There is no precise English word for this collection of fond and often thoughtful essays on Ronald Reagan that the late president’s former political operative, Michael Deaver, has wrought. In academia it would be called a Festschrift, a term borrowed from German to describe a celebration of a professor’s intellectual contributions, often penned by his colleagues and students.

In a very real sense, this is entirely appropriate for a man whose political career was – first, last, and always – about ideas. Derided though he famously was by opponents, who questioned both the depth and breadth of his thinking, Reagan was a man utterly comfortable in and completely conversant with the world of political economy. As the “Great Communicator,” he defined his terms and discussed them in a language that was more redolent of Main Street than Harvard Square. But his guiding principles derived from the classics, including Adam Smith and other heroes of the Scottish Enlightenment, as well as latter-day masters like Milton Friedman.

Even Reagan’s vaunted, and much lampooned, anti-communism was rooted in his firm faith that the command economy was decadent and doomed. Here, as in so many other areas, he was way ahead of some celebrated eggheads, including John Kenneth Galbraith, not to mention platoons of economists who worked for the federal government in the 1980s.

Granted, Reagan’s critique of communism also contained elements of his equally developed philosophy concerning the nature of God and the nature of Man. Here, too, he was adept at distilling the essence of the thing. Everyone – except the communists themselves and even a fair number of them, it turns out – knew it was, indeed, an “evil empire.” They just didn’t want to talk about it.

Reagan talked about it a great deal, and then he joined forces with a Polish pope and a large supporting cast to drive the whole dreadful apparatus into the ground. Lest we never forget, hundreds of millions of people live or will live in freedom as a consequence of Reagan’s ideas and convictions.

As one small measure of appreciation, we have this book, which only confirms the profound and protean nature of Reagan’s influence on the modern conservative movement. There are paleos and neos and libertarians and a goodly number of former Democrats. This latter group includes names like commentator Michael Barone, academic Marvin Olasky, and former congressman J.C. Watts Jr., who might be described as being in “recovery” from their former liberalism.

As with all such collections, the quality of the contributions varies. The professional writers, like Robert Bartley, the late editorial page editor of the Wall Street Journal, and columnist Robert Novak, provide eloquent tribute that also draws important lessons about the way they think the world works. Those who were with Reagan from the beginning, like former Attorney General Edwin Meese III and policy adviser Martin Anderson, tend to the specifics of his political record and achievement.

Some of the politicians, predictably, talk about themselves. Oh well. Reagan, who had enormous stores of good humor and fun, probably would have been the first one to get the joke, and point it out in his genial, self-deprecating way.

Two of my favorite selections use third parties effectively to make their points. Film critic Michael Medved notes that his wife, a clinical psychologist, often points out that most successful people choose conservative values in their private lives, regardless of their political orientation. “From their elegant mansions in the Berkeley hills, these prominent (U. of C.) academics may rant about the need for redistributing wealth or breaking down the tyranny of patriarchal marriage. But when it comes to redistributing their own luxury cars … or assigning their daughters … to communal living arrangements … these advocates of brave new worlds will seldom live up to the logic of their public pronouncements.”

Radio host G. Gordon Liddy, who had some Watergate problems that are not referenced in his biographical note, refers to a conversation he had, prior to welfare reform, with the late actor James Cagney. Cagney describes a childhood so poor that he had to share a single bed with his brother, and they often were hungry. His dream was to be a performer, his brother’s to be a doctor; both achieved prominence in their chosen fields. His conclusion: “‘You know, Gordon, today with the welfare system, with one hand they give you the check and with the other hand they take away your dream.'”

These are the kind of observations and anecdotes in which Reagan delighted. He made his political opponents crazy with them, and he used them in an exceptionally artful way to form a deep and enduring connection with the American people.

Among the dozens of people who agreed to write about why they are Reagan conservatives, there undoubtedly is considerable disagreement over some of the fine points of policy. As Mr. Deaver himself notes in his introduction, “I’ve never been viewed as a ‘movement conservative.'” That they congregate so comfortably in the Reagan orbit is further evidence of the man’s enormous influence and legacy.

Mr. Willcox last wrote in these pages on the clergy.