Suchergebnisse

To be taken seriously is the hope of a serious author, next to which being agreed with is a petty affair. If this sentiment sounds inhuman, and too good to be true, it is because it abstracts from the desire for recognition, which can take the form of desire for political power. Sheldon Wolin takes my bookTaming the Prince1seriously as—as if it were!—an important political influence. He flatters the all-too-human side of my soul by fastening on the book's conclusion and working backwards from that.

THE ELECTION OF GEORGE BUSH TO THE PRESIDENCY IN 1988 was a triumph for Ronald Reagan. The margin of victory was substantial (54 per cent to Bush over 46 per cent to Michael Dukakis in the popular vote) — though not of Reaganesque proportions. But then the master might not wish his apprentice to do as well as himself. Reagan has not only brought peace and prosperity in his own terms while in office, but also has succeeded in leaving a legacy. And the legacy is not only in the political changes he instituted but partly in the person of his immediate successor, the first vicepresident to succeed as president by election since Martin Van Buren in 1837.

The Following is not Intended as a Value-Free Survey of American conservatism today. Less clear, perhaps, will be my general approval of this revolt, although that will emerge soon enough. It remains to announce that I want to offer some friendly advice to American conservatism regarding pride and interest and to recommend to its attention the American Constitution, which so beautifully combines them. American conservatives, perhaps because of the manipulations of American liberals, have lost some of their attachment to the Constitution, and much of their understanding of it.

THE FOLLOWING IS NOT INTENDED AS A VALUE-FREE SURVEY of American conservatism today. Less clear, perhaps, will be my general approval of this revolt, although that will emerge soon enough. It remains to announce that I want to offer some friendly advice to American conservatism regarding pride and interest and to recommend to its attention the American Constitution, which so beautifully combines them. American conservatives, perhaps because of the manipulations of American liberals, have lost some of their attachment to the Constitution, and much of their understanding of it.Recently I overheard someone say that Harvard University was wrong to have invited Ronald Reagan to its 350th anniversary in 1986, because of Reagan's 'anti-intellectualism'. What could this have meant? Reagan has reduced student loan programmes and university research programmes, and wants to cut them further. He invites many actors and very few professors to his White House dinners. He himself should have been, and probably was, a C student in college, like the Democratic president he frequently praises — the one who began the practice of using ghost-writers for his speeches — Franklin D. Roosevelt. In sum, Reagan doesn't sufficiently respect the intellect.

IT IS NO EXCEPTION TO THE CONTINGENCY OF HUMAN THINGS that events can occur as expected: this happens so as to lull US for the next surprise. 'A good election for poll takers', said one headline, of Reagan's lopsided victory. His 18-percentage point margin was exactly predicted by Gallup and roughly approximated by others in a ten to 25 point range of misses. Once again it was confirmed that science can give mathematical expression to our expectations in politics. But the expected result was also a welcome sign that the American polity was healthy enough to reelect a president in whom few - and those more his supporters than his opponents - could have been disappointed. A people's ability to express gratitude to its leaders is more than a measure of political stability: it is one end of political stability and when exercised is the most ennobling act of popular sovereignty.

IT IS NO EXCEPTION TO THE CONTINGENCY OF HUMAN THINGS THAT EVENTS CAN OCCUR AS EXPECTED: THIS HAPPENS SO AS TO LULL US FOR THE NEXT SURPRISE. 'A GOOD ELECTION FOR POLL TAKERS', SAID ONE HEADLINE, OF REAGAN'S LOPSIDED VICTORY. HIS 18-PERCENTAGE POINT MARGIN WAS EXACTLY PREDICTED BY GALLUP AND ROUGHLY APPROXIMATED BY OTHERS IN A TEN TO 25 POINT RANGE OF MISSES. ONCE AGAIN IT WAS CONFIRMED THAT SCIENCE CAN GIVE MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION TO OUR EXPECTATIONS IN POLITICS. BUT THE EXPECTED RESULT WAS ALSO A WELCOME SIGN THAT THE AMERICAN POLITY WAS HEALTHY ENOUGH TO RE-ELECT A PRESIDENT IN WHOM FEW - AND THOSE MORE HIS SUPPORTERS THAN HIS OPPONENTS - COULD HAVE BEEN DISAPPOINTED. A PEOPLE'S ABILITY TO EXPRESS GRATITUDE TO ITS LEADERS IS MORE THAN A MEASURE OF POLITICAL STABILITY; IT IS ONE END OF POLITICAL STABILITY AND WHEN EXERCISED IS THE MOST ENNOBLING ACT OF POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY. A TRIUMPH FOR PRESIDENT REAGAN WAS NOT, HOWEVER, A TRIUMPH FOR THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, AND THEREFORE WAS NOT ENTIRELY A TRIUMPH FOR PRESIDENT REAGAN. REPUBLICANS SUFFERED A NET LOSS OF TWO SEATS IN THE SENATE AND GAINED ONLY FOURTEEN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, A RESULT COMPARABLE TO THE ELECTIONS OF 1956 AND 1972, WHEN POPULAR REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTS (EISENHOWER AND NIXON) WON EASY VICTORIES FOR A SECOND TERM BUT DID NOT IMPROVE THE STATUS OF THEIR PARTY FROM MINORITY TO MAJORITY.