Palin believes all was sweetness and light during the Reagan administration. With the overwhelming exuberance with which centenarians are often celebrated, today's most conservative sectors of the Republican Party looked to the past to reinvent themselves, and they dug up Ronald Reagan to beatify him.
Last week, Sarah Palin, ultra-conservative politician-turned-celebrity, urged the country to "reclaim the values" of the president who governed during the decade of the ‘80s, and criticized the current government for increasing the public debt, for taxes and for spending. Palin believes, as do many other conservatives, that during the Reagan administration, all was sweetness and light. That during those eight golden years, the country regained the road to prosperity and self-confidence. That taxes were cut, the size of government was reduced, the country's military greatness was reconstructed and the Cold War was won.
To deny that the country experienced remarkable economic growth during the Reagan administration would be foolish. It is debatable, however, whether the credit for this goes to the policies of Reagan or to the Federal Reserve chairman, Paul Volcker, appointed by Jimmy Carter.
Although Reagan repudiated the government's social programs, he had the wisdom to leave intact the core elements of New Deal of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. During his tenure, an increase came after every tax cut, ultimately leaving taxes unchanged. At the end of his term, federal spending was higher than at the beginning, and the debt had tripled. A redeeming element of his domestic policy was the comprehensive immigration reform that allowed the legalization of nearly three million undocumented immigrants.
Regarding Reagan's foreign policy, it should be understood that even more than making a conscious effort to rebuild the country's military greatness, Reagan ordered the arms race, because he was convinced (mistakenly) that the Soviet arsenal was formidable and had to be matched — not to put an end to communism, but to survive. When the Soviet empire collapsed, Reagan had the decency to attribute the fall to inherent economic and political failures.
The least that can be said about his policy toward Latin America is that it was a disaster. Not only did he oppose the return of the Panama Canal, but he unleashed a bloody war in Central America, which led to another unforgivable abuse. The so-called “Iran-Contra affair,” authorized by Reagan, was a covert, illegal and unconstitutional operation, conceived by the White House, to sell arms to Iran in exchange for hostages and money that, in part, was surreptitiously diverted to fund the “contras” of Nicaragua.
No one can deny that Reagan was the inspiration for the core of the conservative movement in which churches, mainly from southern states, have had decisive influence on the formulation of the social agenda of the Republican Party. But the suggestion that disinterring him will provide the country with new direction is an enormous blunder.
On the other hand, it is natural that criticism of Obama and the glorification of Reagan by Palin at the celebration in Santa Barbara, California, were greeted with jubilation by the arch-conservative audience that attended the gathering. Fortunately, there were those who harshly criticized the message and the messenger. “Sarah Palin is a soap opera, basically. She’s doing mostly what she does to make money and keep her name in the news.” said Ron Reagan, a son of the former president. “She is not a serious candidate for president and never has been.” And, I say, she is even less of a candidate when she dares to disturb the peace of the grave to seize an anachronistic flag of questionable merit.
Con la agobiante exuberancia con la que suelen celebrarse los centenarios, los sectores más conservadores del Partido Republicano hoy voltean al pasado para reinventarse y excavan a Ronald Reagan con el fin de beatificarlo.
La semana pasada, Sarah Palin, la política ultraconservadora-convertida-en-celebridad, exhortó al país a "recuperar los valores" del presidente que gobernó en la década de los años 80, y criticó al gobierno actual por incrementar la deuda pública, los impuestos y el gasto. Palin cree, al igual que muchos otros conservadores, que durante el gobierno de Reagan todo fue vida y dulzura. Que durante esos ocho dorados años el país recuperó el camino de la prosperidad y la autoconfianza. Que se recortaron los impuestos, se redujo el tamaño del gobierno, se reconstruyó la grandeza militar del país y se ganó la Guerra Fría.
Negar que el país tuvo un notable crecimiento económico durante la gestión de Reagan sería una necedad. Lo discutible es si el mérito les corresponde a las políticas de Reagan o a las del jefe de la Reserva Federal, Paul Volcker, nombrado por Jimmy Carter.
Aunque Reagan renegaba de los programas sociales del gobierno, tuvo el tino de dejar intactos los elementos centrales del Nuevo Trato de Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Y durante su gestión, después de cada recorte fiscal, vino un aumento que, a fin de cuentas, dejó los gravámenes fiscales al mismo nivel. Al término de su mandato, el gasto del gobierno federal era mayor que al principio del mismo y la deuda pública se triplicó. De su política interna lo rescatable sería la reforma migratoria integral, que permitió legalizar a casi tres millones de indocumentados.
De la política exterior de Reagan habría que entender que más que un intento deliberado por reconstruir la grandeza militar del país, Reagan ordena la carrera armamentista porque estaba convencido (equivocadamente) de que el arsenal soviético era formidable y había que igualarlo, no para acabar con el comunismo, sino para sobrevivir. Cuando ocurre el colapso del imperio soviético, Reagan tiene la decencia de atribuirlo a sus inherentes fallas económicas y políticas.
De su política hacia América Latina, lo menos que se puede decir es que fue un desastre. No solo se opuso a la devolución del canal de Panamá, sino que desencadenó una sangrienta guerra en América Central, que dio pie a otro atropello imperdonable. El llamado 'Irán-contra affaire', autorizado por Reagan, fue una operación secreta, ilegal y anticonstitucional, gestada en la Casa Blanca para venderle armamento a Irán a cambio de rehenes y dinero que, en parte, fue subrepticiamente desviado para financiar a la 'contra' nicaragüense.
Nadie puede negar que Reagan ha sido la inspiración de esa parte medular del movimiento conservador en el que las iglesias, principalmente de los estados del sur del país, han tenido una influencia decisiva en la formulación de la agenda social del Partido Republicano. Pero la sugerencia de que desenterrándolo el país encontrará nuevos caminos es un enorme desatino.
Por otro lado, es natural que las críticas a Obama y la glorificación de Reagan hechas por Palin en la celebración de Santa Bárbara (California) hayan sido acogidas con júbilo por la audiencia del foro archiconservador donde participó. Afortunadamente, no faltó quien criticara duramente el mensaje y a la mensajera. "Palin es, fundamentalmente, una artista de telecomedia, dedicada a hacerse publicidad y a ganar dinero -dijo Ron Reagan, uno de los hijos del ex presidente- y su aspiración a la candidatura presidencial no puede ser tomada en serio." Y menos, digo yo, cuando se atreve a violar la paz de los sepulcros para apoderarse de una anacrónica bandera de dudosos méritos.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link
.
Elon Musk’s recent push to launch a new nationwide party ... not only comes off as pretentious but also sets a fundamentally new trend in U.S. politics.
It is doubtful that the Trump administration faces a greater danger than that of dealing with the Jeffrey Epstein files, because this is a danger that grew from within.