rising stars eager to become Reagan's heir. The late president's words doubtless conjure up optimism and help audiences feel good about being right-thinking conservatives. But a slogan like "city on a hill," repeated on cue with mind-numbing predictability, is unlikely to help the conservative movement, let alone the American people as a whole, to engage in the kind of hard thinking demanded by our economic troubles, precarious national security, and cultural meltdown. Maybe a boost of Reaganesque optimism is exactly what we don't need as a nation in the 21st century. Maybe the Reagan we think we remember is the very thing most likely to distract us from painful self-examination and serious reckoning with who we are as a people and how we got this way.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
DavidTC,
I would add that liberals should remove themselves to that same old folks home, since they actually have never elected or even supported anyone with any real intention of "changing" things in any fundamental way, and certainly no one who's been any particular cause for "hope" among "the little people" or among the "forgotten" men and women -- and least of all the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, who is every bit as much of a tool of the establishment as Ronald Reagan ever was, and actually more so, as is clearer to those with eyes to see, with every passing day.
I think this boils down to what you mean by conservative. Reagan gave voice and respectability to those who are skeptical of the power of the state. This view, at least post-Bush, is more classical liberal or libertarian than conservative, but in 1980 it was a part of the political right. Of course, post-Bush the word conservative is almost meaningless except as a pejorative.
Of course Reagan failed. Government expanded under him as it has under all post-war administrations. But in some respects Reagan's philosophy was much more Burkean than than anything we've seen in the Gingrich/Bush era. Burke's "little platoons" were not government bureaucrats. It's a view that the path to a more humane society is not through coercive state actions, but through the actions of free individuals. Reagan helped make this view a legitimate part of our discourse even though he was unable to implement it.
I too don't get where Reagan was an evangelical. Seems like a pretty-watered down evangelicanism. Even if Reagan championed certain socially conservative values, that doesn't make him a evangelical. It doesn't necessarily make him much of a Christian either.
Precarious national security!?! What does that mean? The United States of America comprises a little less than 5% of the world's population, has a defense budget that nearly equals the combined military expenditures of the remaining nations of the planet, and we don't feel safe!@* Get over it!! What is this, an endorsement of Dick "The Penguin" Cheney and his failed international policies. America needs a new vision before the military-industrial establishment completely redfines the nation's financial and political future.
very nice article ,but i am also suggesting the below for Ronald:
"An Exciting and Contemporary Interpretation of Symbolism in
Christianity.The Secret Behind the Cross and the Crucifix by Nwaocha
Ogechukwu is a fascinating and historical narration about the use of
symbolism in organized religion.
What do you think of when you look at the cross and the crucifix? Do they
hold sacred and religious value for you?
After reading Ogechukwu's book, your perception may change about how the
church's use of these symbols has been used for centuries to conceal facts
about their true origins. Ogechukwu reveals those findings in this stunning
expose
This easy to read, enlightening and academically sound book regarding the
symbolism and meaning of the cross in relation to religion leads to a
stunning conclusion. Learn more about the real nature of Christ's death
and religion's role in the symbolism at
www.eloquentbooks.com/TheSecretBehindTheCrossandCrucifix.html
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.