The Week

“PEKING ANNOUNCES AUSTERITY PLAN; PRIVATE BUSINESS to be encouraged.” (New York Times, March 1, page 1). My God, is Reagan President of China too?

A certain amount of amusement has been provided by the efforts, so far unsuccessful, to sink a hook somewhere in the Reagan Administration. For a hectic week or so, Alexander Haig was targeted. Columns on Watergate, on Cambodia. It fizzled. The country liked Haig’s firmness, and is bored by Watergate; Haig sailed in. Next, James Watt was selected to carry the can, as an alleged anti-environmentalist who would make a lousy Secretary of the Interior. Forget it. The country likes the idea of more oil wells, and is not losing sleep over those ticks and weeds we keep hearing so much about. Next, it was the “rich”—so far, another loser issue. The country knows we need more investment, lots of it. The latest target is Dr. Ernest W. Lefever, Reagan’s choice for Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights. Lefever, 61, is a first-rate academic and a trained theologian who has written 14 books. He thinks we should lay off friendly places like Chile. The liberals desperately need a villain of some sort, however, and, just possibly, may be able to paint Lefever black, but we hope not. The country, after all, isn’t interested in kicking Chile around either, perceiving no threat posed by Chile to U.S. interests. The action in these cases, from Haig through Lefever, does possess a symbolic character, each of the cases embodying a principal liberal theme: a) Haig, liberal hostility to a hard line; b) Watt, environmental hostility to economic expansion; c) the rich, liberal egalitarianism and a politics of envy; and d) Lefever, liberal hostility toward America’s friends in the Third World.

Featured Tags

William F. Buckley Jr.

“PEKING ANNOUNCES AUSTERITY PLAN; PRIVATE BUSINESS to be encouraged.” (New York Times, March 1, page 1). My God, is Reagan President of China too?

A certain amount of amusement has been provided by the efforts, so far unsuccessful, to sink a hook somewhere in the Reagan Administration. For a hectic week or so, Alexander Haig was targeted. Columns on Watergate, on Cambodia. It fizzled. The country liked Haig’s firmness, and is bored by Watergate; Haig sailed in. Next, James Watt was selected to carry the can, as an alleged anti-environmentalist who would make a lousy Secretary of the Interior. Forget it. The country likes the idea of more oil wells, and is not losing sleep over those ticks and weeds we keep hearing so much about. Next, it was the “rich”—so far, another loser issue. The country knows we need more investment, lots of it. The latest target is Dr. Ernest W. Lefever, Reagan’s choice for Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights. Lefever, 61, is a first-rate academic and a trained theologian who has written 14 books. He thinks we should lay off friendly places like Chile. The liberals desperately need a villain of some sort, however, and, just possibly, may be able to paint Lefever black, but we hope not. The country, after all, isn’t interested in kicking Chile around either, perceiving no threat posed by Chile to U.S. interests. The action in these cases, from Haig through Lefever, does possess a symbolic character, each of the cases embodying a principal liberal theme: a) Haig, liberal hostility to a hard line; b) Watt, environmental hostility to economic expansion; c) the rich, liberal egalitarianism and a politics of envy; and d) Lefever, liberal hostility toward America’s friends in the Third World.