“RONALD REAGAN AND POLITICAL DISCOURSE”
The Reagan Administration ended twenty years ago. And in the last two decades his
reputation has been enhanced, especially though books and collected writings, such as his
hand-written radio scripts, speeches, and diary, which document his thinking, both before
and during his presidency. Then, and now, Reagan was called “The Great
Communicator.” And, yes, he was a great communicator. Reagan respected the
possibilities, power, and potential persuasiveness of political speech. He was great for
sound, solid reasons. He has much to teach anyone who wants to improve as a political
leader.
1. Vision
One of the best books on Reagan was written by his chief political strategist, Dick
Wirthlin (The Greatest Communicator, 2004). A vision is an “ability to see.” Reagan
had an ability to see a possible future and explain it to an audience. For Reagan, his
vision of America was as the “shining city on the hill,” a beacon of freedom and
opportunity, ready to lead the world toward peace and prosperity. This vision was
adaptable to historical and modern problems, and helped explain the heavy hand of
governmental regulation, the burden of high taxation, and the threat of communist
dictatorship. Here’s an example. At the end of the Berlin speech in 1987 he said “This
wall will fall. For it cannot withstand faith; it cannot withstand truth. The wall cannot
with stand freedom.” He was right, but in a self-fulfilling way because his vision was
corrosive to anyone or anything that restricted political freedom.
Wirthlin shows that Reagan held his vision for decades before becoming president. It
was a core part of the man and the leader. George H.W. Bush famous derided the
“vision thing.” But it is central, vital to both political success and successful
governance, functioning as a reason for running for office and a blueprint for how to use
power once office is obtained. In his last speech as president Reagan recalled the vision.
He said, “In my mind it was a tall proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a
city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity, and if there had to be city
walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart
to get here. That’s how I saw it, and see it still.” Then, when Reagan left the White
House, he gave his staff a picture of the Reagans with the language about the “City on the
Hill” printed underneath. It summed up his presidency.
2. Stories
Audiences love stories and Reagan was a classic story-teller. He understood that stories
function as a way to humanize the abstract. They are also a form of proof. As Wirthlin
notes, Reagan would present a rational case for a policy, and then use emotional stories to
inspire and motivate. So he used stories to allow the audience to link the emotional with
the rational. Stories drew the human heart toward the rational, showing how a policy or a
proposal would work, or, in other words, to repel the mind from bad ideas. They also
allowed enough vagueness that each audience member could read their own meaning into
the story. In his Christmas speech in 1982, he talked about a letter from a sailor on the
aircraft carrier Midway. A group of Vietnamese were rescued from a floundering boat.
For five days they were in that boat, attempting to escape the repression of their own
country. When they cited the aircraft carrier, they waved and shouted “Hello, America
sailor! Hello freedom man!” Reagan used that story to explain why people risk their
lives for freedom. And how a sailor is “America” and a “freedom man.” It really was a
Christmas story.
3. Substance
There are some who think the Reagan speeches were lightweight. They were anything
but that. In fact, there is more substance and content in Reagan’s speeches than by any
American president afterwards, even Bill Clinton or Barack Obama. Look and compare.
Reagan talked about economic theory with commanding detail and understanding. He
spoke of the threat of communism by quoting Marx and Lenin, and then explaining their
views in some depth. He talked about government spending with statistics and facts that
were positively wonkish. Witness his 1981 “Address to the Nation on the Economy.” It
reads like an economic treatise. However, the insight extended to the human as well as
the scholarly. Even in that speech, he also spoke of people with sympathy and warmth.
As a student of history, he had an ability to place contemporary problems in context and
perspective. A reading of his speeches today reveals a much more elevated and detailed
presentation than the current style of political presentations which seem thin and wispy in
comparison. Here is an example from that speech: “We’re victims of language. The
very word `inflation’ leads us to think of it as just high prices….Inflation is not just high
prices; it’s a reduction in the value of our money. When the money supply is increased
but the goods and services available for buying are not, we have too much money chasing
too few goods….Now, one way out would be to raise taxes so that government need not
borrow or print money. But all these years of government growth, we’ve reached, indeed
surpassed, the limit of our people’s tolerance or ability to bear an increase in the tax
burden.” In virtually every speech you see a reliance on facts and explanation, a
discussion of history and patterns of behavior, and detail and depth in analysis. The
substantial character of his speeches was strangely unnoticed by the press two decades
ago and remains a surprise for many readers today.
4. Soundbites
Every speechwriter and speaker should read Peggy Noonan’s book, What I Saw at the
Revolution (1990). There is a lot of insight about Reagan and about the construction of
political messages. For example, she argues that Reagan’s speeches had memorable
phrases because they were an organic part of the speech, authentic expressions of the
messages. They actually condense the message of the particular speech. Good
soundbites are not grafted on. She wrote, “They are part of the tapestry, they aren’t a
little flower somebody screwed on.” And she adds that there has to be substance behind
the soundbite, real “beef.” The Reagan speeches had that: clear and condensed messages
with substantial policy discussions. So the Reagan soundbite becomes a way to
understand and remember the message. Think about the lasting power of phrases like
“government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem,” “a new
movement is stirring,” or “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.” A few years ago, I
heard President Gorbachev speak in Washington. When asked what action by Reagan
did the most damage to the former Soviet Union, he immediately mentioned the
devastating and concussive impact of one phrase, the “evil empire.” The condensed
message helped destroy the legitimacy of the Soviet government itself.
5. Oratory
He was a great speaker. He understood the power of words. He also knew how to say
those words for maximum effect. I call it having “the intelligence behind the words,”
knowing why a particular word was chosen and knowing what to do with it. The late
French President François Mitterand once said that Reagan was someone “in communion
with the American people.” That communion was established through a speaking style
that was conversational, clear, bold, and intelligent. It was the result of hard work made
to look easy as Reagan shifted into different rates of delivery, with emphasis on key
words, an uncanny ability to make prose sound alive and vital, and knowing the power of
the pause…how a pregnant pause can have a lasting impact in highlighting words and
ideas. Reagan once said to Wirthlin that for every polling number “I saw a face.” And in
every audience he saw individual faces and had a conversation with those people. In my
view, that led him to emphasize inclusive language, American mythology and
symbolism, simple words, short sentences, and common sense reasoning. He had the
ability to inspire because he saw the good in people, understood their aspirations and
dreams, and wanted to empower them to succeed. He offered encouragement,
opportunity, and hope. He stressed individual freedom and responsibility.
Reagan’s advisor and close friend, Michael Deaver, wrote in his book, A Different
Drummer (2001), “The guy knows who he is.” Reagan knew what he stood for. He was
comfortable with his vision. Reagan was not driven by polls or politics, unless they
could get his to the goal: freedom. He was on a mission that was good for America and
the world. Robinson has a good insight when he wrote about Reagan’s words: they
changed those who heard them but they also influenced Reagan himself. He was the
product of his vision as well as the architect. You can see this in a speech to members of
parliament at the Palace of Westminster in 1982. Reagan recalled another great leader,
Winston Churchill, when he said: “Let us ask ourselves `What kind of people do we
think we are?’ And let us answer, `Free people, worthy of freedom and determined not
only to remain so but to help others gain their freedom as well.’ Reagan not only saw the
“shining city on the hill.” He wanted it to be part of a “second American revolution.” He
wanted all of us to live there, to be citizens who made a dream our reality.