| WINNING THE FUTURE A 21st Century Contract with America Newt Gingrich Washington, DC: Regnery, Inc, 2005 |
Rating: 3.0 Fair |
|||
| ISBN 0-89526-042-5 | 243pp. | HC | $27.95 | |
There was a time when I respected Newt Gingrich. I had read his 1984 book Window of Opportunity and found in it many worthwhile ideas, most notably his advocacy of a more vigorous space program.
Much has changed in the intervening years. The defining event for me came in 1995, when Gingrich led a drive to hold the federal budget hostage and thereby win passage of a balanced budget. Parts of the government shut down and the popularity of congressional Republicans plummeted amid news reports of cash-strapped civil servants. He lost, Clinton won. Subsequently, ironically during "Monicagate", there were the revelations about Gingrich's "extramarital relations". During his congressional career he accomplished some worthwhile things (e.g. some health-care measures, a boost in CIA funding) and advanced to Speaker of the House. He was also charged with 84 ethics violations. Wikipedia has a good article on him.
When I first read and reviewed this book, in 2006, there was a chance that Gingrich would run for president in 2008. That of course never happened. But he is still on the scene, still wields considerable influence, and may be planning to run in 2012. I therefore think posting this review is still worthwhile.
The point is, Gingrich is a Republican right-wing ideologue, smarter and better educated than many of his ilk, but striving for the same goals. When I first saw his new book a month ago, I thought, Eh? Newt's back. Will I wind up calling his latest book "Spinning the Future"? Now that I've read it, the answer to that question is, "Yes."
Let me explain why.
First of all, Newt1 is considering running for president in 2008. So this book is doubtless part of that campaign, and so is likely to be long on sloganeering2, short on substance.
The Introduction (on Roman-numeraled pages) confirms that suspicion. It proceeds in fairly standard wise, invoking the glory and promise of America, then laying out five threats to its survival. Those threats are, in order:
As you can see, physical threats are the top priority. This is the attention-getter: the "hook", if you will. I will never deny that real physical threats to America and its people, when they exist and are imminent, should be top priority. But why now? Republican George W. Bush is in the White House; the Republicans have control of Congress; our Homeland Security Department is up and running; the "War on Terrorism" has been under way for years, and Bush claims he's foiled every terrorist plot that's cropped up since 9/11 (even though he can't tell us what they were.) No, given present circumstances I think item I is more propaganda than substance.
So to item II, which I maintain is the crux of the whole deal. There is in this country a very active minority made up of religious fundamentalists (which Jerry Falwell used to call "The Moral Majority") who are determined to get prayer allowed back in public schools, Ten-Commandments plaques put back in public buildings, and Christianity acknowledged as the foundation of our nation — "one nation under Gaw-ahd, huh".3 Indeed, they would like to do a great deal more; and, working below the radar, so to speak, they are having some success with that hidden agenda. The recent book Contempt, by Republican former judge Catherine Crier, lays it all out for you: players, game plan, and half-time score.
America's organized religions are doing a lot of good work in this country and abroad, and I have no problem with that, or with people worshipping in whatever way they wish — so long as they don't force me to take part, or try to impose their moral codes on me. I've already got a set, thanks. But fundamentalists will do that. Note the final comment in item II: If God (meaning the Christian God) is driven from public life, we'll end up a weakened, declining land just like secular Europe. Fundamentalist doctrine brooks no non-participation.
Item III resembles item II. I'm all for patriotism. But experience has taught me that, all too often, it makes a handy club. Consider John Ashcroft's use of it after 9/11. I'd rather see the invokers of patriotism reverse the trend of participation in voting in this land. (Talk about declining!) And where is it written that patriotism is the single thing that makes America unique in the world?
Item IV — China certainly is a potential threat. It has nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them (though it's not in the same league with Russia and ourselves.) It is growing stronger, both militarily and economically. India, too, has the bomb and is growing stronger economically. But these nations will not grow dangerously stronger than they are very soon, so this is far from an urgent threat. And laying it at the feet of our school system is more demagoguery. The reason to fix our school system is so that it can turn out well-rounded citizens who care about voting and understand what they're voting for. Again, Bush came into office promising education reform. How's he doing? Not so well, last I heard.
Item V — The general aging of the population is a real problem, and immediate action is needed. That does not mean the "system" (vague term) is about to collapse; it only means a proper answer will take years to set up, and more years or decades to stabilize the situation. I happen to believe privatizing Social Security would be a good thing, if it's done right. But I've read Ron Suskind's book about Paul O'Neill, and I don't see a right-wing administration accomplishing that. Also, since the Social Security trust fund is now part of the general federal budget, Bush's ill-advised deficits are helping the projected collapse along.
I'd argue for a different list of priorities in the next election. They would include education and homeland security, true — but also global warming, energy policy, intellectual-property policy, health-care costs, and worker issues.
Since this book is in essence a campaign platform, I've analyzed it that way. You can find some more of my thoughts along those lines by following the link below. I'll summarize my reaction thus: While Newt has some good ideas, and presents them ably in this book, on the whole his book, and his program, are a fairly transparent platform of right-wing ideology. He may not be a fundamentalist himself, but he plainly understands he needs their backing if he is to capture the presidency. Read the book, by all means. But have a shaker of salt standing by.
To contact Chris Winter, send email to this address.