The Federalist Society is founded on the freedoms that the separation of governmental powers is central to our constitution and that is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to tell you what the law is, not what it should be. The society seeks to promote both an awareness of these principles and to further their application. Now, you may notice i have an adam smith tie on today, and that is not because we have an economic historian coming to speak to us, but it is because adam smith was principally an educator. He was a professor and a private tutor, and he was beloved by his students. And marcus witcher, you have seen throughout the day, is known as a very exuberant, enthusiastic educator. I first met marcus several years ago at an institute, or you may say a conference, i spoke, and then he followed me. He later told me, and i mean years later, that he was so relieved that i went first, because i did not do such a good job, i made it so much easier for him to follow. [laughter] i was an easy act to follow. He was very pleased by this. But marcus has spent the last five years writing this book on Ronald Reagan, and Ronald Reagan has become a signal, he has become an icon for conservative spirit we have the president ial debate for the Republican Party held at the Reagan Library. It is a de facto pre requisite for candidates to air their opinion and pay homage to Ronald Reagan. But, as marcus likes to point out, there is a disconnect between the way conservatives thought about Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, in his own time and space, and the way reagan has been mythologized, the way we think about reagan today, reagan the icon, reagan the simple. Marcus and i were at a Philadelphia Society meeting once, and we were added reception, and don devine, who was head of these service in the Reagan Administration, made some comment about the Reagan Administration to marcus, and marcus said actually, reagan did not cut domestic spending, and they got into this argument about how much reagan actually cut, and it was a funny moment, for those of you who have seen don devine on television, the is those who seen donned a violent television, hes a very animated person and a very a very animated person and a very adamant person. Adamant person, marcus is as well, and it was pretty robust argument and markets as a very exciting well and its pretty one to be robust argument in a very exciting weighing one to be standing standing next to next to. Reagans image was, to a great degree selfmade. It was very aware of his legacy and sought to frame narratives about his presidency. During his presidency, the cold war united conservatives in a sort of fusion assist way. Some you may recall the fusion east project as it was outlandish frank meyer. That United People as disparate libertarians neoconservatives and evangelicals they all came together because of a common enemy. But after the cold war, we sort of lost that fusion isnt. So kurds conservatives today exist in a fractured state. We have neoconservatives, we have those who celebrate american greatest we have libertarians and Classical Liberal liberal conservatives, we have local lists we have invalid that evangelicals. And in the current political climate, they are not as united as they were under the reagan presidency. And a lot of that has to do with the cold war. So here to talk to us today about the cold war reagan conservatives, and the end of the cold war, is doctor marcus which are. He is a scholar at the university of Arkansas Research and economics otherwise known as acre. He teaches in the History Department in addition to being in engaging and enthusiastic speaker, he specializes in political, economic and intellectual history from 1920 to this to the president is focuses on modern american conservatism and his book on reagan comes out this month november 2019. He earned his bachelors at the University Central arkansas and received his ph. D. From the university of alabama. This is when all the elephants in the in the room who. Doctor which are offers classes in modern American History including a history of economic thaw and u. S. Economic development. Hes published in a White Variety of places including white house journal, and his coeditor of a three volume anthology including public choice analysis of American History. Hes currently researching for the next book felling the regan revolution,. Please join me in welcoming doctor which are. aqpplause3 well thank you so much for having me. Its a pleasure to be here and a pleasure to be talking to the montgomery chapter of the federal society is done so much in shaping the american judiciary and played such a large role and conservative movement. Its a great pleasure for me be today. As allen said documented hall and be talking about the reagan conservatisms and the end of the cold war. I want to start off by asking you to think about what do you think Ronald Reagan stood for . What defines Ronald Reagan free is . I think for many, many conservatives, what defines ron reagan to them isnt here is to principles, and unflinching it adherence to principles conservative principle specifically that he never sort of deviated from. Its inception of reagan really, really started to emerge around 2005, 2006 in the wake of george w. Bush is dismal presidency from the point of curve view of conservatives. He became very disillusion with george w. Bush. Want to talk today about how conservatives viewed reagan during the eighties oftentimes they viewed him with frustration, contempt, anger because not more was being done to sort of achieve the conservative policy goals. I was really surprised when, i was researching for my dissertation, because i want to stephen a was book and i thought there was a nice paragraph worry basically talked about all of these concert conservatives who are ups and frustrated with reagan. Then he went on told along sort of story about the reagan years i found out very fascinating. I found that aside and several other books i took it to my dissertation advisers and they said the sounds like an actual topic goal research. It so out of that research came the book. Regan, the struggle for true conservatism. Thats when we want to be talking about today. So well go ahead well talk about how conservatives you view reagan today, and then well go back in time and take a look at how conservatives feed reagan join the 19 eighties. Like i said oftentimes with frustration, and even content when it came to his cold war foreign policies. And then well talk a little bit about how reagan wanted to be remembered and will end up with me gesturing towards how conservatives the and to construct reagan legacy and later the reagan mid. I really love this quote from matt purple i wish i had written it but i did not. My purple road in the churchill we miss remember. I think it really can address what im trying to do in the book. Purple said historical memory is like a great compact, or crushing nuances and flashing wrinkles until a person or event is made a perfect morsel for popular consumption. I think this is largely happened with ron reagan today with modern conservatives. Hes been compacted down a simplified version of himself. Maybe a purest version of himself and all of the nuances in the pragmatic policies of the 19 eighties have largely being forgotten. This is really personified by w. W. Already. This emerged in 2005. And coulter said, you know, for christians it, is, bit from serves, it is w. W. Already, what would reagan do . Of course this really took off in 2005 and took off in 2007 the lead up to the republican primary of 2008. A founded on this and they say would what were wrong reagan do today . Go and amazon combined www. Slip, you can buy yourself a tshirt as you see up here. You can buy up yourself a Bumper Sticker put on your car you can buy a mouse pad like the one of the four left, that says if we can resurrect and, we would reelect them. Right, the idea of zombie reagan running in the 2020 primary. But nonetheless, conservatives around 2005, 2006 or seven began to reconstruct reagan as a conservative purist. And they began to sort of claim, maybe even before that, that Ronald Reagan reagan won the cold war by sticking to his conservative principles, and that reagan, through his conservatism, gets the credit ultimately for the dissolution of the soviet empire and the end of the cold war. So today what were going to do will go back in and see what conservatives rock to save reagans policy in the 19 eighties and how that is quite different what they claim today. So what is my manuscript to . Well my manuscript details the complex and often tense relationship that existed between resident reagan and conservatives. And acknowledges the wide range of purse difference perspectives on the right. I think that is something that is unique to my book i think other historians have done a good job of that is well that is something i try to grapple with that as well, all of the differences within the conservative movement. I do not think historians have done enough in understanding conservatism and all of his various i iterations. And also questions whether or not the reagan years were actually the triumphant conservatism i. Dont think this is to actually think the 1990s of the was a trump. The Clinton Administration to many many of the things that maybe not on purpose, maybe begrudgingly, after looking a post. But nonetheless, the Clinton Administration president clinton the ultimate get welfare reform, or they get the balanced budget etc. So Big Questions as to where we should often be the 19 eighties is a triumph of conservatism. Many conservatives did not see it as a triumph of conservatism at least in the 19 eighties. Finally the book explains misgivings among the american conservatives and it tends to explain the creation of the reagan lacing or the evolution of the legacy in the creation of the reagan myth. So i get this flight slide here i was lucky enough to visit a vast and a number of archives including Ronald Reagans president ial library which is a great place to to visit. And hard times . Right actually going through the reagan papers, specifically the martin back would files. If anybody has any questions we can return to this event during the q as. So just sort of as a primer so that every so everyone here is not upset with. Neither few for schoolsathon about what an in the cold war. First is probably the most dominant which is mcal gorbachev through his policies and glass miles to deserves most of the credit for the end of the cold war, because inadvertently he undermined the soviet system, undermined the communist party and system, and in doing so destroyed dip fabric of the soviet union and its satellites, basically the control. Thats probably the Largest School of thought within historical profession within the school of thought reagan is given very little credit for the end of the cold war. There is another school of thought the claims reagan actually prolonged the cold war. Not only did he not contribute to it, but he prolonged it. Simply emboldening emboldening the hardliners within the soviet land are made more difficult for someone like gorbachev to an ax reform. Third school is what we call of reagan victory school. Who claimed that rogue reagan won the cold war by basically forcing the soviet union into bankruptcy. They made the collective military buildup in United States to put pressure on the soviets. They could not keep up had to an act reforms it ultimately undid the soviet union. And finally, there emerged sort of emerging this is a school thought i want to belong to, that reagan and gorbachev Work Together to set the foundation for a peaceful end of the cold war and the dissolution of the soviet empire. I think that gorgeous gorbachev probably deserves most of the credit although he probably would not like to take it is an avowed socialist i think his policies under the soviet union, but i think reagan is there is a lot of credit for working with gorbachev to basically establish better relations tonight able gorbachev off to establish those reforms at home. I know im speaking to a more conservative audience, so im not either of the first to say dont be too angry with me ok . All right lets go ahead and jump in the 19 eighties. So conservatives were frustrated with reagans Foreign Policy throughout the 19 eighties, but they were also really frustrated with other things it reagan introduced in the arena in his first two years of his Reagan Administration. Some are upset with the advanced Airborne Warning and control system saudi arabia. They thought that this violated Israeli National security, and here is israeli Prime Minister even came out and condemned reagan for the sale. This was reagans first Foreign Policy and he basically told the Prime Minister of israel. He basically told the Prime Minister, listen i am the president of the United States. Other countries do not make out Foreign Policy. You can imagine how well that went over with neoconservatives when reagan made that type of comment. Also, on taiwan, reagan accepted chinas nine point plan for taiwan, which included reduced wrap and sales from the United States, which are very wedded to taiwan, and still, are in some ways. So many criticize reagan for being sort of soft on china here. Thirdly, i did was criticize pacific lee by neoconservatives for his lack of a public response of the imposition of martial law in poland, the crackdown on solidarity. Neoconservatives claim that reagan shouldve done more he should have passed push back against the soviet union is with massive embargoes. And they said that he largely did nothing. We know now that there is a new book on sort of reagan in the cia in poland. We know now that reagan was behind the scenes very active in helping support dissident groups within the eastern bloc and he was doing quite a bit actually. At least his administration is doing quite a bit. But it was not Public Knowledge so people in poland did not know that so the criticizing him for the. Theyre also criticizing because they thought they had elected him to pursue more aggressive policy against the sauvignon in the first two years they dont really hear that materialize. Lets get to some specific criticisms in 1982, Norman Potter writes a piece in the New York Times he writes his piece titled in your conservative anguish over reagans Foreign Policy in which he pretty much systematically dismisses the idea that reagan had any in kabul assessments in his first year of the presidency. Partisan system that the Reagan Administration had not outline a clear vision of what they wanted to accomplish in the cold war they focused on. The economy obviously when. Reagan comes into office its his first concern. Getting the economy back on track. They to get some they do get some spending cuts initially and firstly about by large Foreign Policy conservatives alex, felt that the economic matters, and has it really defined a conservative Foreign Policy. The result according to patterns, was a vacuum into which had come pouring, against which Ronald Reagan has stood for so many years. Potter its, and continued and the first couple years in the regular ministration he had helped the soviet union stabilize but themselves and encouraging the breakup from within it so piercing that actually they pick the soviet union and gave them a podhoretz call and they had tried to convince podhoretz that they were not trying to find detente. Which is a cooling with the soviet union. Which kissinger had a line in the seventies. It was widely criticized by conservatives, including reagan. And podhoretz whats listening to the president , and after politely a couple times trying to get off the phone, and said yes mister president thank you so much and writes, down later in his memoir that after he had hung up with reagan, he realized that the president was pursuing what he would call, what podhoretz would call detente. Even if its not what reagan would call detente. In 1982 the new, right publishes an addition of conservative digests in which they systematically criticize the president they criticize him on social issues for not getting the School Prayer mandate past and you have social conservatives criticizing the president , you also have others criticizing him because of the balanced budget. Which run out in 1982. You also have blindside or,s where matt reagan because reagan was on the pass to path to raise taxes and you have Foreign Policy conservatives who are on the people we want. So has reagan concert deserted the conservatives, you know and this edition of the magazine, it has criticism from across the spectrum, and its like if you are like i really dont want to it by this argument, you know i would somehow find this which i havent been able to do on ebay or amazon and hannity right. Because that credit, resource and here just a few quotes from the magazine on Foreign Policy