Opening of Library-Museum Returns Nixon to Limelight

The many assumptions that esteemed British historian Paul Johnson (“Destiny Derailed, Then Triumphant,” Commentary, July 16) tries to push over on us as historical fact are too numerous to discount here. And, his statement that the U.S. Constitution is “idealistic” and “impossible for a President to observe it in the spirit and the letter, and at the same time, protect America’s interests in a wicked world” comes across as a feeble attempt to picture Richard Nixon as a victim of a “public witch hunt” and Watergate as a “forgotten footnote.”

But, Johnson is a propagandist here, because he commits three cardinal sins of the historian. First, he boldly declares what would have happened “if” by arguing that the Soviet Empire would have collapsed “several years earlier” if Nixon had not been a victim of a Democratic Congress. Second, he asserts that the American people were of one mind by opining that the “support they gave Reagan was their way of signifying, without actually admitting, that they owed Nixon an apology.” Third, he declares Reagan “deserves credit for bringing the Cold War to a successful conclusion.”

Johnson knows better than to give a development such as the sweeping changes in the Soviet Union a simple, single-causation image. History demands a period of 10 to 20 years to provide the perspective to understand its many causes and effects. What is going on in Gorbachev’s Russia is not history yet but current events. Only time can reveal to us what has both caused it and what its full significance will be.

It is perfectly acceptable for the historian to include his political bias into his interpretation of events. But it is shameful for the propagandist to present his biased views of history.

DAVID TUTTLE

San Juan Capistrano