The recent cat-fight
sparked by CBS's production "The Reagans" has coughed up the twin hairballs
of "censorship" and "propaganda." Both these terms, properly
understood, describe acts of government. All the spitting we witnessed
was simply democratic politics (as distinct from 'government') and the broadcaster's
withdrawal of the show to its cable affiliate was a simple economic decision
based on a re-evaluation of what the market would (or would not) bear.
To anyone at all familiar with the scuffle, it goes without saying that the supporters of the Reagans accused the supporters of The Reagans
of propaganda, in the form of revisionist history. The opposing accusation
of censorship was flung, in desperation, by proponents of the show when they
realized that the product of their artistic "freedom of speech" would find
few buyers in the "free marketplace" of commercial television. It was
a familiar showdown between the Right and Left, but with the unfamiliar result
that, this time, the Right was faster on the draw and emerged victorious,
leaving the Left injured, insulted and crying foul.
What lesson should conservatives draw from the outcome of this battle? We
trust that it will add persuasively to the mounting evidence that what we
believe in is actually capable of prevailing. This incident is a perfect
example to show those who still need convincing that there is a growing groundswell
of conservative sentiment abroad in the land. Articulate conservatives
have long seen themselves as lonely voices, crying in the wilderness. Or,
perhaps more often, held their tongues in a public forum dominated by the
intimidating psycho-babble of the so-called Liberals.
The Left have styled themselves the experts on what is 'wrong' with America,
and in so doing, have unwittingly become its most glaring exemplars.
Now, when they speak of 'freedom' they don't mean liberty; they mean license,
coupled with the systematic marginalizing of those who still hold moral and
religious principles. When they speak of 'equality' they mean preferential
treatment, condescendingly meted out by self-anointed elites to designated
victim groups. And, when they speak of 'tolerance' they will only tolerate
those who "know their place," who come to them hat-in-hand, willing to discard
their own hopes and dreams for self-improvement and submerge their own responsibility
into the indiscriminate 'diversity' of victimhood.
And who do these professional victims blame? Why, the successful, the
"rich," the powerful and, by extension, America itself. Because they
feel no self-responsibility nor self-esteem, they find it impossible to acknowledge
that others have actually earned and, thus, deserve the success they have
achieved through inventiveness, persistence, honesty and courage. These
meritorious qualities threaten their perverse notion of equality and remind
them, painfully, of their own short-comings. And because they feel
themselves undeserving of success, they have to blame the success of others
on cheating, unfair advantage or, at best, "the luck of the draw."
Anything, as long as it isn't merit.
Thus, it's no surprise that the Left has attempted to tear down the dreaded
"good example" set by President Reagan, who brought about the downfall of
an "evil empire" and a simultaneous up-surge of the American economy.
We are right to defend and uphold the truth and dignity of America's good
examples against the attacks of anti-Americans of every stripe, foreign or
domestic. We are right to be proud of our nation and its achievements.
Indeed, the Right is right.
& Helen Evans, international teachers and authors, write articles and
teach a philosophical approach to conservatism. Their website is http://peterandhelenevans.com.