With support from the University of Richmond

History News Network puts current events into historical perspective. Subscribe to our newsletter for new perspectives on the ways history continues to resonate in the present. Explore our archive of thousands of original op-eds and curated stories from around the web. Join us to learn more about the past, now.

Elizabeth Drew: Nostalgia for Nixon?

Anger and frustration with the president have produced an unusual turn of late. Numerous people have been moved to remark, "I'm beginning to miss Nixon," or, "I wish we could have Nixon back" -- this usually followed by, "He was so progressive on domestic policy."

The nostalgists rightly see Richard Nixon as having been far more intelligent and thoughtful than George W. Bush; Nixon was indeed very smart, though no intellectual. Actually, he hated intellectuals, among others, including Jews, political opponents and those born to privilege. Nixon lacked the exceptional curiosity of Bill Clinton, but he had an understanding of the world that can only be longed for today.

In fact, Nixon, who ran a rather disorganized presidency, wasn't interested in domestic policy. He essentially handed it off to his aide John Ehrlichman. And there was no unifying philosophy. Nixon called himself a "pragmatist," and he should be taken at his word: His domestic policy was a blend of the enlightened, the pragmatic and the cynical...

...The domestic issues that did interest Nixon were the economy, though he failed to tamp down inflation and unemployment, and politically sensitive topics such as abortion, crime and race relations. Yet perhaps his most lasting domestic legacy has been the effects of his "Southern strategy," appealing to Southerners and blue-collar workers who opposed advancement for blacks. His administration enforced civil rights laws only so far as the courts ordered (so that the courts could be blamed). He turned the party of Lincoln into the party that exploited racism.

So, despite the now-fashionable nostalgia, Nixon's pragmatism, his lack of core beliefs and his opportunism throughout his political lifetime offer little reason to doubt that he would be right in step with the conservative Republican politics of today.

Read entire article at Washington Post