While this is my first visit to Mainland
China, I have visited Hong Kong and Taiwan many times over the last
30 years, drawn to this nation and its people by their important
place in world politics and human history.
Much
of what I know about China I learned from Walter H. Judd, who was a
medical missionary in China in the 1920s and the 1930s. Dr. Judd is
relevant to our discussion because he was a major influence on the
American conservative movement from the 1950s through the 1980s.
Indeed, what he said about China was very nearly the gospel for
many conservatives.
After a year's study at the University of
Nanking, Dr. Judd was posted to the Shaowu mission in the town of
Shaowu, Fukien Province, so far into the interior that it could
only be reached by a 10day boat trip up the Min River. He spent
the next five years in Shaowu, caring for the sick and the dying,
facing death at the hands of bandits, criticizing the Nationalists,
debating with Communists, including Gen. Lin Piao, going for months
without seeing another white face, and falling deeply in love with
China until, his life threatened by persistent bouts of malaria, he
reluctantly came home to the United States.
Dr.
Judd had many Communists as his patients in Shaowu, and he was
always impressed by their discipline. They first came through his
town in 1926 when they were part of Chiang Kaishek's united front
against the warlords. "They were the first military outfit I ever
saw," said Dr. Judd, "that never had a case of venereal
disease."
He
returned to the Middle Kingdom in 1934 to take charge of a large
hospital in Fenchow, Shansi Province, in the North where he would
not be exposed to malaria. During his second tour of duty in China,
he often found himself under martial law as Communists and
Nationalists vied fiercely for control of the area before forming
an uneasy united front against the invading Japanese. In early
1938, Fenchow fell to the Japanese, and Dr. Judd was a "guest" of
the occupying Japanese forces for five tense months.
Miraculously, Dr. Judd was allowed to
leave Fenchow and return to the United States after treating the
Japanese commanding general for a sexual disease he had contracted
from a Chinese woman. The embarrassed general sought help from the
American physician because he did not want to lose face by
revealing the nature of his illness to a Japanese doctor. And he
made sure that none of his countrymen would learn about his problem
by sending the American who had treated him back home, 10,000 miles
away.
For
the rest of his long life, Dr. Judd gave many speeches about Asia,
always emphasizing the central importance of China. He would hold
up his hand, palm out, and say:
This is Asia. My palm is China and my
fingers are the nations extending from the continent Korea, Japan,
IndoChina, the Philippines, and Indonesia. When China is at peace
and under a government that truly represents the interests of the
Chinese people, all of Asia is at peace. But if China is at war and
under a government that does not represent the true interests of
the Chinese people, all of Asia is in conflict.
Russell Kirk and The Conservative
Mind
It
is a striking historical coincidence that both the People's
Republic of China and the modern American conservative movement
were born a little over 50 years ago, the PRC in 1949 with the
coming to power of Mao Zedung and modern conservatism in 1953 with
the publication of Russell Kirk's masterwork, The Conservative
Mind.
Chairman Mao famously declared that
political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. While that may be
true for certain regimes in certain circumstances, such political
power cannot be sustained permanently, for it requires ever larger
barrels and ever more guns. Political power that depends
exclusively for its survival upon force inevitably degenerates into
military power and leads to an authoritarian and usually a
totalitarian state. Chairman Mao's aphorism in fact denies the
reality that lasting political power grows not out of a gun, but
out of an idea.
The
central idea of The Conservative Mind, upon which American
conservatism is essentially based, is ordered liberty. It is a
blending of the sometimes contending requirements of the community
and the individual, of individual freedom and individual
responsibility, of limited government and unlimited markets.
Kirk
described six basic "canons" or principles of conservatism:
- A divine intent, as well as personal
conscience, rules society;
- Traditional life is filled with variety
and mystery while most radical systems are characterized by a
narrowing uniformity;
- Civilized society requires orders and
classes;
- Property and freedom are inseparably
connected;
- Man must control his will and his
appetite, knowing that he is governed more by emotion than by
reason; and
- Society must alter slowly.
The
Conservative Mind was an impressive feat of scholarship a
synthesis of the ideas of the leading Conservative AngloAmerican
thinkers and political leaders of the late 18th century through the
early 20th century. The work established convincingly that there
was a tradition of American conservatism that had existed since the
Founding of the Republic. With one book, Russell Kirk made
conservatism intellectually acceptable in America. Indeed, he gave
the Conservative movement its name.
However, the intellectual pedigree of
American conservatism goes much farther back in time than the 18th
century. In a subsequent book, Russell Kirk wrote that the roots of
American order were first planted nearly three thousand years
earlier.
Kirk
used the device of five cities Jerusalem, Athens, Rome, London,
and Philadelphia to trace their development. The roots first
appeared in Jerusalem, with the Hebrew perception of a purposeful
moral existence under God. They were strengthened in Athens, with
the philosophical and political selfawareness of the Greeks. They
were nurtured in Rome, by the Roman experience of law and social
awareness. They were intertwined with the Christian understanding
of human duties and human hopes, of man redeemed. They were joined
by medieval custom, learning, and valor.
The
roots of American order were then enriched by two great political
experiments that occurred in London, the birthplace of parliaments
and the guardian of common law, and in Philadelphia, where both the
Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution were written.
The miracle of Philadelphia was that the delegates were able to
resolve, for the most part, the conflicting demands of freedom and
order. They created a true national government but not an absolute
government. They designed something new under the political sun a
federalism which carefully enumerated, separated, and restrained
the powers of the national government.
1953: A Critical Year
1953 the year of The Conservative
Mind was a critical year in American politics and conservatism.
Dwight Eisenhower was inaugurated as President, signaling an end to
the New Deal era. Conservatives such as Russell Kirk, Robert
Nisbet, Richard Weaver, Clinton Rossiter, and Leo Strauss published
works that could not be ignored. It was the year that conservatives
began to coalesce, arguing and disputing all the while, into a
political movement.
Over
the next 50 years, a succession of Conservative philosophers,
popularizers, philanthropists, and politicians marched across the
American political stage. First came the philosophers, who
presented their ideas usually in an academic forum. Next came the
popularizers, journalists and the like, who translated the often
obscure language of the philosophers into a common idiom. Finally
came the politicians, whose attention was caught and whose
imaginations were fired by the popularizers and who introduced
public policies and campaign platforms based on Conservative ideas.
Throughout this period, prescient philanthropists underwrote the
thinking of the philosophers, the journals of the popularizers, and
the campaigns of the politicians.
The
history of American politics suggests that a political movement
must experience these successive waves of ideas, interpretation,
and action along with sufficient financial resources to be
successful.
The
rise of conservatism was also helped significantly by the decline
and fall of American liberalism, which lost its way between the New
Deal of Franklin D. Roosevelt and the Great Society of Lyndon B.
Johnson, between the anticommunist Korean War, which it supported,
and the Sandinistas' Marxist takeover of Nicaragua, which it also
supported, and between the earthy populism of Harry Truman and the
cerebral elitism of Al Gore.
In
large measure, the success of the American conservative movement
rests on its role in two epic events one foreign, one
domestic that have shaped much of modern American history. The
first was the waging and the winning of the Cold War. The second
was the American public's rejection of the idea that the federal
government should be the primary solver of major economic and
social problems.
Conservatives declared that communism was
evil and had to be defeated, not just contained. And they said that
the federal government had grown dangerously large and had to be
rolled back, not just managed more efficiently.
Because conservatives played a decisive
part in ending the Cold War and alerting the nation to the perils
of a leviathan state, they reaped enormous political rewards, such
as Ronald Reagan's sweeping presidential victories in 1980 and
1984, the Republicans' historic capture of Congress in 1994, and
George Bush's capture of the White House in 2000.
But
the Conservative revolution that remade American politics was a
long time in the making. In the mid1950s, Conservative ideas did
not seem to be taking hold in many Americans' minds. Similarly,
Conservative politicians found themselves far from the center of
the public square.
Senator Robert Taft of Ohio died in the
summer of 1953, and Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin, after his
Senate censure in December 1954, was as good as dead. President
Eisenhower was offering a "dimestore" New Deal at home while
Secretary of State John Foster Dulles was accused by some
conservatives of failing to pursue an aggressive enough
anticommunist foreign policy.
William F. Buckley Jr. and National
Review
In
the early 1950s, in fact, the Conservative movement could claim
only a few publications and fewer organizations. Conservative
victories, wrote William F. Buckley Jr., were "uncoordinated and
inconclusive" because the philosophy of freedom was not being
expounded systematically in the universities and in the media. A
new Conservative journal was needed, he argued, to combat the
liberals, to compensate for "Conservative weakness" in the academy,
and to "focus the energies" of the movement.
In
the first issue of his new magazine, National Review, Buckley
sounded the clarion, averring that conservatives lived, as did all
other Americans, in "a Liberal world." National Review would not
submit but would stand "athwart history yelling Stop!" confident
that "a vigorous and incorruptible journal of Conservative opinion"
could make a critical difference in the realms of ideas and
politics.
National Review, then, was not simply a
journal of opinion but a political act which, like the publication
of Russell Kirk's The Conservative Mind, shaped the modern
Conservative movement.
Barry Goldwater and The Conscience
of a Conservative
Along with the publication of The
Conservative Mind and the founding of National Review, a new
political star was rising in the West in the 1950s. Barry Goldwater
was the grandson of a Jewish peddler who became a millionaire; a
college dropout whose book The Conscience of a Conservative sold
3.5 million copies and was for a while required reading for history
169B at Harvard University.
Goldwater delighted in challenging
conventional wisdom but always used the Constitution as his guide.
He said that the future of freedom in America depended upon the
election of public officials who pledged to enforce the
Constitution and who proclaimed, "My aim is not to pass laws, but
to repeal them." He also called for victory over communism in the
Cold War.
All
the ingredients of a national political movement seemed to be
coming together: a charismatic political leader, Senator Barry
Goldwater; widely known popularizers like Bill Buckley; thinkers
like
F. A. Hayek, Russell Kirk, and Milton Friedman in their
intellectual prime; and farsighted "golden" donors.
These were heady times for the
Conservative movement, capped by a Time magazine article that
reported: "A statebystate survey of Time correspondents indicates
that at least Republican Barry Goldwater could give [President]
Kennedy a breathlessly close contest." The American conservative
movement was prepared to help Goldwater capture the Republican
presidential nomination and then perhaps secure the most
soughtafter prize in American politics the presidency.
And
then, on November 22, 1963, a smiling, tanned John F. Kennedy
settled back in an open limousine to parade through downtown
Dallas.
The
bullet that killed Kennedy also killed Goldwater's changes to
become President the American people did not want three different
Presidents in a single year. And yet, the Arizona Conservative
still announced his candidacy for the Republican nomination,
unwilling to disappoint the millions and there were millions who
looked to him as a political savior. Rarely does a presidential
candidate run knowing beyond a reasonable doubt that he cannot
win.
President Johnson demolished Barry
Goldwater in the presidential election, receiving 61 percent of the
popular vote and carrying 44 states. Liberal commentators declared
that the Conservative movement was dead. James Reston, Washington
bureau chief of The New York Times, concluded that "Barry Goldwater
not only lost the presidential election...but the Conservative
cause as well."
Conservatives emphatically disagreed.
- "The landslide majority did not vote
against the Conservative philosophy," wrote Ronald Reagan; "they
voted against a false image our liberal opponents successfully
mounted."
- National Review senior editor Frank Meyer
pointed out that, despite the liberal campaign to make
conservatism seem "extremist, radical, nihilist, anarchic,"
twofifths of the voters still voted for the Conservative
alternative.
- Human Events stated that the Goldwater
campaign had accomplished three critical things: "The Republican
Party is essentially Conservative; the South is developing into a
major pivot of its power; and a candidate who possesses Goldwater's
virtues but lacks some of his handicaps can win the
presidency."
This
last insight came to pass in the person of Ronald Reagan, who
delivered a nationally televised address for Goldwater in the
waning days of the 1964 campaign and became, as a result, a
national political star overnight. Prominent California
Republicans later admitted that they would not have approached
Reagan to run for governor of their state if it had not been for
his TV address, entitled, "A Time for Choosing."
An Enduring Legacy
There was another critical legacy of the
Goldwater campaign I want to mention the entry of thousands of
young people into American politics and policymaking. These young
conservatives now sit in Congress and on the Supreme Court, manage
campaigns and raise millions of dollars, head think tanks like The
Heritage Foundation and write seminal books, edit magazines, and
anchor radio and television programs.
In
addition, Barry Goldwater addressed in a serious and substantive
way issues that have been at the center of the national debate ever
since Social Security, government subsidies, privatization,
morality in government, and communism. Campaign strategist John
Sears summed up that Goldwater changed "the rhetoric of politics"
by challenging the principles of the New Deal, "something no
Democrat or Republican before him had dared to do."
There were several milestones in the first
20 years of the Conservative movement, such as the publication of
The Conservative Mind and the founding of National Review, but none
equaled the political salience of Barry Goldwater's seemingly
quixotic run for the White House. His candidacy was "like a first
love" for countless young men and women, never to be forgotten,
always to be cherished. It was the beginning rather than the end of
conservatism's political ascendancy.
The Rise of Ronald Reagan
Although he had never before run for
public office, Ronald Reagan trounced the incumbent Democratic
governor of California, Edmund (Pat) Brown, by 1 million votes in
the November 1966 election. By the following July, after only six
months in office, Governor Reagan was ranked in opinion polls as a
serious contender for the Republican presidential nomination.
Over
the next eight years as governor of the most populous state in the
Union, Reagan cut and trimmed government wherever possible, kept
government income and outgo in balance (as required by law), used
business and professional experts to make government more
efficient, and did not hesitate to make unpopular decisions, such
as instituting tuition for the state's university system. His most
important accomplishment was welfare reform. In 1996, the U.S.
Congress passed and President Bill Clinton signed into law a
welfare reform program that relied in large measure on the
California plan that Reagan had engineered a quarter of a century
earlier.
While Ronald Reagan was finishing up his
second term as governor of California in the early 1970s, President
Richard Nixon was sinking deeper and deeper into the mire of
Watergate. In July 1974, the House Judiciary Committee approved
three articles of impeachment. Any possibility and it was
slight that Nixon might evade impeachment disappeared in early
August with the release of his "smoking gun" conversations with
White House aide Robert Haldeman. The President had deliberately
participated in an unconstitutional coverup of Watergate.
The New Right and the
Neoconservatives
During this chaotic period, two new and
influential branches of conservatism came into being. The New Right
was a reaction to the attempted liberal takeover of the Republican
Party epitomized by President Gerald Ford's selection of Nelson
Rockefeller as his Vice President. The neoconservatives similarly
responded to the liberal seizure of the Democratic Party,
represented by the nomination of George McGovern as President.
The
New Right and the neoconservatives were not a natural alliance. The
New Right was deeply suspicious of government, while the
neoconservatives embraced it. The New Right loved the mechanics of
politics, while the neoconservatives preferred the higher plane of
public policy. But both hated communism and despised liberals the
New Right for what they had always been, the neoconservatives for
what they had become.
In
the end, it was the neoconservatives' anticommunism and resistance
to the counterculture that won the approval of the conservatives
and led to a pragmatic marriage. The minister who presided over the
nuptials was Ronald Reagan, who needed the brainpower of the
neoconservatives and the manpower of the New Right, especially the
Christian Right, to be elected.
Reagan as President: Defining a
Decade
In
1980, at the age of 69, Reagan bested six of the GOP's brightest
stars in the Republican primaries, including George Herbert Walker
Bush, who had served as U.S. envoy to China among other
assignments. In the fall campaign, President Jimmy Carter attempted
to portray his Republican opponent as a rightwing extremist
opposed to peace, arms control, and working people. Reagan refused
to be thrown offcourse and went on courting the bluecollar,
ethnic Catholic vote, concentrated on Carter's sorry economic
record, and reassured the voters that he could handle the weighty
duties of the presidency.
Although most of the national polls said
it would be a close election, Reagan won by an electoral landslide
and more than 8 million votes. Observers agreed that the results
constituted a broad mandate for Reagan to change the direction of
American politics. Newsweek called Reagan's plan to cut both
spending and incometaxes a "second New Deal potentially as
profound in its impact as the first was a half century ago."
The
new President and his advisers were well aware they had to act, and
quickly in presidential politics, as in the 100yard dash, a quick
start is everything. Their domestic cornerstone was the 1981
Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA), which cut all incometaxes by 25
percent, reduced the top income tax rate from 70 percent to 50
percent, and indexed tax rates to offset the impact of
inflation.
As a
result, beginning in the fall of 1982, the economy began 60
straight months of growth, the longest uninterrupted period of
expansion since the government began keeping statistics in 1854.
Nearly 15 million new jobs were created during this period, and
just under $20 trillion worth of goods and services, measured in
actual dollars, were produced.
From
intelligence reports and the insights gained over a lifetime of
study, President Reagan concluded that communism in the Soviet
Union and Eastern and Central Europe was cracking and ready to
crumble. In one of the most memorable utterances of his presidency,
the President in 1982 predicted (before the British Parliament at
Westminster): "The march of freedom and democracy...will leave
MarxismLeninism on the ashheap of history as it has left other
tyrannies which stifle the freedom and muzzle the selfexpression
of the people."
A
critical part of what came to be called the Reagan Doctrine was the
Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), the development of a
comprehensive antiballistic missile system. The only people who
hated it more than its liberal detractors in America (who ridiculed
it as "Star Wars") were the Soviets. In 1993, General Makhmut
Gareer, who headed the department of strategic analysis in the
Soviet Ministry of Defense, revealed what he had told the Soviet
general staff and the Politboro in 1983: "Not only could we not
defeat SDI, SDI defeated all possible countermeasures."
The Reagan Legacy
Biographer Lou Cannon wrote that "no
president save FDR defined a decade as strikingly as Ronald Reagan
defined the 1980s." But Cannon did not go far enough. Reagan left
an indelible mark on American politics, starting in the 1960s, when
he was governor of California and continuing through the 1980s and
to the present day. I predict that just as the first half of the
20th century has been called the Age of Roosevelt, the last half of
the 20th century will be called the Age of Reagan.
Just
as Roosevelt led America out of a great economic depression, Reagan
lifted a traumatized country out of a great psychological
depression, induced by the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and
Martin Luther King, Jr., and sustained by the Vietnam War, the
scandal of Watergate, and the malaise of Jimmy Carter. Reagan used
the same political instruments as Roosevelt the major address to
Congress and the fireside chat with the people and the same
optimistic, uplifting rhetoric.
But
although both Roosevelt and Reagan appealed to the best in
America, there was a significant philosophical difference between
the two Presidents: Roosevelt turned to government to solve the
problems of the people, while Reagan turned to the people to solve
the problems of government.
Traditionalists vs. Neoconservatives
The
Conservative movement had generally flourished during the 1980s,
but there were inevitable tensions as it grew in size and
influence. In the 1950s, the sharpest debates had been between
traditionalists and libertarians as to the proper balance between
order and liberty. In the 1980s, traditionalists and
neoconservatives disputed as to the correct role of the state.
The
external threat of communism and the calming presence of President
Reagan had persuaded most conservatives to sublimate their
differences for the greater good. But with the collapse of Soviet
communism and Reagan's departure, disagreements among the varying
kinds of conservatism came to the surface with more intensity.
Newt Gingrich and the Contract
with America
President Bush the Elder was a severe
disappointment to many conservatives, who did not mourn for long
his 1992 defeat to New Democrat Bill Clinton. They found
consolation in a new and somewhat controversial Conservative leader
who came from the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue Congressman
Newt Gingrich. His Contract with America was the tip of a giant
Conservative iceberg that tore into the seemingly permanent
Democratic majority in Congress and sank it faster than the
Titanic.
In
the November 1994 elections, Republicans gained 52 seats and
assumed a majority in the House of Representatives for the first
time since 1953 when Dwight Eisenhower was President. And they
recaptured control of the U.S. Senate. The New York Times called
the Republicanconservative triumph "a political upheaval of
historic proportions."
But
the year that began with such shining promise ended in bitter
disappointment. The Republican House watched its public approval
sink from 52 percent to the upper 20s in January 1996, while
Speaker Gingrich received a perilous disapproval rating of 51
percent.
Republicans grossly underestimated
President Clinton's political skills, especially his use of the
veto, and they failed to respond forcefully enough to the
Democrats' propaganda. And they overestimated the ability of
Congress to govern. In the age of mass media, presidential power is
too great and congressional power is too diffuse for Congress to
prevail over the President for long.
George W. Bush and the War
on terrorism
No
U.S. President was as coolly welcomed as Republican George W. Bush
was in January 2001. His inaugural was overshadowed by the disputed
nature of his victory narrowly losing the popular vote to Vice
President Al Gore and winning the Electoral College by just one
vote more than the needed 270.
Widely described and not only by partisan
Democrats as the man who "stole" the 2000 election, a cautious
Bush began his presidency by focusing ontaxes and education reform
as a reflection of his "compassionate" conservatism. His major
accomplishment in his first six months was a monumental tax cut of
$1.6 trillion, a move in keeping with the supplyside economic
philosophy of Ronald Reagan, not of his father George H. W. Bush.
But the President seemed detached and even uncomfortable in the
job, and Democrats began laying plans for an aggressive
presidential campaign and a retaking of the White House in
2004.
And
then came September 11, 2001 "9/11." The hijacked airplanes that
smashed into the white towers of the World Trade Center in New York
City, the mammoth Pentagon in Washington, D.C., and the
Pennsylvania countryside killed three thousand innocent people and
swept away the political and social detritus of the previous 10
months. The nation was no longer divided between blue Gore
states and red Bush states but was united in red, white, and
blue.
The
once passive President became an activist chief executive, asking
for the authority to fight a protracted conflict against
terrorists, help industries hit hard by terrorism, and rejuvenate a
stalled economy. Aided by the public's tendency to rally around the
President in a time of crisis, Bush's approval ratings skyrocketed
until they topped 90 percent as high a level as any President
since the advent of polling.
Inevitably, President Bush's popularity
has leveled off in the 50s. Bipartisanship in Congress has become
more difficult as the fundamental differences between Republicans
and Democrats on core issues liketaxes and federal spending and
even the Iraq War have resurfaced. Patriotism has become
passé in some quarters, especially in the academy.
But
America will not return to its preSeptember 11 way of life. The
terrorist attacks were a defining moment in modern American
history. Americans are prepared to fight terrorism as long as they
did the Cold War, which occupied us for some four decades.
In
any war, leadership is critical. President Bush's leadership will
be scrutinized as his Administration considers appropriate action
against terrorists. Despite the questions about the existence or
nonexistence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the majority
of Americans still believe the war of liberation against Saddam
Hussein was justified, and they have not forgotten how quickly the
United States removed the extremist Taliban regime in
Afghanistan.
At
home, the Bush Administration is committed to preserving the tax
cuts and stimulating the economy without massive federal spending
and federal regulation. Such a balancing act of economics and
politics will demand the greatest skill and care. The President is
fortunate in that he can call upon the myriad resources of a mature
Conservative movement the collective strengths of a great complex
of politicians, popularizers, philosophers, and
philanthropists.
The Triumph of conservatism
The
transforming power of modern American conservatism over the last 50
years has been unmistakable. In the late 1940s, we seemed to be
headed for a socialist world in which MarxismLeninism could only
be contained, not defeated. In the 1990s, we celebrated the
collapse of Soviet communism and the adoption of liberal democracy
and free markets around the world because of the leadership of
charismatic conservatives like Ronald Reagan and Margaret
Thatcher.
The
impacts of modern conservatism in America have been equally
profound. There is renewed public skepticism about Big Government,
a "leave us alone" attitude that stretches back as far as the
Founding of the Republic. Because of Conservative initiatives like
welfare reform, several of the nation's leading cultural
indicators, such as violent crime, teenage births, and the child
poverty rate, have declined. And in the wake of 9/11, a prudential
internationalism has evolved, based on this principle: Act
multilaterally when possible and unilaterally when necessary.
The
liberal historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. wrote in 1947 that "there
seems no inherent obstacle to the gradual advance of socialism in
the United States through a series of New Deals." Fiveandahalf
decades later, the Conservative columnist George Will wrote that
we had experienced "the intellectual collapse of socialism" in
America and around the world.
The
one political constant throughout those 50 years has been the rise
of the Right, whose Long March to national power and prominence was
often interrupted by the death of its leaders, calamitous defeats
at the polls, frequent feuding within its ranks over means and
ends, and the perennial hostility of the prevailing liberal
establishment. But through the power of its ideas ever linked by
the priceless principle of ordered liberty and the unceasing
dissemination and application of those ideas, the Conservative
movement has become a major, and often the dominant, player in the
political and economic realms of America.
Lee Edwards,
Ph.D., is Distinguished Fellow in Conservative Thought in
the B. Kenneth Simon Center for American Studies at The Heritage
Foundation. He delivered this lecture in Beijing and Shanghai,
China, in November 2003.