Hillary's America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party

by Dinesh D'Souza

  What Lincoln can teach us is that principles and pragmatism are not enemies—they actually go together. Principles reflect the goal we are aiming at, and pragmatism reflects the means to get there. To win an election and retain a majority, we need both. Lincoln was anti-slavery on principle but his election platform was based on the pragmatic policy of stopping the extension of slavery.

  Today some conservatives might accuse Lincoln of “selling out.” Could Lincoln be a RINO? Perish the thought. Lincoln understood that the best way to get rid of slavery was to win the 1860 election—that was the first step. If Lincoln lost, slavery would surely have had a longer life. So Lincoln was actually following the best anti-slavery option available at the time. Pragmatism is a step by step means for realizing goals that cannot be achieved all at once.

  To stand on principle and reject the pragmatic option is both shortsighted and foolish. Of course the abolitionists were this way, and they felt really good about themselves. But left to themselves the abolitionists would have lost the 1860 election. They would have remained politically marginalized.

  Fortunately, they were integrated into a broader anti-slavery coalition led by Lincoln. Lincoln never called himself an abolitionist—he resisted the label—but in the end it was Lincoln, and the Republican Party he led, who achieved the abolitionist goal of ending slavery through a pragmatic political platform that won electoral victory. That’s an important lesson.

  We can also learn from Reagan, chiefly how he took ideas and employed them to achieve his principal goals. This is not merely “waiting for Reagan” or mechanically applying Reagan’s solutions to today’s issues. Reagan’s world was very different from ours. He was dealing with runaway inflation, high interest rates, a Soviet bear on the prowl. His remedies were designed for those problems. We need remedies that deal with our problems.

  Still, there’s a lot we can learn from Reaganism, which was based on three broad ideas. In foreign policy, Reagan held that the world is a dangerous place and there are bad guys around who couldn’t just be talked out of being bad guys. No amount of UN resolutions or lengthy conversations would do the trick. Thus regrettably but inevitably, force is a necessary ingredient of American foreign policy.

  The Reagan Doctrine was a middle position between isolationism—staying out of world affairs—and interventionism—as reflected in the Bush Doctrine of preemptive invasion. Reagan began with the premise that American troops should not be deployed to secure other people’s freedom. They should be willing to fight for it themselves. If they proved willing to do that, then America would help.

  In Afghanistan, for instance, America didn’t send troops to repel the Soviet invasion there. Rather, the Afghans—aided by Muslims from other countries—did the fighting, and America helped equip them with military hardware and strategic advice. In Nicaragua too, Reagan helped to arm the resistance which held the Marxist Sandinistas at bay until the Sandinistas were ultimately ousted from power in a free election.

  We can learn from Reagan in recognizing that in foreign policy, Americans simply want two things: don’t bomb us, and trade with us. Trade on the basis of mutual advantage is the general basis for our dealings with other countries. But we recognize that there are people in the world who wish to terrorize us and blow us up.

  America’s message to those people is: We are not against your religion and we have no intention of ruling or occupying your countries. So if that’s your concern, we can work with you to allay it. But if you try and bomb us—take note, Islamic radicals—then we are going to annihilate you. How we do it is a matter of debate, but that we will do it, you can be sure. So if you want to get to heaven really fast, we can help you with that.

  In domestic policy, Reagan began with the premise that the entrepreneur, not the bureaucrat, is the creator of wealth and jobs. The free market—technological capitalism—is the best way to generate mass prosperity and rising standards of living. To this end Reagan supported tax cuts, reducing the top marginal rate from nearly 70 percent to 28 percent; privatization—dispatching tasks previously done by government to the private sector—and deregulation, making it easier for companies and workers to get things done.

  The GOP today should draw on Reaganite principles to affirm the idea that technology, not government, is responsible for materially improving people’s lives, not just in America but around the world. Government policy should support technological capitalism—not crony capitalism but genuine capitalism.

  Government should confine itself to its proper domain—doing just the things that are enumerated in the Constitution—and not be a general scheme for taking from people the fruits of their labor. This means that taxes should be as low as possible and proportional. Proportional, not progressive taxation—everyone doesn’t pay the same amount of taxes, but everyone pays taxes at the same rate.

  Personally, I would set that rate at around 15 percent. But what I think doesn’t matter: the rate can be set democratically. If the government needs more money due to a national security threat or some other legitimate reason, people can vote to raise the rate. But here’s the rub: in raising the rate they would also be raising their own rate. We have to get away from the idea that people can simply vote to raise other people’s taxes while not affecting what they pay.

  Finally, in social policy Reagan affirmed that a good society isn’t just based on individualism; it is also based on family, on church, on community, and on patriotism. These are what Burke called the “little platoons” of human happiness. Reagan sought to make the GOP a party of inclusion, civic order, and social decency.

  Today this means a generous, reformed immigration policy that, while opposing illegal immigration, offers legal, vetted immigrants the opportunity to bring their skills, talents, and work ethic to our country and our economy; it is immigration that’s in the national interest. Once here, we should expect those immigrants to assimilate to the American way of life; that, after all, is what drew them to come here in the first place.

  In the tradition of Reagan, we should be a pro-life and pro-family party, but this requires prudence and pragmatism in how we go about reducing the number of abortions and rebuilding respect for traditional family values. I don’t favor gay marriage but the heterosexual family—the family that is the cradle for the overwhelming majority of Americans—has plenty of challenges of its own and we should deal first with those, getting our own house in order.

  Reagan preached a broad vision of America and didn’t believe he needed to make a special appeal to women, to blacks, to Hispanics, and to other minorities. But the GOP has lost ground with these groups even since the Bush years. Bush, for example, got 40 percent of the Hispanic vote while Romney four years later got only 23 percent. So this year I believe a direct appeal to minorities is a good idea and could bring huge dividends.

  The Republican message to women and minorities is this: Don’t fall for the progressive Democratic con. The Republicans have from the beginning been the party of women’s rights and minority rights. We have stood by you in the past, and today the principles of the GOP are the best way for women and minorities to advance on your merits and claim your share of the American dream.

  To women we say: This is not about electing the “first woman president” and why in any case would you want to elect the scariest member of your sex? As collaborative sex abusers, the Clintons are no solution to the war on women; they are the war on women. We tried the “first” black thing with Obama; look how that worked out. Instead of pushing for another “first” who will come back to haunt us, let’s concentrate on how we can give equal rights under the law—a Republican idea—to all Americans, male and female.

  To Hispanics we say: We’re not against immigrants; we want immigrants who believe in the American dream and want to assimilate to the American way of life. Ever wonder when you have fully “become American”? We believe it is when you become a Republican! So come aboard, and join the party of economic opportunity, upward mobility
, and self-reliance. In short, get out of the Democratic barrio where they’ll keep you poor, miserable, and dependent.

  To blacks we say: You’ve been voting Democratic for seventy-five years, and look where it’s gotten you? You have been in America longer than most of the other ethnic groups and yet in a short time they have surpassed you. Don’t fall for the same old captivity song of the Democrats; don’t let them use you anymore. It’s time to try something different. It’s time to leave the plantation.

  Reagan was the outsider when he ran for president in 1980. The Republican establishment opposed him and derided him. Yet Reagan never railed against them. He fought them privately, sure, but he maintained a cordial public demeanor. He abided by his famous eleventh commandment of not speaking ill of other Republicans. With victory, the establishment became his. But after Reagan, the doofuses went back to their old ways.

  Today Reagan would be appalled at the self-serving careerism and petty infighting within the GOP, where the establishment serves itself rather than its members, where consultants rake in huge bucks while losing one election after another, and where even Republican electoral victory doesn’t seem to advance conservative policy goals.

  Reagan would also be appalled by narrow-minded Republicans who act as if they’re more interested in defeating fellow Republicans—as too moderate or too conservative—than in beating the Democrats. That’s one big reason why the GOP—the the party with the best ideas—is the “minority party” in America and has been for the past seventy-five years.

  We need to win this election in the short term and, in the long, to make the GOP the majority party in America for the next fifty years. That’s how we undo what Obama has done, that’s how we fumigate the country and get rid of the bad influence and the residual bad odor of the Democrats, that’s how we begin the work of rebuilding and restoring America. This is not the work of a single election; it’s the work of a generation.

  So listen up, libertarians—you are not going to get a libertarian candidate, so be content with one who is generally free market. Listen up, social conservatives—there is no prospect of ending abortion or gay marriage now, so let’s support a candidate who will make pro-life and pro-family Supreme Court appointments. Listen up, GOP establishment types—you are not going to run the show the way you used to, so get behind the candidates that Republican voters actually choose.

  NEVER HILLARY

  In the end, of course, this election is not about Trump. It is about Hillary. Worse than Obama, she is the frightening culmination of all that is twisted and wrong about American politics. All the #NeverTrump nonsense collapses when we realize that this has always been a Hillary up or down election. My position is #NeverHillary.

  Moreover, the Republicans are the good guys and the Democrats the bad guys. Not everyone on our team is a good guy but the team that jointly works to prevent stealing and exploitation is always an improvement on the team that carries out the stealing and exploitation. Or, as I have been trying to convey throughout this book, the party that takes down the plantation is better than the party that builds the plantation.

  How to beat Hillary and her gang? I offer two specific ways. First, please help me get the word out about this book and the accompanying movie to everyone you know. Books operate on the mind; they provide intellectual ammunition. Movies operate on the mind too but they mostly appeal to the senses and the emotions. We should not deride these; they are also involved in the art of persuasion.

  To win the election, we must rally the base and also reach moderate Democrats and independents. Most of the people who read this book or see the accompanying film will be conservatives and Republicans. That’s fine; it’s been a rough campaign. The book and the film lay out what we’re up against; they should help our team to unify and get mobilized.

  But we also need to reach beyond the base. Here’s how you can help. Get together with your friends or social group and go see the film opening weekend. It’s a Hollywood secret that the opening weekend is critical for a movie. If a film is in 1,500 theaters opening weekend and does well, it will be in more theaters the next week. If we do poorly that weekend, we will be in fewer theaters. So this is how you put fuel in our rocket; this is how you can help the film get shown everywhere in the country and reach more people.

  If you’re actively involved in a Republican or conservative group, you can also organize your own campaign to reach independent voters. How? The names and addresses of these voters is known. The RNC and various political PACs and groups have their contact information. So get it and provide the information that will help these voters make an intelligent choice.

  Where will that information come from? You can generate your own, but for my part, I am putting my best “messaging” at your disposal. The Hillary movie accompanying this book will come out in DVD/Home Box Office a month before the election. That is a critical time. Your group can purchase DVDs at a reasonable price and drop them into the mailboxes of independent voters in Florida, Ohio, Colorado, and the other swing states that will very likely decide this election.

  This is called using your influence. It is a creative, targeted, and lethal way to make a difference. This is how you become a Very Dangerous American. It doesn’t cost a lot of money, because books and DVDs just cost a few bucks apiece. Of course there may be other ways to strike, but here I am giving you the one that brings our forces together.

  You have more influence than you realize. Today with Facebook and Twitter and even email, we can reach large numbers of people for free. We can build networks and disseminate information as if each of us was an individual publisher. Even if you’re technologically challenged, the new technology is actually no more difficult than turning on the TV and using the microwave oven, once you get used to it. So get used to it, and expand your influence.

  Lincoln once said that America is ruled by public opinion. He did not mean by this that America is ruled by the opinions of the public. The ordinary American doesn’t care very much about politics. He or she votes every two or four years, typically if it isn’t raining. This voter is “undecided,” not because of a divided mind, but because he doesn’t know what’s going on.

  What shapes the mind of these voters is the creativity and enthusiasm and involvement of the people who do know what’s going on. That’s you. If you’re a party delegate, or a blogger, or actively involved in a political group, you are part of the smaller subset of hands-on Americans who actually shape the course of events. I estimate that group to be two to five million people, far fewer than the hundred million who will vote in November. You should be one of those people.

  Through your active involvement—not just in the election but also after—you can set the goal posts for American politics. This is how, in Lincoln’s sense, you become one of the rulers of America. Democratic self-government is achieved by the citizens who choose to participate on a regular basis in the formation of the rules that shape our society.

  Don’t be discouraged; we have far more power than we realize. Years ago a professor of mine told me the story about the lion tamer and the lion. So there’s the lion, and there’s the lion tamer, a little guy with a stick. Yet every time the lion tamer gesticulates, the lion responds. The lion is following the dictates of the lion tamer.

  But here my professor raised a provocative question: Who’s more powerful, the lion tamer or the lion? Obviously it is the lion. Now, however, we have a puzzle. If the lion is more powerful, why does the lion so obediently and sycophantically obey the instructions of the lion tamer? The answer, of course, is that the lion doesn’t know its own power. The lion thinks the lion tamer is more powerful.

  In the same way, we sometimes feel hopeless because we are just citizens and the people in Washington—or in the White House—have all the power. But in reality it is not so. In democratic politics, at least at election time, we are the ones who have the power. Their scams cannot go through without our consent. So let’s remember that we are the lion, and
if only we recognize our power, and use it, we can help, in this desperate time, to put the Democratic lion tamers out of business.

  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

  I want to thank Kimberly Dvorak for her research support and editorial suggestions. She’s thorough, reliable, and a joy to work with. Aaron and Sonia Brubaker are always there for me, getting it done, in some cases even before I realize it needs to be done. I want to thank our entire film team, especially producer Jerry Molen, whose life and character are a reminder of what we’re fighting for. My longtime editor Harry Crocker helped shape this project and kept my arguments on course, even though some of them initially confounded him. My friend and co-conspirator Bruce Schooley provided indispensable counsel, both for this book and the accompanying film, which reflect his influence at every stage. Danielle, my daughter, is a constant inspiration and perennial sounding board; soon she’ll be out of college and giving me a run for my money. And to my wife Debbie—thanks, honey, for all your help, encouragement, and love. You are my highly competent “happiness manager,” and have brought so much joy into my life.

  NOTES

  CHAPTER 1

  1. John Milton, Paradise Lost, Book 2, literaturepage.com.

  2. Markos Moulitsas, “Hillary Clinton: Too Much of a Clinton Democrat?,” Washington Post, May 7, 2006.

  3. William Safire, “Blizzard of Lies,” New York Times, January 8, 1996; Maureen Dowd, “Obama’s Big Screen Test,” New York Times, February 21, 2007.

  4. Cited by David Brock, The Seduction of Hillary Rodham (New York: Free Press, 1996), 24.

  5. Hamilton Jordan, “The First Grifters,” Wall Street Journal, February 20, 2001.

  6. James Grimaldi and Rebecca Ballhaus, “Hillary Clinton’s Complex Corporate Ties,” Wall Street Journal, February 19, 2015.

  7. Sophie Tatum, “Elizabeth Warren: Donald Trump ‘Built His Campaign on Racism,’” CNN, May 4, 2016; Robert Reich, “Trump: The American Fascist,” billmoyers.com, March 11, 2016.