The opening paragraph of the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 wrote, "America is now divided between two opposing forces: woke revolutionaries and those who believe in the ideals of the American Revolution."
What a perfect example of fake news. By taking on the mantle of American values and attacking their opponents as destroying those values, the Heritage Foundation has done what Trump and his allies always do: they accuse their opponents of doing what they themselves have actually done. In truth, it is the MAGA-Right that perverts and destroys our founding values.
This distorted view of our founding documents was formalized in Matthew Spaulding's 2009 book We Still Hold These Truths. Spaulding is a former Director of American Studies at the Heritage Foundation. In the book, Spaulding faults liberals for perverting the vision of the Founding Fathers and calls liberalism the enemy.
For example, in speaking of the "certain unalienable truths" proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence, he states that liberals have "rejected the idea of self-evident truths and enduring principles."
How bizarre. It is liberals, i.e., Democrats, who embrace the words of the Declaration of Independence. Given the MAGA-Right's assaults on immigrants, LGBTQ people, people of color, and women, it is clear that it is the MAGA-Right that has rejected these truths.
As I stated in my 2004 book We Still Hold These Truths: An American Manifesto, the position that support for conservative arguments can be found in our founding documents is not without basis. But the MAGA-Right disavows traditional conservative positions.
They advocate instead the dismantling of the Federal government to conform more to the anti-Federalist view—a weak and limited national government—that was the basis of the Articles of Confederation, rather than the view that was adopted by the Founding Fathers after the failure of the Articles and was the basis for the Constitution—a strong and multi-faceted Federal government with proscribed checks and balances.
True, some of the Founding Fathers, such as Jefferson, were concerned that a strong federal government would constrict citizens' rights, so he proposed what became the Bill of Rights.
But for the MAGA-Right, there is no recognition, appreciation, or tolerance for the point of view of the rights of others. For example, as MAGA Christians in what they consider a Christian country, they believe they can forbid gays to marry and demand that women act in accordance with MAGA beliefs. This is not protecting MAGA's freedom of religion. This is imposing MAGA's religious views on others, violating others' rights. They pursue the denial of liberty to others.
If you read Spaulding's book—if you didn't read it carefully—you could come away thinking he is a reasonable man who respects our founding documents and history. He has, for example, a section on equality and equal rights that is a powerful exposition, which one would think would presage support for all civil rights legislation as well as the DEI efforts of government. He certainly talks the talk.
But when it comes to the implementation and interpretation of these words, he doesn't walk the walk, but distorts their meaning to suit his own political ends. He and the MAGA-Right have a one-sided view of liberty.
The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are profoundly liberal documents for their era, relying on the balancing of powers and rights. What the MAGA-Right is attempting to do, and in the short term is succeeding in doing, is to destroy that balance, whether it's between the branches of government or the rights of people. Their goal is to create a government and system of laws that radically depart from our historic ideals and values.
This destruction of American ideals can only be stopped by the people, by their realizing what the Trump administration is doing and how it affects them and their children. Only by their votes can this perversion of America be stopped.
Given the massive misinformation campaign by the MAGA-Right, for this to happen, the Democratic Party must mount a counter-campaign to inform the public about America's true ideals—what our founding documents and the Founding Fathers said—how the Trump administration cynically perverts those ideals, and how that perversion impacts us all. That is the focus of my book, We Still Hold These Truths: An American Manifesto.
The MAGA-Right and Spaulding speak of equality, freedom of religion and speech, and liberty being dependent on a respect for both rights and responsibilities—these are indeed America's ideals—but they just mouth the words; their implementation of those concepts limits and perverts the Founders' meaning. And that meaning comes from the Enlightenment—the words were aspirational—not from the facts on the ground at that time.
For example, in saying that all "men" are created equal, the Founders meant that all mankind have certain unalienable rights. Their "self-evident" came from the fact of creation—that "we were all of the same species; made by the same God"—not what they saw looking around them. These rights don't belong just to white men or the MAGA-Right.
The traditional meaning of "balance of rights and responsibilities" is that someone exercising his rights has the responsibility not to interfere with the rights of another. However, the MAGA-Right's interpretation is that others have the responsibility not to interfere unjustly with the practice of their rights, such as by regulating business. They aggressively interfere with the rights of others because, again, they do not acknowledge their rights.
But beyond this information campaign, the Democratic Party must rediscover the source of its policies and communicate that source to the people. This source is not "liberal" thinking or progressive "woke" thinking. Instead, the foundation of all its policies is the Declaration of Independence.
To this end, I have proposed a domestic Mission statement for the Democratic Party:
"To build a country of greater opportunity for all, where:
- Each and every American has a real chance to experience the promises made in the Declaration of Independence … ‘that all men [mankind] are created equal, that their Creator endows them with certain unalienable Rights … Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness;’
- government meets its responsibility as outlined in the Declaration … ‘to secure those rights’ … within the constraints of fiscal responsibility; and
- all citizens have a shared responsibility to support the government’s efforts to secure those rights and promote the public good, each according to their ability, and to not, through the exercise of their rights, impinge on the rights of others."
This statement is the moral philosophy, the heart, the soul of American democracy. This is, or was, America’s common faith.
I believe this is the path out of the abyss of Trumpism and back to a government and policies that will make America great again—government of the people, by the people, and for the people.
Ronald L. Hirsch is a teacher, legal aid lawyer, survey researcher, nonprofit executive, consultant, composer, author, and volunteer. He is a graduate of Brown University and the University of Chicago Law School and the author of We Still Hold These Truths.























image of U.S. President Donald Trump is displayed on a digital billboard in Times Square in New York on April 8, 2026.
Trump is stuck between two realities. Neither serves the American people
Normally, I worry that events may overtake a column. But not so with the Iran war.
I don’t worry about running afoul of a headline or Truth Social post from the president because what is said about the situation is no longer very relevant to the reality.
On April 8, Nick Catoggio, my Dispatch colleague, dubbed an earlier stoppage with Iran “Schrödinger’s ceasefire.” This was a reference to the famous thought experiment by the physicist Erwin Schrödinger, who was trying to explain the weirdness of “superpositionality” in quantum physics. A cat in a box is both dead and alive at the same time until you open the box. Schrödinger meant to illustrate the absurdity of the idea that particles aren’t any one thing, but a “cloud of probabilities.”
The Trump administration is stuck in a word cloud of probabilities of his own making. The war is over. The war is on. The war isn’t a war. We have a deal, but we don’t have a deal, but we’re about to have a deal. We destroyed Iran’s military. No, we left it intact. We want regime change. No we don’t. We already accomplished it. We “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program a year ago. We had to go to war in February to prevent nuclear war. The Strait of Hormuz is open, closed, or something in-between. No deal without “unconditional surrender.” Let’s make a deal!
This everything-all-at-once vibe can be disorienting, particularly since most Americans didn’t have a war with Iran on their bingo cards until the shooting had already started. President Trump didn’t prepare the country or consult with Congress beforehand because he thought it would all be a smashing success in a matter of weeks.
The miscalculation that started it all: killing Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and much of Iran’s senior leadership, on the first day of the war. To “the great proud people of Iran, I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand,” Trump announced on Feb. 28. “When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will be probably your only chance for generations.”
I support regime change in Iran and shed no tears for Khamenei or his goons. But when you start a war by killing the regime’s top leaders, it’s not unreasonable for the remaining ones to conclude that you really intend regime change.
Khamenei was a murderous fanatic, but he was a fairly cautious one. He liked to threaten closing the Strait of Hormuz or attacking our regional allies, but he was reluctant to actually do it, fearing it would invite a regime change war. The mullahs and IRGC goons believed, not unreasonably, that if they lost their grip on power, they’d be lynched by the Iranian people they’ve brutalized for decades.
By starting with a regime change war, Trump removed any reason for the regime not to go for broke. When you have nothing to lose — particularly when you are a millenarian religious fanatic — a Persian Alamo strategy makes a lot of sense.
So Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz and attacked its neighbors.
But it turns out this wasn’t the Alamo. In the contest of wills, Trump blinked. The Iranian regime’s tolerance for punishment proved — so far — to be greater than Trump’s and that of our gulf allies. Militarily we could finish the job, but that would require ground troops and much greater economic turmoil. In a conflict Trump launched unilaterally without the prior support of Congress, NATO or the American people, Trump doesn’t have the political capital for that.
But that’s only half the problem. Trump wants the war over, but he doesn’t want to pay — militarily, economically, politically — what that would cost. So he wants to make a deal that ends it. But there is no deal available that wouldn’t come at an equally undesirable cost. Any deal that looks like what President Obama struck with the Iranians would be too embarrassing to bear. But the Iranians are convinced that they can get just such a deal, and they’re willing to drag things out as long as it takes.
The result: Trump’s in a box of his own making. He thinks he can talk his way out by simply asserting a reality that doesn’t exist. When the financial markets get nervous, he announces a breakthrough that is, at best, a possibility. When the Iranians agree to a deal that looks similar to one Obama might negotiate, Trump goes back to his threats.
It can’t go on forever. But I’m sure it’ll last until long after this column is forgotten.
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.