Richard Milhous Nixon is routinely criticised in retrospective assessments of US Presidents, with most of the focus centring on the Watergate scandal, his resignation, and subsequent pardon by Gerald Ford. Whilst attempting to grasp a just image of a political figure, especially one who strongly divides opinion, it is wise to focus on what is omitted; history is a canvas painted with broad strokes, and yet it is the forgotten corners that hold the true hues of the past. Nixon’s legacy unfairly centres around the smudges of scandal littering the canvas, ignoring the careful brushstrokes of his diplomatic foreign policy and domestic achievements. 

Only Nixon Could Go to China

Nixon’s relationship with China, and specifically with Chinese Communist Party Chairman Mao Zedong, was completely paradoxical. Nixon was politically right, avidly anti-communist and a driving force of McCarthyism. Initial consideration would suggest he would be one of, if not the most, unsuiting President to establish relations between the United States and the People’s Republic of China. Yet, it was Nixon’s 1972 visit which worked to ease Cold War tensions and lay the groundwork for China’s eventual integration into the world economy. The anti-communist hawk understood the need for considerate detente measures, to place the interest of US security above that of his vendetta against Marxist-Leninism and its tributaries. Nixon’s trip to China was a spark in an abyss of Cold War paranoia, igniting a new era in global diplomacy, which would ultimately culminate in the triumph of liberal democracy in 1991. 

Vietnamisation and The Path to Peace

Nixon ended U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War, recognising the unachievability of prior administrations' quixotic ambitions of containment. Unlike his predecessors, who clung to the Truman Doctrine and feared communism’s spread in Southeast Asia, Nixon aligned with public opinion and began troop withdrawals while ending the draft. Undertaking a process of Vietnamization, Nixon oversaw the training of South Vietnamese forces as well as disruptive operations on the Ho Chi Minh trail, helping South Vietnam’s defensive capabilities, hindering Northern Vietnamese supply lines, while ending the unnecessary loss of American lives. Critics argue Nixon’s withdrawal was a failure, citing the fall of South Vietnam in 1975. But I ask: was continuing a war that killed 300 Americans weekly and sparked widespread protests a viable option? Nixon’s pragmatic approach saved lives, executed the will of the American people, and brought troops home after eight arduous years.

The Domestic Sphere: Policy Gone Public 

Continuing his alignment with public opinion, Nixon reacted to the growing cultural crusades of social justice, freedoms and rights expansion. His domestic policy was inherently democratic, reflecting the hopes of Americans who felt overlooked by previous statesmen who considered themselves more informed than the public who elected them. This led to swathes of conservationist policy, including the establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency and the adoption of laws improving air quality and the ecological accountability of government departments. These policies are retrospectively overlooked, likely explaining why Nixon receives little praise for them, despite their remarkable proficiency. Nixon also championed several civil rights issues, including pledging support for the ill-fated Equal Rights Amendment which would have enshrined constitutional protection against sex discrimination if not for its failed ratification. He also ensured the upholding of Brown v. Board of Education, encouraging cooperation between Southern leaders, both black and white, on the issue of integrating schools, as well as supporting black capitalism and enhanced economic equity through the implementation of affirmative action. Nixon’s domestic policy maintained civil rights expansion and promoted newfound environmentalism as these issues consumed public consciousness - impressive accomplishments given his focus on international affairs. 

The Acceptable, The Regrettable, and The Unacceptable

When evaluating a figure whom historical discourse views unfavourably, understanding the reasoning for such perspectives has to be addressed. Nixon was by no means flawless. Whilst his failure to consistently reduce inflation can be accredited to the Vietnam War he ended, his adoption of price controls stimulating food shortages reflects a short-sided and ill-advised economic policy that, whilst not catastrophic, was far from inspiring. In spite of the policies that Nixon adopted, both domestic and international, that aligned the government closer to that of the public Nixon also seemed obsessed with control and Machiavellian secrecy. Members of Nixon’s reelection campaign infamously bugged the Democratic National Headquarters for the sake of abstracting inside political knowledge, in a scandal dubbed Watergate. Attempting to conceal material that exposed his knowledge of the scheme, Nixon held onto subpoenaed materials, which were only scraped from his reluctant grasp as a result of a Supreme Court judgement. This reflected a deeply unethical moral compass guided by coercive principles. With impeachment looming, Nixon resigned the presidency - becoming the only President to ever do so. This would be the only consequence he suffered, with Ford swiftly pardoning Nixon for all alleged crimes after he assumed office. Despite his capacity to break new ground with his principles and policy, paranoid scepticism was an unshakeable trait of the 37th President that mires his legacy. 

Conclusion

Deeply flawed yet deeply impressive, Richard Nixon is the most peculiar President in US history and the most difficult to empirically quantify. His foreign policy was instrumental in creating the geopolitical landscape in which the US secured Cold War victory, whilst domestically he bridged the widening gap between the American people and its leadership - establishing a trust he later betrayed out of political paranoia. Valuing democratic governance and pragmatic decision-making but unable to separate himself from the political dark arts, Nixon’s complex legacy should not be so easily condemned, but instead understood as ethereally enigmatic. Few, if any, Presidents produced as much effective policy as Nixon, yet none betrayed their privileges to the same extent. Misguided criticism of Nixon concentrates almost solely on Watergate, disregarding the merit of Tricky Dick’s cultural consciousness and revolutionary nature. Not only America, but the world, would be a very different and likely worse place if he had never held the Presidency.

Cianan Sheekey

Managing Editor

10th February 2025