"The first victory we can claim is that our hearts are free of hatred. Hence we say to those who persecute us and who try to dominate us: ‘You are my brother. I do not hate you, but you are not going to dominate me by fear. I do not wish to impose my truth, nor do I wish you to impose yours on me. We are going to seek the truth together’. THIS IS THE LIBERATION WHICH WE ARE PROCLAIMING."
Oswaldo José Payá Sardiñas (2002)
"America
is a more democratic nation, a more just nation, a more peaceful nation
because Martin Luther King, Jr., became her preeminent nonviolent
commander." - President Ronald Reagan, 11/2/83
Remarks on Signing the Bill Making the Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr., a National Holiday November 2, 1983 The
President. Mrs. King, members of the King family, distinguished Members
of the Congress, ladies and gentlemen, honored guests, I'm very pleased
to welcome you to the White House, the home that belongs to all of us,
the American people.
When I was thinking of the contributions to our country of the man that
we're honoring today, a passage attributed to the American poet John
Greenleaf Whittier comes to mind. "Each crisis brings its word and
deed." In America, in the fifties and sixties, one of the important
crises we faced was racial discrimination. The man whose words and deeds
in that crisis stirred our nation to the very depths of its soul was
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Martin Luther King was born in 1929 in an America where, because of the
color of their skin, nearly 1 in 10 lived lives that were separate and
unequal. Most black Americans were taught in segregated schools. Across
the country, too many could find only poor jobs, toiling for low wages.
They were refused entry into hotels and restaurants, made to use
separate facilities. In a nation that proclaimed liberty and justice for
all, too many black Americans were living with neither.
In one city, a rule required all blacks to sit in the rear of public
buses. But in 1955, when a brave woman named Rosa Parks was told to move
to the back of the bus, she said, "No." A young minister in a local
Baptist church, Martin Luther King, then organized a boycott of the bus
company—a boycott that stunned the country. Within 6 months the courts
had ruled the segregation of public transportation unconstitutional.
Dr. King had awakened something strong and true, a sense that true
justice must be colorblind, and that among white and black Americans, as
he put it, "Their destiny is tied up with our destiny, and their
freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom; we cannot walk alone."
In the years after the bus boycott, Dr. King made equality of rights his
life's work. Across the country, he organized boycotts, rallies, and
marches. Often he was beaten, imprisoned, but he never stopped teaching
nonviolence. "Work with the faith", he told his followers, "that
unearned suffering is redemptive." In 1964 Dr. King became the youngest
man in history to win the Nobel Peace Prize.
Dr. King's work brought him to this city often. And in one sweltering
August day in 1963, he addressed a quarter of a million people at the
Lincoln Memorial. If American history grows from two centuries to
twenty, his words that day will never be forgotten. "I have a dream that
one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the
sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the
table of brotherhood."
In 1968 Martin Luther King was gunned down by a brutal assassin, his
life cut short at the age of 39. But those 39 short years had changed
America forever. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 had guaranteed all
Americans equal use of public accommodations, equal access to programs
financed by Federal funds, and the right to compete for employment on
the sole basis of individual merit. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 had
made certain that from then on black Americans would get to vote. But
most important, there was not just a change of law; there was a change
of heart. The conscience of America had been touched. Across the land,
people had begun to treat each other not as blacks and whites, but as
fellow Americans.
And since Dr. King's death, his father, the Reverend Martin Luther King,
Sr., and his wife, Coretta King, have eloquently and forcefully carried
on his work. Also his family have joined in that cause.
Now our nation has decided to honor Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., by
setting aside a day each year to remember him and the just cause he
stood for. We've made historic strides since Rosa Parks refused to go to
the back of the bus. As a democratic people, we can take pride in the
knowledge that we Americans recognized a grave injustice and took action
to correct it. And we should remember that in far too many countries,
people like Dr. King never have the opportunity to speak out at all.
But traces of bigotry still mar America. So, each year on Martin Luther
King Day, let us not only recall Dr. King, but rededicate ourselves to
the Commandments he believed in and sought to live every day: Thou shall
love thy God with all thy heart, and thou shall love thy neighbor as
thyself. And I just have to believe that all of us—if all of us, young
and old, Republicans and Democrats, do all we can to live up to those
Commandments, then we will see the day when Dr. King's dream comes true,
and in his words, "All of God's children will be able to sing with new
meaning, '... land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrim's pride,
from every mountainside, let freedom ring.'"
Thank you, God bless you, and I will sign it.
Mrs. King. Thank you, Mr. President, Vice President Bush, Majority
Leader Baker and the distinguished congressional and senatorial
delegations, and other representatives who've gathered here, and
friends.
All right-thinking people, all right-thinking Americans are joined in
spirit with us this day as the highest recognition which this nation
gives is bestowed upon Martin Luther King, Jr., one who also was the
recipient of the highest recognition which the world bestows, the Nobel
Peace Prize.
In his own life's example, he symbolized what was right about America,
what was noblest and best, what human beings have pursued since the
beginning of history. He loved unconditionally. He was in constant
pursuit of truth, and when he discovered it, he embraced it. His
nonviolent campaigns brought about redemption, reconciliation, and
justice. He taught us that only peaceful means can bring about peaceful
ends, that our goal was to create the love community.
America is a more democratic nation, a more just nation, a more peaceful
nation because Martin Luther King, Jr., became her preeminent
nonviolent commander.
Martin Luther King, Jr., and his spirit live within all of us. Thank God
for the blessing of his life and his leadership and his commitment.
What manner of man was this? May we make ourselves worthy to carry on
his dream and create the love community. Thank you.
Note: The President spoke at 11:06 a.m. in the Rose Garden at the White House.
"How do you tell a Communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin." - Ronald Reagan, September 25, 1987
Forty years ago President Ronald Reagan gave a speech that recognized America's past sins, the improvements and sacrifices made to be better, and called on Reverend Clergy to take action due to "the resurgence of some hate groups preaching bigotry and prejudice. Use
the mighty voice of your pulpits and the powerful standing of your
churches to denounce and isolate these hate groups in our midst. The
commandment given us is clear and simple: 'Thou shalt love thy neighbor
as thyself.'" He addressed other moral challenges in the United States, before looking outward to the communist threat. President Reagan went to first principles, and Vladimir Lenin's belief that "Morality is entirely subordinate to the interests of class
war." Lenin's evil morality has been examined in this blog before. The 40th president also reflected on the spiritual nature of the struggle. This speech is even more relevant today in its entirety than in 1983, and should be required reading.
RONALD REAGAN, “EVIL EMPIRE SPEECH” (8 MARCH 1983)
President Reagan: Thank you…[Applause]…Thank you very much…Thank
you very much…[Applause subsides]…Thank you very much…and, Reverend
Clergy all, and Senator Hawkins, distinguished members of the Florida
congressional delegation, and all of you:
I can’t tell you how you have warmed my heart with your welcome. I’m delighted to be here today.
Those of you in the National Association of Evangelicals are
known for your spiritual and humanitarian work. And I would be
especially remiss if I didn’t discharge right now one personal debt of
gratitude. Thank you for your prayers. Nancy and I have felt their
presence many times in many ways. And believe me, for us they’ve made
all the difference.
The other day in the East Room of the White House at a meeting
there, someone asked me whether I was aware of all the people out there
who were praying for the President. And I, had to say, “Yes, I am. I’ve
felt it. I believe in intercessionary prayer.” But I couldn’t help but
say to that questioner after he’d asked the question that–or at least
say to them that if sometimes when he was praying he got a busy signal,
it was just me in there ahead of him. [Laughter] I think I understand
how Abraham Lincoln felt when he said, “I have been driven many times to
my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to go.”
From the joy and the good feeling of this conference, I go to a
political reception. Now, [Laughter] I don’t know why, but that bit of
scheduling reminds me of a story–[Laughter]–which I’ll share with you:
An evangelical minister and a politician arrived at Heaven’s gate
one day together. And St. Peter, after doing all the necessary
formalities, took them in hand to show them where their quarters would
be. And he took them to a small, single room with a bed, a chair, and a
table and said this was for the clergyman. And the politician was a
little worried about what might be in store for him. And he couldn’t
believe it then when St. Peter stopped in front of a beautiful mansion
with lovely grounds… many servants, and told him that these would be his
quarters.
And he couldn’t help but ask, he said, “But wait, how–there’s
something wrong–how do I get this mansion while that good and holy man
only gets a single room?” And St. Peter said, “You have to understand
how things are up here. We’ve got thousands and thousands of clergy.
You’re the first politician who ever made it.” [Laughter and Applause]
But I don’t want to contribute to a stereotype. [Laughter] So I
tell you there are a great many God-fearing, dedicated, noble men and
women in public life, present company included. And yes, we need your
help to keep us ever mindful of the ideas and the principles that
brought us into the public arena in the first place. The basis of those
ideals and principles is… a commitment to freedom and personal liberty
that, itself is grounded in the much deeper realization that freedom
prospers only where the blessings of God are avidly (mispronounces and
corrects himself) sought and humbly accepted.
The American experiment in democracy rests on this insight. Its
discovery was the great triumph of our Founding Fathers, voiced by
William Penn when he said: “If we will not be governed by God, we must
be governed by tyrants.” Explaining the inalienable rights of men,
Jefferson said, “The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same
time.” And it was George Washington who said that “of all the
dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and
morality are indispensable supports.”
And finally, that shrewdest of all observers of American
democracy, Alexis de Tocqueville, put it eloquently, after he had gone
on a search for the secret of America’s greatness and genius–and he
said: “Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her
pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the greatness and the
genius of America. America is good. And if America ever ceases to be
good, America will cease to be great.” [Applause]
Well, I’m… [Applause] ..Well, I’m pleased to be here today with
you who are keeping America great by keeping her good. Only through your
work and prayers and those of millions of others can we hope to survive
this perilous century and keep alive this experiment in liberty, this
last, best hope of man.
I want you to know that this administration is motivated by a
political philosophy that sees the greatness of America in you, her
people, and in your families, churches, neighborhoods, communities–the
institutions that foster and nourish values like concern for others and
respect for the rule of law under God.
Now, I don’t have to tell you that this puts us in opposition
to, or at least out of step with, a–a prevailing attitude of many who
have turned to a modern-day secularism, discarding the tried and
time-tested values upon which our very civilization is based. No matter
how well intentioned, their value system is radically different from
that of most Americans. And while they proclaim that they’re freeing us
from superstitions of the past, they’ve taken upon themselves the job of
superintending us by government rule and regulation. Sometimes their
voices are louder than ours, but they are not yet a majority. [Applause]
An example of that vocal superiority is evident in a controversy
now going on in Washington. And since I’m involved, I’ve been waiting
to hear from the parents of young America. How far are they willing to
go in giving to government their prerogatives as parents?
Let me state the case as briefly and simply as I can. An
organization of citizens, sincerely motivated, deeply concerned about
the increase in illegitimate births and abortions involving girls well
below the age of consent, some time ago established a nationwide network
of clinics to offer help to these girls and, hopefully, alleviate this
situation. Now, again, let me say, I do not fault their intent. However,
in their well-intentioned effort, these clinics decided to provide
advice and birth control drugs and devices to underage girls without the
knowledge of their parents.
For some years now, the federal government has helped with funds
to subsidize these clinics. In providing for this, the Congress decreed
that every effort would be made to maximize parental participation.
Nevertheless, the drugs and devices are prescribed without getting
parental consent or giving notification after they’ve done so. Girls
termed “sexually active”–and that has replaced the word
“promiscuous”–are given this help in order to prevent illegitimate
worth/birth (quickly corrects himself) eh or abortion.
Well, we have ordered clinics receiving federal funds to notify
the parents such help has been given. [Applause] One of the nation’s
leading newspapers has created the term “squeal rule” in editorializing
against us for doing this, and we’re being criticized for violating the
privacy of young people. A judge has recently granted an injunction
against an enforcement of our rule. I’ve watched TV panel shows discuss
this issue, seen columnists pontificating on our error, but no one seems
to mention morality as playing a part in the subject of sex. [Applause]
Is all of Judeo-Christian tradition wrong? Are we to believe
that something so sacred can be looked upon as a purely physical thing
with no potential for emotional and psychological harm? And isn’t it the
parents’ right to give counsel and advice to keep their children from
making mistakes that may affect their entire lives? [Slight crescendo of
voice and emphasis–Long Applause]
Many of us in government would like to know what parents think
about this intrusion in their family by government. We’re going to fight
in the courts. The right of parents and the rights of family take
precedence over those of Washington-based bureaucrats and social
engineers. [Applause]
But the fight against parental notification is really only one
example of many attempts to water down traditional values and even
abrogate the original terms of American democracy. Freedom prospers when
religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged.
[Applause] When our founding fathers passed the First Amendment, they
sought to protect churches from government interference. They never
intended to construct a wall of hostility between government and the
concept of religious belief itself. [Murmurs of agreement, Applause]
The evidence of this permeates our history and our government.
The Declaration of Independence mentions the Supreme Being no less than
four times. “In God We Trust” is engraved on our coinage. The Supreme
Court opens its proceedings with a religious invocation. And the members
of Congress open their sessions with a prayer. I just happen to believe
the schoolchildren of the United States are entitled to the same
privileges as [Continues over applause] Supreme Court Justices and
Congressmen.
Last year, I sent the Congress a constitutional amendment to
restore prayer to public schools. Already this session, there’s growing
bipartisan support for the amendment, and I am calling on the Congress
to act speedily to pass it and to let our children pray. [Applause]
Perhaps some of you, read recently about the Lubbock school
case, where a judge actually ruled that it was unconstitutional for a
school district to give equal treatment to religious and nonreligious
student groups, even when the group meetings were being held during the
students’ own time. The First Amendment never intended to require
government to discriminate against religious speech. [Applause]
Senators Denton and Hatfield have proposed legislation in the
Congress on the whole question of prohibiting discrimination against
religious forms of student speech. Such legislation could go far to
restore freedom of religious speech for public school students. And I
hope the Congress considers these bills quickly. And with your help, I
think it’s possible we could also get the constitutional amendment
through the Congress this year. [Applause]
More than a decade ago, a Supreme Court decision literally wiped
off the books of fifty states, statutes protecting the rights of unborn
children. Abortion on demand now takes the lives of up to one and a
half million unborn children a year. Human life legislation ending this
tragedy will someday pass the Congress, and you and I must never rest
until it does. [Applause] Unless and until it can be proven that the
unborn child is not a living entity, then its right to life, liberty,
and the pursuit of happiness must be protected. [Applause]
You…You may remember that when abortion on demand began, many,
and indeed, I’m sure many of you, warned that the practice would lead to
a decline in respect for human life, that the philosophical premises
used to justify abortion on demand would ultimately be used to justify
other attacks on the sacredness of human life–infanticide or mercy
killing. Tragically enough, those warnings proved all too true. Only
last year a court permitted the death by starvation of a handicapped
infant.
I have directed the Health and Human Services Department to make
clear to every health care facility in the United States that the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973 protects all handicapped persons against
discrimination based on handicaps, including infants. [Applause] And we
have taken the further step of requiring that each and every recipient
of federal funds who provides health care… services to infants must post
and keep posted in a conspicuous place a notice stating that
“discriminatory failure to feed and care for handicapped infants in this
facility is prohibited by federal law.” It also lists a
twenty-four-hour; toll-free number so that nurses and others may report
violations in time to save the infant’s life. [Applause]
In addition, recent legislation introduced by–in the Congress–by
Representative Henry Hyde of Illinois not only increases restrictions
on publicly financed abortions, it also addresses this whole problem of
infanticide. I urge the Congress to begin hearings and to adopt
legislation that will protect the right of life to all children,
including the disabled or handicapped.
Now, I’m sure that you must get discouraged at times, but there
you’ve done better than you know, perhaps. There’s a great spiritual
awakening in America, a [Applause]…a renewal of the traditional values
that have been the bedrock of America’s goodness and greatness.
One recent survey by a Washington-based research council
concluded that Americans were far more religious than the people of
other nations; 95 percent of those surveyed expressed a belief in God
and a huge majority believed the Ten Commandments had real meaning in
their lives, and another study has found that an overwhelming majority
of Americans disapprove of adultery, teenage sex, pornography, abortion,
and hard drugs, and this same study showed a deep reverence for the
importance of family ties and religious belief.
I [Applause]…I think the items that we’ve discussed here today
must be a key part of the nation’s political agenda. For the first time
the Congress is openly and seriously debating and dealing with the
prayer and abortion issues–and that’s enormous progress right there. I
repeat: America is in the midst of a spiritual awakening and a moral
renewal. And with your biblical keynote, I say today, “Yes, let justice
roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream.”
Now, [Applause]…obviously, much of this new political and social
consensus I’ve talked about is based on a positive view of American
history, one that takes pride in our country’s accomplishments and
record. But we must never forget that no government schemes are going to
perfect man. We know that living in this world means dealing with what
philosophers would call the phenomenology of evil or, as theologians
would put it, the doctrine of sin.
There is sin and evil in the world, and we’re enjoined by
Scripture and the Lord Jesus to oppose it with all our might. Our
nation, too, has a legacy of evil with which it must deal. The glory of
this land has been its capacity for transcending the moral evils of our
past. For example, the long struggle of minority citizens…for equal
rights, once a source of disunity and civil war is now a point of pride
for all Americans. We must never go back. There is no room for racism,
anti-Semitism, or other forms of ethnic and racial hatred in this
country. [Long Applause]
I know that you’ve been horrified, as have I, by the resurgence
of some hate groups preaching bigotry and prejudice. Use the mighty
voice of your pulpits and the powerful standing of your churches to
denounce and isolate these hate groups in our midst. The commandment
given us is clear and simple: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.”
[Applause]
But whatever sad episodes exist in our past, any objective
observer must hold a positive view of American history, a history that
has been the story of hopes fulfilled and dreams made into reality.
Especially in this century, America has kept alight the torch of
freedom, but not just for ourselves, but for millions of others around
the world.
And this brings me to my final point today. During my first
press conference as president, in answer to a direct question, I pointed
out that, as good Marxist-Leninists, the Soviet leaders have openly and
publicly declared that the only morality they recognize is that which
will further their cause, which is world revolution. I think I should
point out I was only quoting Lenin, their guiding spirit, who said in
1920 that they repudiate all morality that proceeds from supernatural
ideas–that’s their name for religion–or ideas that are outside class
conceptions. Morality is entirely subordinate to the interests of class
war. And everything is moral that is necessary for the annihilation of
the old exploiting social order and for uniting the proletariat.
Well, I think the refusal of many influential people to accept
this elementary fact of Soviet doctrine illustrates an historical
reluctance to see totalitarian powers for what they are. We saw this
phenomenon in the 1930s. We see it too often today.
This doesn’t mean we should isolate ourselves and refuse to seek
an understanding with them. I intend to do everything I can to persuade
them of our peaceful intent, to remind them that it was the West that
refused to use its nuclear monopoly in the forties and fifties for
territorial gain and which now pr-proposes 50 percent cut in strategic
ballistic missiles and the elimination of an entire class of land-based,
intermediate-range nuclear missiles. [Applause]
At the same time, however, they must be made to understand: we
will never compromise our principles and standards. We will never give
away our freedom. We will never abandon our belief in God. [Long
Applause] And we will never stop searching for a genuine peace, but we
can assure none of these things America stands for through the so-called
nuclear freeze solutions proposed by some.
The truth is that a freeze now would be a very dangerous fraud,
for that is merely the illusion of peace. The reality is that we must
find peace through strength. [Applause]
I would a-[Applause continuing]…I would agree to a freeze if
only we could freeze the Soviets’ global desires. [Laughter, Applause] A
freeze at current levels of weapons would remove any incentive for the
Soviets to negotiate seriously in Geneva and virtually end our chances
to achieve the major arms reductions which we have proposed. Instead,
they would achieve their objectives through the freeze.
A freeze would reward the Soviet Union for its enormous and
unparalleled military buildup. It would prevent the essential and long
overdue modernization of United States and allied defenses and would
leave our aging forces increasingly vulnerable. And an honest freeze
would require extensive prior negotiations on the systems and numbers to
be limited and on the measures to ensure effective verification and
compliance. And the kind of a freeze that has been suggested would be
virtually impossible to verify. Such a major effort would divert us
completely from our current negotiations on achieving substantial
reductions. [Applause]
I, a number of years ago, I heard a young father, a very
prominent young man in the entertainment world, addressing a tremendous
gathering in California. It was during the time of the cold war, and
communism and our own way of life were very much on people’s minds. And
he was speaking to that subject. And suddenly, though, I heard him
saying, “I love my little girls more than anything–” And I said to
myself, “Oh, no, don’t. You can’t — don’t say that.” But I had
underestimated him. He went on: “I would rather see my little girls die
now; still believing in God, than have them grow up under communism and
one day die no longer believing in God.” [Applause]
There were…There were thousands of young people in that
audience. They came to their feet with shouts of joy. They had instantly
recognized the profound truth in what he had said, with regard to the
physical and the soul and what was truly important.
Yes, let us pray for the salvation of all of those who live in
that totalitarian darkness–pray they will discover the joy of knowing
God. But until they do, let us be aware that while they preach the
supremacy of the State, declare its omnipotence over individual man, and
predict its eventual domination of all peoples on the earth, they are
the focus of evil in the modern world.
It was C.S. Lewis who, in his unforgettable “Screwtape Letters,”
wrote: “The greatest evil is not done now…in those sordid ‘dens of
crime’ that Dickens loved to paint. It is…not even done in concentration
camps and labor camps. In those we see its final result, but it is
conceived and ordered; moved, seconded, carried and minuted in clear,
carpeted, warmed, and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white
collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to
raise their voice.”
Well, because these “quiet men” do not “raise their voices,”
because they sometimes speak in soothing tones of brotherhood and peace,
because, like other dictators before them, they’re always making “their
final territorial demand,” some would have us accept them at their word
and accommodate ourselves to their aggressive impulses. But if history
teaches anything, it teaches that simpleminded appeasement or wishful
thinking about our adversaries is folly. It means the betrayal of our
past, the squandering of our freedom.
So, I urge you to speak out against those who would place the
United States in a position of military and moral inferiority. You know,
I’ve always believed that old Screwtape reserved his best efforts for
those of you in the Church. So, in your discussions of the nuclear
freeze proposals, I urge you to beware the temptation of pride–the
temptation of blithely..uh..declaring yourselves above it all and label
both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the
aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a
giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle
between right and wrong and good and evil.
I ask you to resist the attempts of those who would have you
withhold your support for our efforts, this administration’s efforts, to
keep America strong and free, while we negotiate–real and verifiable
reductions in the world’s nuclear arsenals and one day, with God’s help,
their total elimination. [Applause]
While America’s military strength is important, let me add here
that I’ve always maintained that the struggle now going on for the world
will never be decided by bombs or rockets, by armies or military might.
The real crisis we face today is a spiritual one; at root, it is a test
of moral will and faith.
Whittaker Chambers, the man whose own religious conversion made
him a witness to one of the terrible traumas of our time, the
Hiss-Chambers case, wrote that the crisis of the Western world exists to
the degree in which the West is indifferent to God, the degree to which
it collaborates in communism’s attempt to make man stand alone without
God. And then he said, for Marxism-Leninism is actually the
second-oldest faith, first proclaimed in the Garden of Eden with the
words of temptation, “Ye shall be as gods.”
The Western world can answer this challenge, he wrote, “but only
provided that its faith in God and the freedom He enjoins is as great
as communism’s faith in Man.”
I believe we shall rise to the challenge. I believe that
communism is another sad, bizarre chapter in human history whose
last–last pages even now are being written. I believe this because the
source of our strength in the quest for human freedom is not material,
but spiritual. And because it knows no limitation, it must terrify and
ultimately triumph over those who would enslave their fellow man. For in
the words of Isaiah: “He giveth power to the faint; and to them that
have no…might He increased strength. But they that wait upon the Lord
shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles;
they shall run, and not be weary.” [Applause]
Yes, change your world. One of our founding fathers, Thomas
Paine, said, “We have it within our power to begin the world over
again.” We can do it, doing together what no one church could do by
itself.
God bless you, and thank you very much. [Long Applause]
Ronald Wilson Reagan born 110 years ago today on February 6, 1911.
Ronald Reagan was born 110 years ago today in Tampico, Illinois on February 6, 1911. Today, at the Reagan Library the Reagan Foundation broadcast an online celebration observing the 40th President's birthday with a wreath laying ceremony at his tomb. Moments like these give one time to reflect.
My earliest political memories dimly recalled Nixon, and Ford but more complete memories began with the Carter Administration, and the dramatic change that occurred with President Reagan's administration from the afternoon of January 20, 1981 to the morning of January 20, 1989.
In my first year at Florida International University, I had joined the College Republicans, and at the age of 19 on June 29, 1988 at the Omni International Hotel to support the Senate candidacy of Connie Mack an event was held were I was able to meet and listen to President Ronald Reagan, and came away deeply impressed. He gave a wide ranging speech that included foreign policy and meeting with Cuban- American leaders, and he spoke truths that still resonate and hold true today. Below is an excerpt from the speech.
"And let's talk for a moment about foreign policy. Let me offer
here a simple, straightforward message: No more Vietnams, no more Nicaraguas, no more Bay of Pigs.
Never again! Connie Mack and I stand with the Nicaraguan resistance. We
will not rest until we've won for them the full support they need and
until they've won for themselves the genuine democracy and freedom for
which they've so bravely struggled. By supporting courageous freedom
fighters around the world, we're shining a light on the path out from
Communism, and nowhere has that light shone brighter than in Afghanistan. And isn't it time we apply the lessons of Afghanistan in Nicaragua and show the same commitment to freedom fighters in our own hemisphere as we do to others in distant lands?
I just came from a meeting with Cuban-American leaders, and I
want to tell you what I told them. In Communist Cuba, a man like Armando
Valladares is considered a criminal. In the
United States, we're honored to have him represent our nation before
the world. In Communist Cuba, a man like Ramon Puig is labeled an enemy of the Government. In the United States, he's a respected citizen and a hero. And while Havana spreads communism, terror, and death in Central America, many Cuban-Americans like Dr. Manuel Alzugaray are providing food, medicine, and humanitarian assistance to the victims of Communist aggression.
So, yes, there is an unbridgeable gulf between the Governments of the United States and Cuba; it is the gulf between freedom and tyranny. And as far as this administration is concerned, freedom for Cuba,
liberty for her people, is a nonnegotiable demand. And so long as Cuba
remains an inhuman Communist dungeon, so long as it exports terrorism
and revolution in the Western Hemisphere; has some 60,000 military,
secret police, and other personnel propping up brutal Communist
dictatorships around the world; and, yes, so long as Cuba is used as the
personal instrument of Fidel Castro's violent anti-Americanism -- there
cannot and must not be any normalization of relations with Cuba."
Critics of Reagan's policy on Cuba have to downplay both its concrete actions and achievements.
Ronald Reagan entered the White House in 1981 and re-imposed the Cuba travel ban, toughened economic sanctions undoing Jimmy Carter's detente with Fidel Castro, in 1982 placed the Castro regime on the list of state sponsors
of terrorism, and started Radio Marti to break through the communist
monopoly with uncensored information for Cubans on the island.
The
Soviets are terrified of the truth. They understand well and they dread
the meaning of St. John's words: "You will know the truth, and the
truth will set you free." The truth is mankind's best hope for a better
world. That's why in times like this, few assets are more important than
the Voice of America and Radio Liberty, our primary means of getting
the truth to the Russian people.[...] We've repeatedly urged the
Congress to support our long-term modernization program and our
proposal for a new radio station, Radio Marti, for broadcasting to Cuba.
The sums involved are modest, but for whatever reason this critical
program has not been enacted. Today I'm appealing to the Congress: Help
us get the truth through. Help us strengthen our international
broadcasting effort by supporting increased funding for the Voice of
America, Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty, and by authorizing the
establishment of Radio Marti.
He signed it into law in October 1983. When it finally went on the air full time in 1985 Radio Free Cuba had come into existence named Radio
Marti. This radio station transmitting uncensored information to Cuba marked a before and after inside the island nation. At the time President
Reagan hoped that Radio Marti would ''help defuse the war hysteria on
which much of current Cuban Government policy is predicated.'' The
Hoover Institution in 1989 listed it as one of a 100 conservative
victories.
The State Department placed Cuba on the list of state sponsors of terrorism on March 1, 1982 because of the dictatorship's involvement in cocaine trafficking
and arms smuggling to communist guerrilla groups in Colombia.
The Reagan Administration pursued engagement both with the Castro regime and the Cuban people, and unlike others, before and after, did not confuse the two. Reagan tasked Ambassador Vernon Walters as his special envoy, sending him in 1982 to meet for
six hours with Fidel Castro in Cuba. As was the case with the Soviet Union, the Cuban counterparts took part in a frank discussion that did not sugarcoat the nature of their regime.
25 years after the Castro regime came to power on January 5, 1984 President Reagan addressed the Cuban people over Radio
Marti, in its early broadcasts. Below is the message he delivered.
“On behalf of the people of the United States, I would like to extend New Year’s greetings to the people of Cuba.
We know you’re marking a historic anniversary on your island.
Twenty-five years ago, during these early January days, you were
celebrating what all of us hoped was the dawn of a new era of freedom.
Most Cubans welcomed the prospects for democracy and liberty which the
leaders of the Cuban revolution had promised.
Such a free and democratic Cuba would have been warmly welcomed by
our own people. We’re neighbors in a hemisphere that has been characterized by the quest for human freedom. Government which rests
upon the consent of the governed is a cardinal principle that enshrines
the dignity of every individual. We share many of the same ideals,
especially a common longing for a world of peace and justice. We are
both proud peoples, proud of what we’ve achieved through our own
efforts.
But tragically, the promises made to you have not been kept. Since
1959 you’ve been called upon to make one sacrifice after another. And
for what? Doing without has not brought you a more abundant life. It has
not brought you peace… It has not won freedom for your people – freedom
to speak your opinions, to travel where and when you wish, to work in
independent unions and to openly proclaim your faith in God…
In the meantime, over half a million of your fellow citizens have
migrated to the United States, where their talents and hard work have
made a major contribution to our society. We welcomed them and we’re
proud of their success. But we have to wonder: what would Cuba’s economy
be like today if those people had been allowed to use their great
talent, drive and energy to help you create prosperity on your island?
The most important question remains: Where is Cuba heading? If it
were heading towards greater welfare and freedom for your people, that
would be wonderful. But we know prisoners of conscience, convicted for
their political activities, have been languishing in Cuban prisons,
deprived of all freedom for nearly a quarter of a century…
You may not be aware of some of these things… That’s because you are
systematically denied access to facts and opinions which do not agree
with your government’s official view. But why are your leaders so
unwilling to let you hear what others think and say? If the power of
truth is on their side, why should they need to censor anyone’s views?
Think about that…
The objective of the Radio Martí program will be simple and
straightforward: tell the truth about Cuba to the Cuban people. We want
you to know what you haven’t been told…
These are not pleasant questions but they deserve answers. I hope
you’ll contemplate them with care. At the beginning of this new year,
let us hope that the future will be kinder than the past. And may that
better future begin soon for all you in Cuba.
Feliz Año Nuevo y que Dios te bendiga [Happy New Year and God bless you].
The Reagan Administration did not stop there, but named former Cuban prisoner of conscience Armando Valladares
Ambassador to the United Nations Human Rights Commission and made human
rights in Cuba a priority. Reagan presented an interim report to members of the Cuban American community.
In the 1987 documentary Nobody Listened,
directed by Néstor Almendros and Jorge Ulla the world was introduced to
Ricardo Bofill, one of the founders of the Cuban human rights movement, and the nonviolent human rights movement overall on the big
screen. Dr. Bofill is interviewed and discusses his circumstances as a dissident in Cuba engaged in the battle of ideas:
"I
can't understand the hatred towards me. Because, really in the only
field I’ve done battle, is the field of ideas. In this field I’ve had no
response just prison and the police. And I don’t know why because the
revolution controls all mass media. They have editorials, journalists,
even many writers in the world. I don’t know why the response, time and
again, has been jail. The response should come in the field I fight in,
with ideas. I was arrested again in 1983. On that occasion, I was
sentenced to 17 years in jail accused of activities in the Cuban
Committee for Human Rights and the last period of prison began. For
reasons of health and others I know not of in 1985 I was placed in the
status I’m now in which is “conditional liberty with restriction of
movement.”
Fidel Castro was asked the name of the human rights defender in another interview.
The Cuban dictator dismissed his importance, but it is obvious in the
context of his answer that he knew very well who this lone activist was,
and viewed him as a threat.
President Ronald Reagan received Dr. Ricardo Bofill in Nov 1988.
In
1988 Ricardo Bofill was forced out of the country by the dictatorship, but
continued his human rights work from exile in Miami, while Gustavo Arcos
remained and continued to represent the movement in Cuba. In late November 1988 he was being received by President Ronald Reagan in the White House.
These are a just a few of the reasons that Cuban Americans fondly remember the 40th President of the United States, and continue to honor his memory.
Monday is Martin Luther King Jr. Day, a holiday signed into law by Ronald Reagan, and it arrives this year at a moment of political crisis in the United States. King's commitment to nonviolence, rejection of communism and the importance of conscience are crucial considerations for the current moment. In 1967 the civil rights leader doubled down on doing what is right as a matter of conscience.
Screen grab of Martin Luther King Jr. interview with NBC in 1967
"Cowardice asks the question, is it safe?
Expediency ask the question, is it politic?
Vanity asks the question, is it popular?
But conscience ask the question, is it right?
And there comes a time when we must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but one must take it because it is right."
Before the 1960 lunch counter sit-ins in Greensboro, North Carolina and the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. there was Rosa Parks. On
December 1, 1955 in Montgomery, Alabama sitting in the back of the bus
[the area reserved for African Americans during Segregation] the
"white" section having been filled to capacity with a white man
standing the bus driver told Rosa Parks to stand up and give her seat to
him.
She said "no."
Rosa Parks refused and a nonviolent moment
that would generate a movement that would tear down legal segregation
was mobilized. She was arrested, finger printed, photographed, jailed
and fined $14 dollars for refusing to give up her seat.
Rosa Parks and Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.
Her nonviolent action created a nonviolent moment that brought Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. into the movement and mobilized young men such as John Lewis.
Both Rosa Parks and John Lewis would live out full lives dedicated to civil rights and public service. John Lewis is currently a U.S. Congressman. Sadly, Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated in 1968.
Coretta Scott King watches as President Reagan signs MLK Day into law
But his death, in defense of civil rights, decades later in 1983 led Ronald Reagan to declare a public holiday in King's name. Today, President Trump on the 62nd anniversary of Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat, honored her memory and the good that she has done for the United States. This is the power of nonviolence and its capacity for good, decades after the initial action.
62 years ago this week, a brave seamstress in Montgomery, Alabama uttered one word that changed history... pic.twitter.com/eOvCBcMIKX
"How do you tell a Communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin." - Ronald Reagan, September 25, 1987
One hundred years ago this week Vladimir Lenin led the Bolsheviks to power in Russia and established the first communist regime, among what would come to be many, that would began a hundred year killing spree that would claim more than 100 million lives. To understand communism in power it is important to revisit Lenin, the head of government of Soviet Russia from 1917 to 1924 and of the Soviet Union from 1922 to 1924 consolidating a one party communist regime that would remain in power for the next 74 years. Morally bankrupt
Communists consider morality of lesser importance than violence in the service of taking power. Vladimir Lenin on October 2, 1920 in a speech to Russian communist youth explained: "The class struggle is
continuing and it is our task to subordinate all interests to that
struggle. Our communist morality is also subordinated to that task. We
say: morality is what serves to destroy the old exploiting society and
to unite all the working people around the proletariat, which is
building up a new, communist society." Truth has no value if it does not serve the communist agenda. Fidel Castro on March 26, 1964 rejected objective truth stating: "I conceive the
truth in terms of a just and noble end, and that is when the truth is
truly true. If it does not serve a just, noble and positive end, truth,
as an abstract entity, philosophical category, in my opinion, does not
exist."
Terrorism for Lenin is a legitimate within class struggle
In January of 1918 at a meeting of the Presidium of the Petrograd Soviet Lenin explained the necessity of terrorism for
communist revolutionaries: "We can't expect to get anywhere unless we
resort to terrorism:
speculators must be shot on the spot. Vladimir Lenin viewed terrorism in a positive light when integrated into the proletarian class struggle and in the fifth volume of his collected works explained that only a true believer could understand. "Terrorists bow to the spontaneity of the passionate indignation of
intellectuals, who lack the ability or opportunity to connect the
revolutionary struggle and the working-class movement into an integral
whole. It is difficult indeed for those who have lost their belief, or
who have never believed, that this is possible, to find some outlet for
their indignation and revolutionary energy other than terror."
Karl Marx also embraced the use of terror within a communist context. On May 18, 1849 he wrote "We are ruthless and ask no quarter from you. When our turn comes we shall not disguise our terrorism." In Marx's 1850 address to the Communist league he explained that "[the working class] must act in such a manner that the revolutionary
excitement does not collapse immediately after the victory. On the
contrary, they must maintain it as long as possible. Far from opposing
so-called excesses, such as sacrificing to popular revenge of hated individuals
or public buildings to which hateful memories are attached, such deeds must not
only be tolerated, but their direction must be taken in hand, for examples' sake." This is heavily embedded in communism's ideological DNA.
Lenin's regime prioritized power over morality and viewed terrorism as an instrument for achieving power. This is also reflected in one of his innovations of governance under his regime: the gulag. In January of 1918 just three months in power to pursue policies to "cleanse" Russia of harmful human parasites.
"There must be worked out and tested thousands of forms and means of practical reckoning by the communes themselves, small cells i n the village and the city. Variety is here a guarantee of vitality, a guarantee of success and the achievement of the one common goal: the cleansing of the Russian and of all harmful insects, of fleas -- swindlers, of bugs -- the rich, and so on and so forth."
Richard Pipes has written an important paper titled "Lenin's Gulags" that is required reading. Vladimir Lenin started the Gulag system in Russia in 1918 and by the 1920s the number of detainees was over 100,000. The full number is in the tens of millions and may never be known because their was an effort to destroy all evidence of this network of prisons, work camps, and slave labor. The Gulag system is not a mistake but a consequence of the communist system that denies human rights to anyone who is not viewed positively by the regime.
Map of Gulag prison-camps, between 1923 and 1961, based on data from Memorial
This afternoon I watched the world premiere of "Women of the Gulag" directed by Marianna Yarovskaya at the Landmark E Street Cinema Corner of E and 11th Streets NW in Washington, DC hosted by the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation and based on the 2013 bookWomen of the Gulag: Portraits of Five Remarkable Lives by Dr. Paul Gregory. It is a powerful and moving documentary and opens up a little seen chapter of a great historical wrong. Earlier versions of "Women of the Gulag" are available online and are embedded below.
Ronald Reagan defunded and left UNESCO in mid 1984because
the hard left was using it to spread its anti-American and radical left
ideologies but George W. Bush brought the United States back into
UNESCO after a twenty year boycott believing it had reformed. Returning to UNESCO was a mistake, the organization has been back to its old tricks that are hostile both to U.S. values and national security interests.
Irina Bokova, Director-General of UNESCO, on the occasion of the withdrawal by the United States of America from UNESCO made a video statement in which she stated that "together, we have worked to protect humanity’s shared cultural heritage
in the face of terrorist attacks and to prevent violent extremism
through education and media literacy." She claims later on in the same statement that "[at] the time when the fight against violent extremism calls for
renewed investment in education, in dialogue among cultures to prevent
hatred, it is deeply regrettable that the United States should withdraw
from the United Nations agency leading these issues. At the time when conflicts continue to tear apart societies across
the world, it is deeply regrettable for the United States to withdraw
from the United Nations agency promoting education for peace and
protecting culture under attack."
How does adding all the works of Ernesto "Che" Guevara including the "originals manuscripts of his adolescence and youth to the campaign Diary in Bolivia” serve to promote "education for peace"? How do the multimedia archives where recordings are contained of when he first lied about exporting revolution in 1961 and in later speeches declares the sacred duty to die for revolution in 1964 advance peace? Or gems such as this: "The situation was uncomfortable for the people and for [Eutimio], so I
ended the problem giving him a shot with a .32 pistol in the right side
of the brain, with exit orifice in the right temporal [lobe]. He gasped
for a little while and was dead. Upon proceeding to remove his
belongings I couldn't get off the watch tied by a chain to his belt, and
then he told me in a steady voice farther away than fear: 'Yank it off,
boy, what does it matter.' I did so and his possessions were now mine.
Diary entry from the Sierra Maestra on the execution of Eutimio Guerra as an anti-revolutionary spy (January 1957)"
How does making his 1961 book, Guerrilla Warfare, easily available to youth around the world promote a culture of peace? It is a manual for organizing and carrying out an armed insurgency that
draws on Guevara's experience in the Cuban revolution. It pushes the idea of the guerilla as a vanguard that creates the conditions for revolution using violence. The cover of the English edition with a hand grenade says it all. Or his 1962 work Tactics and Strategy of the Latin American Revolution in which the Argentine guerilla explains "The seizure of power is a worldwide objective of the revolutionary forces," and later goes on to explain "that we must follow the road of liberation even though it may cost millions of nuclear war victims." But there are many other works and documents. These are just a small selection.
March 28, 1961: Mobilizing the Masses for the Invasion
April 9, 1961: Cuba: Exceptional Case or Vanguard in the Struggle Against Colonialism?
August 8, 1961: On Growth and Imperialism
September, 1962: The Cadres: Backbone of the Revolution
1963: Guerrilla war, a method [note: not to be confused with his famous 1961 book on the subject already mentioned above.]
April 16, 1967: Message to the Tricontinental
Che Guevara's last work the "Message to the Tricontinental" written in 1967 contains some gems worth sharing, or so UNESCO believes to educate new generations for "peace" such as an appeal to embracing hatred in order to do the hard things without mercy:
"Hatred as an element of the struggle; a relentless hatred of the
enemy, impelling us over and beyond the natural limitations that man is
heir to and transforming him into an effective, violent, selective and
cold killing machine. Our soldiers must be thus; a people without hatred
cannot vanquish a brutal enemy."
Later on in the same essay Guevara makes the case for terrorism.
"We must carry the war into every corner the enemy happens to carry
it: to his home, to his centers of entertainment; a total war. It is
necessary to prevent him from having a moment of peace, a quiet moment
outside his barracks or even inside; we must attack him wherever he may
be; make him feel like a cornered beast wherever he may move. Then his
moral fiber shall begin to decline. He will even become more beastly,
but we shall notice how the signs of decadence begin to appear."
This is a passage that could, and perhaps has, inspired ISIS or Al Qaeda and we know that Che Guevara inspired the Norwegian terrorist mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik in 2011. Breivik cited both Fidel Castro and Che Guevara in his manifesto for the amount of carnage a small number can achieve.
U.S. tax dollars would have been paying for this, but the Obama Administration froze payments in 2011 after UNESCO recognized Palestine as a full member and began an onslaught of anti-Israel resolutions.
Who will UNESCO honor next to promote a culture of "peace": Osama Bin Laden, Adolf Hitler, Mao Zedong, or Josef Stalin?
As the world threatens to spiral down into more extreme violence,
perhaps other countries should consider some of the messages UNESCO and their tax
dollars are paying for in promoting the writings of Mr. Guevara.
Other countries should follow the lead of the United States and Israel
in leaving this institution that fails not only to protect heritage sites but hastens their destruction, and remained silent when Hamas bulldozed a world heritage site to set up a terrorist training camp in 2013 and claims to promote peace while making readily available manuals on guerilla warfare and writings that advocate
war crimes and terrorism.
UNESCO maintains archives of all of Ernesto Guevara's writings
Posts
