Who's a Republican?

by Jeffrey Hart

Who's a Republican? Why in the world are they?

A book could hardly be more timely, or in fact, more delightful to read. Of course Democrats have their answer to the questions. The sound of the word "Gingrich" sums it up. It combines "Grinch" (who stole Christmas) with "rich," a very flexible term. The Republicans are "fat cats" and Scrooges and very probably bigots. In fact, the Democrats keep running against Hitler, who runs as a Republican in assorted clever disguises.

Peter Robinson '79 took to the road to talk to a variety of Republicans, from national figures through state-level officials and also widely chatting with what the media calls "real people."

I must disclose here that Peter Robinson was a student of mine at Dartmouth, and one of the very best. After that, he spent a couple of years at Oxford on a fellowship, worked in the White House for both Reagan and Bush Sr. as a speechwriter, and now is a fellow at the Hoover Institution. You would never guess at all this background from the unpretentious wisdom of this book, and the relaxed purity of his prose style.

For example: "I grew up Republican. There were extenuating circumstances." That light touch as the book opens perfectly represents its tone.

He wonders why he is still a Republican in spite of everything we could all say in criticism of that party. To explore his wonderment he hits the road, in this if not much else, reminding me of Samuel Lubell in years gone by reporting on politics through careful interviewing out among the dark fields of the republic, as Nick Carraway called them.

Though this book is light in tone--Robinson assumes the persona of a naïf, a sort of Jimmy Stewart, perhaps Candide--it is anything but naïve. It moves into some of the major questions that shape our politics, especially in this election season.

Early on, we come upon a blockbuster tidbit. While working for President Reagan as a speechwriter, Robinson flew with him on Air Force One to Berlin, where Reagan, among other things, was to make an appearance at the Berlin Wall. The challenge for this, of course, was laid down by Jack Kennedy's "Ich bin ein Berliner" back in the early Sixties. Unlike most inhabitants of Air Force One, Robinson took it upon himself to circulate among some actual Berliners. At one social gathering, a woman said the Russians should tear down "that wall." Robinson noted that phrase and wrote it into his draft of Reagan's speech at the wall. He wrote, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall."

Now listen to this. The State Department and the National Security Council felt faint and dizzy. This would not do, no, not at all. None other than Peter Rodman, lately of National Review, voiced the objections of state. General Colin Powell, no less, raised a fuss at the NSC. (Meditate on that for a while.) Fax machines buzzed with alternative drafts from State and the NSC.

Reagan made the decision. "I'm the president, aren't I?" he said to his aides in Berlin. "Yes, you are." So the phrase, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall," stayed in the speech.

This was important. We now know that the multiple pressures for "human rights" did have an effect, energizing dissent in the Soviet empire in East Europe, and jangling nerves in the Kremlin. Glasnost, as part of Gorbachev's conciliation program, helped kick in the rotten barrel.

It is impossible in the space here to address all of the important questions dealt with in this book and all the interesting personalities interviewed.

Robinson finds that where you were born and what your parents were is an important part of adult political identity. "I grew up Republican," he writes, "I was born to Republican parents and raised in a Republican neighborhood." In fact, he grew up in upstate New York as middle class and WASP. He now sees that he was virtually fated to be a Republican under those circumstances. (I will interject that he has since become a Catholic, but without leaving the Republican party--an interesting fact in itself.)

In his travels he notices that his own fate reappears in many variations. For Jews the Democratic party is virtually a synagogue. They "live like Episcopalians but vote like Puerto Ricans" the bon mot goes. The first generation of immigrant Jews rarely voted at all. The second generation grew up under Franklin Roosevelt, approved of his programs, and saw many Jews brought prominently into his administration.

Similarly, blacks today are solidly Democratic. Without the black vote, the Democrats would be a third party.

Back in the days of segregation, when southern blacks could not vote, the south was "solid south" Democratic. But blacks in the north and midwest voted Republican. The white south began to move out of the Democratic party in 1948. Barry Goldwater voted against Lyndon Johnson's civil-rights legislation. Republicans excoriated welfare dependency. Today blacks are the keystone of the Democratic party.

Robinson sees that there is a tribal quality to political identity. People usually remain with the political party to which their parents belonged. But he is interested in those who change--women, blacks, Jews, and others. Those who switch from Democratic to Republican seem to be individualistic people, even contrarians. They do not want to be treated as members of groups.

Robinson is also interested in Republican successes as governors and mayors, in the latter category most notable, perhaps, Mayors Rudolph Giuliani of New York and Bret Schundler of Jersey City.

Schundler, a Harvard graduate and Wall Street success, gained office in a largely black political environment and succeeded in revitalizing schools and neighborhoods, getting a myriad of practical things done. He and his black constituents want school vouchers. Watch Schundler. He plans to run for governor of New Jersey.

What is the role of race in southern Republicanism? None, says former chairman Haley Barbour. The new Republicanism of the south is managerial and entrepreneurial, based in considerable part on the migration of large numbers of northerners southward.

Why is Hollywood so liberal and Democratic? Movie critic Michael Medved says that Hollywood is based on money and sex, and that being a Republican is uncool.

I would add that an art culture (Hollywood) and a verbal culture (the academy) have a built-in hostility to a production culture (business, the military).

Robinson sees that the Republicans will have to buy their own advertising, since the Democrats get so much free from the media, and that therefore they will not commit suicide through campaign-finance reform.

A timely book, for sure, and a good one.