-
Pick Obama’s Brain
May 16, 2013 | 61 comments
-
Remembering Herb Romerstein
May 10, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Obama’s Planned Parenthood Love Fest
April 29, 2013 | 69 comments
-
Happy Earth Day… and Lenin Day
April 22, 2013 | 33 comments
-
Bill Casey’s Centennial
April 5, 2013 | 69 comments
Special Report
Reagan’s ‘Evil Empire’ Turns 30
The speech sounds even better today.
Today, Ronald Reagan’s Evil Empire speech turns 30 years old. It stands as one of the most memorable orations of the last three decades. It coined a phrase, a tag, a label — one that utterly fit. If the shoe fits, wear it. Well, this jackboot fit the Soviet ogre’s foot.
It was a searing speech, not merely because it was so provocative, which it was, or incendiary or controversial, which it also was, but because it was such an obvious truth that so desperately needed to be said by someone at the presidential level. Ronald Reagan cut through the clutter, and the moral equivalency and accommodation, and spoke loudly and boldly, with the uncompromising courage and confidence that was so uniquely Ronald Reagan.
Why did Reagan say what he said? Here’s his later explanation: “Although a lot of liberal pundits jumped on my speech … and said it showed I was a rhetorical hip-shooter who was recklessly and unconsciously provoking the Soviets into war, I made the ‘Evil Empire’ speech and others like it with malice aforethought.”
What malice aforethought?
The speech must be viewed from two crucial perspectives: 1) Reagan’s personal/spiritual motivation; and 2) his larger international/geo-strategic motivation. Both of these two contexts came together as part of a broader Reagan intention to try to undermine atheistic Soviet communism and peacefully win and end the Cold War.
On the first, Reagan’s chief motivation was laid bare in the speech itself. Reagan believed he had no choice (morally or spiritually) but to condemn the Soviet system because it was evil, and (as he said in the speech) both Scripture and Jesus Christ command Christians to oppose evil with all their might. He would be remiss in his Christian duty if he did not denounce and oppose the Soviet Union.
And as a matter of plain, undeniable historical truth, the Soviet Union was in fact an Evil Empire. In addition to completely violating the full sweep of most basic civil liberties — freedom of press, speech, assembly, religion, conscience, travel, emigration, and property, to name just a few — the Soviet Union was responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of people. Its wider communist ideology killed over 100 million in the 20th century, double the combined dead of World War I and II.
The numbers are staggering. It is difficult to identify any ideology or belief system in history that has killed more people, let alone in such a narrow period. It boggles the mind to imagine how one ideology could cause so much pain and suffering. The massive levels of death alone would justify Reagan’s charge that the Soviet Union was an Evil Empire, and that is before one even tries to comprehend (on the spiritual order) the vicious war on religion pursued by the USSR and its associated communist states. As to that, Soviet communists did indeed pursue, as Mikhail Gorbachev put it, a “war on religion.”
Given this, why wouldn’t Ronald Reagan — or anyone, for that matter — not see and judge such a state as inherently and endemically evil? Who could argue? And why, in Reagan’s view, should anyone hesitate to think so or even say so?
More than that, Reagan, though a humble man, saw himself as a voice for the voiceless in the Soviet empire, those he called the “captive peoples” held in the darkness of the “captive nations.” His was a public voice on behalf of the captives, with the potency of the presidential bully pulpit behind it.
Here again, only after the presidency, Reagan would explain: “For too long our leaders were unable to describe the Soviet Union as it actually was. The keepers of our foreign-policy knowledge … found it illiberal and provocative to be so honest. I’ve always believed, however, that it’s important to define differences, because there are choices and decisions to be made in life and history.” Few were willing to speak that truth to power, but Reagan was unafraid. He further explained: “The Soviet system over the years has purposely starved, murdered, and brutalized its own people. Millions were killed; it’s all right there in the history books. It put other citizens it disagreed with into psychiatric hospitals, sometimes drugging them into oblivion. Is the system that allowed this not evil? Then why shouldn’t we say so?”
To Reagan, this honesty was necessary for eliminating illusions. Reagan said such candor was needed to “philosophically and intellectually take on the principles of Marxism-Leninism.” “We were always too worried we would offend the Soviets if we struck at anything so basic,” he said. “Well, so what? Marxist-Leninist thought is an empty cupboard. Everyone knew it by the 1980s, but no one was saying it.”
And so, Reagan said it. On March 8, 1983, he told his audience of evangelicals: “Yes, let us pray for the salvation of all of those who live in that totalitarian darkness — pray they will discover the joy of knowing God. But until they do, let us be aware that while they preach the supremacy of the state, declare its omnipotence over individual man, and predict its eventual domination of all peoples on the Earth, they are the focus of evil in the modern world.”
He urged those assembled to “beware the temptation of pride — the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.”
What Reagan said was exactly right, and sorely needed. But that’s not how liberals saw it. The left, naturally, went bonkers, accusing Reagan of all sorts of evil and pride and temptation — worst of all, of America-centrism. But it’s funny what the left doesn’t remember: Before Reagan pointed the finger at the USSR, he paused in the speech to point it inward at the faults and “moral evils” of his own country: “Our nation, too, has a legacy of evil with which it must deal,” said Reagan. “For example, the long struggle of minority citizens for equal rights…. There is no room for racism, anti-Semitism, or other forms of ethnic and racial hatred in this country.”
About the Author
Paul Kengor is professor of political science and executive director of The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College. He is author of the new book The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis, The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor. His other books include The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism and Dupes: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century.
Appleby| 3.8.13 @ 6:36AM
Thank you for this article, and best of all for not mentioning even once the evil monkey-see-monkey-do at the head of our nation today.
AlanAnti-RoveCheneyBrooks | 3.8.13 @ 9:06PM
Appleby,
every time Reagan is praised it draws attention to his GOP successors and would-be GOP successors. That is, if they were worthies, then why are they not praised more?
The answer need not be written.
AlanAnti-RoveCheneyBrooks | 3.9.13 @ 9:37PM
Here is what is in the works, Appleby:
http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/.....en-to-idea
Bob K| 3.8.13 @ 7:16AM
Excellent article!
How long will it be before we get a President who will talk in these terms about China?
TLP| 3.8.13 @ 3:26PM
Contest at yesterday's Homecoming Dance.
AlanAnti-RoveCheneyBrooks | 3.8.13 @ 9:17PM
"Today, Ronald Reagan’s Evil Empire speech turns 30 years old. It stands as one of the most memorable orations of the last three decades."
TLP,
the above isn't saying much- is it? You don't like Bill Clinton, so that's subtracting eight years; another four years you subtract for Obama; so that leaves six years (leaving out the two years before '83) of Reagan; eight years of Dubya. If you still appreciate Bush 43, then there's only fourteen out of 30 years left to write:
"Today, Ronald Reagan’s Evil Empire speech ... stands as one of the most memorable orations of the last three decades."
If you no longer appreciate Dubya, then what do you write?:
'Ronald Reagan’s Evil Empire speech turns 30 years old. It stands as one of the most memorable orations from 1983- '88"?
Not too hulking good.
Intelligent Design| 3.8.13 @ 8:14AM
And today it would be fitting to have another Evil Empire speech about Islam. But despite 1,400 years of evidence, there isn't one political leader in the U.S. who has the courage to say the truth.
Moe Blotz| 3.8.13 @ 8:32AM
No high priced politicians need to craft such a fancy speech, our Secretary of State Jean Effing Kerry is going to buy the Islamists off $250,000,000.00 at a time.
TLP| 3.8.13 @ 2:48PM
Contest at yesterday's Homecoming Dance.
Al Adab| 3.8.13 @ 8:35AM
A few speak out on the floor of the Senate while others have dinner with the president. Isn't it about time for voters to separate the wheat from the chaff; rid us of these tepid Senators and find once again men to lead who have the courage of their convictions and who realize this is the time to stand?
Von Mises Jr| 3.8.13 @ 9:20AM
Perhaps it is time to speak of our "Evil Regime." Just as in the USSR, our Dear Leader strives to take away our liberty, free speech and right to defend our lives and property. They declare that they are Judge, Jury and Executioner.
Like the Soviets, our regime has declared "War on Religion." And the Democrat Congress and even a few statist Republicans such as McLame and Lindsey Grahamnesty think that it is swell to kill Americans with drones if they talk back. If they can't drone us, then they will kill us with socialized medicine "Death Panels."
Mr. Kengor speaks of the "Pride" of the USSR leadership. I posit that our Dear Leaders including the Czars and socialist in Congress and the Bureaucracy have unjustified and unhealthy "Pride." In fact, they exhibit immense Greek-style "Hubris and Arrogance" along with the deadly sins of "Greed" and "Wrath."
In the sixties, I remember these so-called liberals proud to "Speak Truth to Power." But today it is the conservatives and libertarians that are the true defenders of liberty.
Al Adab| 3.8.13 @ 11:10AM
We tend to forget in the oath of office, that part about all enemies foreign... and domestic. the issue is how we react when our own government becomes "destructive of those ends".
PolishKnight| 3.8.13 @ 1:00PM
I hate to rain on the parade, but if Reagan was going to hold the USA accountable while criticizing the USSR, he should have mentioned that the left had merely reversed racism rather than eliminating it. No doubt he was opposed to affirmative action, but it clearly wasn't a priority in his administration and his failure to address the issue is the reason why the USA stands now to fall to leftists who have built a solid base of voters and corporate interests on racist entitlements.
Say what you like about the left, but they don't just look to win one battle or storm one gate. They fight to win on EVERY front imaginable. They truly are "progressive" in the sense that they play to win.
Al Adab| 3.8.13 @ 1:15PM
Your historical perspective is good PK. It would have taken 20 years of conservative governance to rid ourselves of the damage leftists did and all we had were 8 years and that mostly without a conservative congress. this is to distinguish between republicans and Conservatives. The GOP is only slightly less to blame for our current state.
TLP| 3.8.13 @ 2:49PM
Contest at yesterday's Homecoming Dance.
PolishKnight| 3.8.13 @ 10:03PM
Thanks Al Adab, but I don't believe in cutting Republicans too much slack and that goes even for the gipper.
Let's compare and contrast Obama's administration to Reagan's: Say what you like about Obama (and there's a lot to say) but he's not driving with the brakes on. He's got his foot down on the gas pedal all the way. Not just on one issue, but on everything. As chief executive, he exercises his ability to enforce which laws he likes or deems "constitutional" to the maximum extent. 5% cut in new spending? Release all the illegals in detention!
When the left whined about spending cuts, RR should have led the way with unnecessary base closures and going after fatcat military spending which often benefits the left as much as anyone. How much military spending was there in Boston during Dukakkis's tenure?
Michele San Pietro| 3.8.13 @ 6:47PM
That's one of the countless reasons why President Reagan should be made a saint. The Soviet Union was really an evil empire, and thank God it doesn't exist anymore.
PolishKnight| 3.8.13 @ 10:07PM
Sadly, the third world socialist-fascist oligarchy we're making here in the states makes the USSR at it's prime seem desirable by comparison. Tons of cheap labor for oligarchs to make a quick buck on (and then dump them on the welfare state for the taxpayer to pick up the tab) means we'll be indistinguishable from India and Mexico in 40 years. That's "free market" economics as the CATO institute and libertarianism has declared. Or at least a start. Make the USA into a third world nation filled with racist welfare recipients and then they'll embrace capitalism. Works almost as well as the left's plan to transform the USA into the same thing and then making it into Sweden.
Insanity on both sides.
Michele San Pietro| 3.10.13 @ 8:40AM
I certainly dislike Obama. However, I doubt he or something like him will ever be able to achieve such a senseless goal. Also, I think the present United States, for all its faults and Democrats' nonsense, is stil infinitely better than the former Soviet Union. Where freedom was zero and even critical comments like ours were not permitted.
Robert| 3.10.13 @ 7:18PM
In time, Michael...in time. Give our Dear Leader more time!
Michele San Pietro| 3.11.13 @ 1:45PM
He has less than four years left and no force on the earth can prevent him from leaving the White House in 2017. This is still America, thank God!
Gartenmayer| 3.9.13 @ 1:33AM
He urged those assembled to “beware the temptation of pride — the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding http://www.toneweras.com/new-e.....n-c-3.html and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.”
What Reagan said was exactly right, and sorely needed. But that’s not how liberals saw it. The left, naturally, went bonkers, accusing Reagan of all sorts of evil and pride and temptation — worst of all, of America-centrism. But it’s funny what the left doesn’t remember: Before Reagan pointed the finger at the USSR, he paused in the speech to point it inward at the faults and “moral evils” of his own country: “Our nation, too, has a legacy of evil with which it must deal,” said Reagan. “For example, the long struggle of minority citizens for equal rights…. There is no room for racism, anti-Semitism, or other forms of ethnic and racial hatred in this country.”
Mr. O'Ciernan| 3.10.13 @ 7:10PM
There's no question Reagan was correct in his unequivocal defiance of political correctness by calling the Soviet Union an evil empire, but I wish the author would have specifically explained his subtitle, "The speech sounds even better today."
Gartenmayer | 3.11.13 @ 5:46AM
What Reagan said was exactly right, and sorely needed. But that’s not how liberals saw it. The left, naturally, went bonkers, accusing Reagan of all sorts of evil and http://www.toneweras.com/new-e.....-c-12.html pride and temptation — worst of all, of America-centrism. But it’s funny what the left doesn’t remember: Before Reagan pointed the finger at the USSR, he paused in the speech to point it inward at the faults and “moral evils” of his own country: “Our nation, too, has a legacy of evil with which it must deal,” said Reagan. “For example, the long struggle of minority citizens for equal rights…. There is no room for racism, anti-Semitism, or other forms of ethnic and racial hatred in this country.”