I officially became a Republican in 1982.
Two years earlier, I voted for Jimmy Carter for president for the second time.
But, more importantly, in the 1960s and 1970s, I was a stone cold radical leftist – literally working shoulder to shoulder with the likes of revolutionary terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn and whacked out traitors Tom Hayden and Jane Fonda.
So, why did I become a Republican shortly after Ronald Reagan won the presidency? Because I realized he was right.
Reagan made the Republican and conservative agenda clear and appealing – even for a jerk like me who was recruited by the cultural and political Marxist establishment inside America to do big things, to get, much like Barack Obama, a free indoctrination at one of their chosen universities, to be one of the leaders of “the movement.”
How did Reagan do that?
- He laid out a positive and clear program for defeating totalitarianism, expanding freedom at home and abroad, growing the economy and empowering the people.
- Rather than play defense against Democrats, liberals and leftists, Reagan fought on offense – laying out his own appealing agenda for rolling back socialism.
- He did these things, all the while being told by media, his opponents and many in his own party that he could never accomplish his objectives.
Since Reagan left office in 1989, the Republican Party establishment has acted like everything Reagan did in his eight years in office was a fluke. Maybe they really think it was.
But that’s why the Republicans have been consistently losing ground ever since – even when they occasionally win elections.
Let me explain this from my own perspective as a former leftist: The left always sets its goals beyond what they expect to achieve in the short term. Some inside the movement even appear to be working at odds with each other, with one faction demanding the sun, the moon and the stars, while another faction promotes only an immediate first step toward the objective. And, most importantly, they never give up! They don’t think short term. They think long term. If they lose a battle, they don’t throw up their hands and change their convictions. Instead, they double-down and work harder on the goal.
Take, for instance, the left’s objective for same-sex marriage. Some inside the movement, like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, at first denied they even believed in the goal. But others pushed it hard – even when the initiative was defeated 31 straight times in 31 states. They didn’t give up. They relentlessly remained on offense, keeping their opponents fighting on defense.
It’s always better to fight on offense. Why? Because when you win, you gain ground in your struggle. On defense, when you win, you only keep turf you have.
Let’s look at the example of the recent shutdown of government and the showdown over increasing the debt limit: Ted Cruz and Mike Lee went on offense in the battle. And what did they find? They found the Republican establishment sniping at them from behind. Their unpardonable sin was changing tactics. Republicans insisted on playing the same losing hand they had dealt themselves over and over and over again.
That’s why I find the new breed of maverick Republicans so appealing. Even though none of them share my experience on the other side, they seem to understand intuitively that you cannot win a war by fighting only on defense.
And, believe me when I characterize the political and cultural struggle we’re in right now as a “war.” I am not exaggerating. This is not hyperbole. This is a war that will determine whether Western civilization as we have known it will survive and prevail or whether it will wind up on the ash heap of history.