Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Are Liberals Destroying America's Ideals?

Opinion

Divided American flag
Three threats to American democracy and their social roots
Jorge Villalba/Getty Images

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.

Read More

Guarding What? The Moral Cost of Militarizing Our Cities

Protestors in Chicago, August 2025

Credit: Angeles Ponpa

Guarding What? The Moral Cost of Militarizing Our Cities

A federal judge recently blocked plans to deploy the National Guard to Chicago. But the battle over militarizing American streets is far from over. On Monday, a federal appeals court lifted a temporary restraining order and ruled that the National Guard can be deployed to Portland, Oregon, amid ongoing protests at the Macadam ICE Facility.

Every time political leaders propose sending troops into cities or float invoking the Insurrection Act, they test a fragile boundary that keeps democracy in check.

Keep ReadingShow less
Joe Manchin on Taxpayer-Funded Primaries: 'They're Locking Us Out!'

Joe Manchin

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Joe Manchin on Taxpayer-Funded Primaries: 'They're Locking Us Out!'

While appearing on CNN host Michael Smerconish’s show, former Democratic U.S. Senator Joe Manchin, now a registered independent, told Smerconish that “we have to have open primaries” in order to get candidates who prioritize representation to run and have a chance to win.

“We have to change the primary,” he added. “They are locking us out.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Ingrassia Exit Highlights Rare GOP Pushback to Trump’s Personnel Picks

President Donald Trump speaks at a White House press briefing on Jan. 30, 2025.

Credit: Jonah Elkowitz/Medill News Service

Ingrassia Exit Highlights Rare GOP Pushback to Trump’s Personnel Picks

WASHINGTON — Paul Ingrassia withdrew his nomination to lead the Office of Special Counsel on Tuesday night after facing Republican pushback over past controversial statements.

While Ingrassia joins a growing list of President Donald Trump’s nominees who have withdrawn from consideration, many who have aired controversial beliefs or lack requisite qualifications have still been appointed or are still in the nomination process.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Revolution in Congressional Decision-Making
low light photography of armchairs in front of desk

A Revolution in Congressional Decision-Making

The dysfunction of today’s federal government is not simply the product of political division or individual leaders; it is rooted in the internal rules of Congress itself. The Founders, in one of their few major oversights, granted Congress the authority to make its own procedural rules (Article I, Section 5) without establishing any framework for how it should operate. Over time, this blank check has produced a legislative process built to serve partisan power, not public representation.

The result is a Congress that often rewards obstruction and gridlock over compromise and action. The Founders imagined representatives closely tied to their constituents—one member for every 30,000 to 50,000 citizens. Today, that ratio has ballooned to one for every 765,000 in the House, and in the Senate, each member can represent tens of millions (e.g., California). As the population has grown, representation has become distant and impersonal, while procedural rules have tightened the grip of party leadership. Major issues can no longer reach the floor unless the majority party permits it. The link between citizens and decisions has nearly vanished.

Keep ReadingShow less