Was Ronald Reagan racist
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Ronald Reagan used an explicitly racist slur in a 1971 taped phone call with President Richard Nixon—calling African U.N. delegates “monkeys”—a passage restored to public release in 2019 and documented by multiple outlets [1] [2] [3]. Historians and commentators have used that audio and Reagan’s policy record on civil rights to argue he was hostile to many civil-rights advances; defenders and some family members have framed the remark as an aberration or denied Reagan was personally racist [4] [2] [5].
1. The smoking tape: what was actually said and how we know it
A six‑second excerpt of a 1971 call between then‑California governor Ronald Reagan and President Nixon, long withheld on the Nixon tapes, was restored and published in 2019; in it Reagan refers to African U.N. delegates as “monkeys,” a line that Nixon laughs at and repeats, and which historians say is plainly racist [3] [1]. The source for the disclosure is archival work by historian Tim Naftali and releases through the Miller Center and National Archives; major outlets reported the audio and published transcripts [1] [3].
2. Immediate reactions: condemnation and damage control
Reaction was swift and bipartisan in tone: Reagan’s daughter Patti Davis called the comments indefensible and “an aberration” but offered no defense of the words themselves, while Reagan’s broader defenders and some institutional accounts have emphasized that Reagan denied being racist [2]. News organizations and historians framed the tape as a disturbing new data point that complicates the popular, often hagiographic, memory of Reagan [1] [4].
3. How historians place the tape within Reagan’s record on race
Scholars say the tape does not stand alone: critics tie the comment to a pattern of policy choices and rhetoric—opposition to affirmative‑action “quotas,” judicial nominees who rolled back aspects of civil‑rights enforcement, and political appeals that scholars characterize as a white‑backlash strategy—that together suggest hostility to many civil‑rights reforms [5] [6]. Academic treatments note complexity and tensions in Reagan’s record but argue that racialized politics were central to the conservative coalition he helped build [5] [6].
4. Alternate view: defenders who urge context or mitigation
Some defenders point to elements of Reagan’s record that complicate a simple label of “racist,” such as moments of rhetorical support for individual civil‑rights protections or administrative steps they argue were moderate by the standards of his era; other statements from family and allies describe the phone remark as uncharacteristic [2] [6]. Available sources do not provide a definitive statement from Reagan beyond denials reported contemporaneously [2].
5. What the tape changes about legacy debates
Journalists and historians say the restored audio revived debate about how to weigh private language against public policy: the tape provides direct evidence of racial animus in private conversation, and commentators link it to longer‑term effects on Black poverty and incarceration under Reagan’s policies, though causation and interpretation remain contested among scholars [4] [5]. The disclosure has prompted institutions and publishers to reexamine honors, naming, and the broader cultural memory of Reagan [1] [4].
6. Limits of the evidence and remaining questions
The evidence in the available sources is strong about this particular racist remark [3] [1], but sources also note ambiguity about whether a single private utterance should by itself define a complex public legacy; historians differ on how to weigh rhetoric versus policy [5] [6]. Available sources do not provide exhaustive documentation of every private remark or every motive behind specific Reagan policies; those gaps shape ongoing scholarly disagreement [6].
7. Bottom line for readers
The factual record in released archival tapes shows Reagan using an explicitly racist slur in 1971 [3] [1]. Scholars and critics place that slur in a broader pattern of opposition to certain civil‑rights measures and judicial choices [5] [6], while defenders point to other elements of his record and family testimony that argue for more nuance [2]. The debate now centers less on whether the tape exists than on how that private language should be integrated into assessments of Reagan’s public legacy [4] [1].
Limitations: this report relies on the supplied sources; it does not attempt to adjudicate motive beyond documented speech, nor does it claim to summarize every scholarly view beyond those cited [1] [5] [6].