Reviews for Richard Nixon: Rhetorical Strategist, Vol. 6

The average rating for Richard Nixon: Rhetorical Strategist, Vol. 6 based on 2 reviews is 3 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2011-03-27 00:00:00 Fernando Castillo The author makes an interesting argument. His thesis is that Reagan's political philosophy was more akin to liberalism than conservatism. He writes: "James Madison told Americans that government is essential because not all men are 'angels'. Ronald Reagan told Americans that each and every one of them was a 'hero'." The comparison is meant to highlight the difference in how the two men viewed human nature and the proper role of government. The author concludes that Reagan's steadfast desire to settle the Cold War through discussion and negotiation, rather than an endless arms race, is evidence of Reagan's liberal faith in the power of verbal persuasion. The author writes: "By putting an end to the suicidal madness of the arms race, Reagan made history. Even if Reagan, like so many others, did not fully envision exactly how communism would fall, he ended the cold war by creating what Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher insisted was the "essential trust" that would be necessary to allow the peaceful exit of the Soviet Union from history." For this, the author argues, Reagan deserves to be considered as one of the greatest American Presidents. The book is not without its criticism of Reagan despite its laudatory conclusion. The author, for example, takes exception to Reagan's economic policy. His primary criticism is that Reagan was far too inclined to overlook the danger of a materialistic culture that grew as a result of his economic policy and far too unwilling to criticize the people in any form. One of my complaints with the book is that the author fails to clearly define some of his terminology. For example, he claims that Reagan was "anti-government", but then he proceeds to show how Reagan greatly expanded the size of government in areas like national defense. Likewise, the author repeatedly refers to "neo-cons" or "neo-conservatives" and applies these labels to certain individuals without even once defining neo-conservatism. The second is a rather glaring and irritating omission for a writer who purports to examine political philosophy.

Review # 2 was written on 2014-06-09 00:00:00 Mark Dean Paul Berman says of John Patrick Diggins, "He was the most philosophical-minded of the American historians." I think that is pretty well demonstrated in this book which, although primarily biography, lays out some interesting arguments about Reagan's political and religious philosophies. This made it hard to follow in spots, and it is a book worth reading more than once (and having in one's personal library). I have reread portions of chapters 8 and 9, and intend to reread chapter 7 before I return this book to the library.