If The Words Of Our Leaders Don't Matter, Then Why Are The Streets On Fire?

We live in a painfully divided and partisan time, highlighted by an arguably unprecedented President. In the reactions of President Trump’s supporters to the impact of his escalating, inflammatory public rhetoric, we find a unique challenge to some usually conventional positions. Confronted with accusations of the present danger of the President’s words, some of his most thoughtful supporters argue that it misses the point. They suggest that what he says — while admittedly inelegant and suboptimal — is meaningless, it is only what he does that matters, and that any disagreement not based on specific enacted policies is an ad hominem attack, a criticism based on his personality rather than the facts.

It is an argument unique to this particular president, made necessary by the indefensibility of his frequent pronouncements and transparent falsehoods, and his abject and deliberate absence of constructive leadership. It suggests that the position of President has no more influence over the Nation’s (or World’s) actions and reactions than that of an effective legislator. While I would comfortably argue with his actions as well, it is this argument about the critical importance of his words that I hold can — must — be loudly challenged conceptually and, most frighteningly, may well be disproven again in the months to come at the nation’s painful expense.

At its core, the American form of democracy purports to be representational. The terms of our elected officials are notoriously short — two years for Congress, four for the President, six for the Senate, and various for state and local positions — a conceit intended to create responsiveness on the part of those officials to the will and desires of their constituents. More often than not, the duration of a term is insufficient to reasonably evaluate the impact of the actions of the officeholders; the decision for retaining or dismissing them from office is based on superficial outcomes, argued for projections or the attendant, pervasive propaganda.

As such, the ability of officials to hold power is based on their ability to convince a majority that their priorities and judgment are aligned with that of the voters, a group of enormous variance in sophistication, awareness, and focus. In recent years, the task of reaching across those variances has been deemed too difficult, and the political parties have resorted to broad forms of identity and generalized objectives, distinctions that are often without substance, but lend themselves to sloganeering and bumper sticker ideology.

As an example, ask a hundred self-professed conservatives what they stand for, and they’ll respond reflexively with terms like fiscal responsibility, a smaller, less intrusive government, free markets, and perhaps some social values… then they’ll tell you that they actively support the current administration, who have practiced the absolute opposite. Ask a hundred liberals what they stand for, and… well, the list would be particularly long and often contradictory these days, but it would inevitably include the antithesis of whatever this President purports to stand for.

Wonkish Minority

The reality is that — for all but a tiny, wonkish minority — neither side actually reads, much less understands what the specific legislations are. The great majority of those paying more than passing attention is disinclined to reflect on nuances, preferring to be informed by a combination of the abbreviated national coverage, perhaps flavored by hyper-partisan commentators… and the clips and quotes of the leaders of the party that they follow.

What we as a nation follow, absorb, and react to are the words issued by our various leaders, edited by the media and dispensed repetitively for digestion. It is by those words that we elect our representatives; it is by those words that we form opinions on the policies and pronouncements of the day; it is by those words that we actively support, or object to and work against, the direction that the country is purported to be pointed towards. It is not by the policies themselves, which are only understood from the cliff notes provided by the partisans. It is not by a stated ideology, since the specifics of the ideologies are fuzzy and frequently redirected towards momentary objectives.

It is by the sound bites — carefully crafted, poll-tested, and delivered — that the nation is motivated and triggered. In the final analysis, it is these words (and our predisposition as to how to interpret them) that most often are all that matter.

Perhaps most importantly — how and why it matters today and maybe defining for tomorrow:

The nation, the world, sits on a thousand edges, all razor-sharp, all critical. There is the pandemic, which still has the ability to substantially alter this generation and the U.S. standing in the world. There is the economic crisis, which will likely transform (in presently unknowable ways) the future parameters of our economy, and create critical problems that we will be dominated by tomorrow. There is the potential for a massive reshuffling of the world order, with an opportunistic Russia, an ascendant China (and Africa), a cracking Europe, and a still smoldering the Middle East among other equally dynamic areas. There is the rapidly expanding factor of global climate change, potentially altering the calculus of alliances, power, and economies in ways beyond nationalism. There is the technological revolution, the coming impact of advances in AI, in physics, in the potential manipulation of what makes us human and defines our existence. There are dozens of other major impacts, potential or real, that each could leap up on that list.

The direction that the United States will take — and in so doing, the role that it will play in the leadership of the coming world — will be determined in large part by the nature of our leadership’s responses to those crises. How we handle the next 18 to 24 months will matter exponentially, beginning with the challenges of the management of the virus and the directly related economic issues. If the U.S. fails to properly balance the control of the virus’ impact with the resuscitation of the economy, we will continue our already meaningful withdrawal from the world stage, and preclude the best of the possible solutions for the massive list of pending problems.

It is a fraught time, an important moment in world history and the role of the United States in much of it can be, should be, and likely will be, determinative.

In the immediate moment, we have a deeply hurting and conflicted populace that could easily buckle under the weight of its myriad challenges. When you consider that well more than 30 million people — about 20% of the nation’s entire labor force — have seen their employment changed overnight; when you consider that the nation has been inflamed and driven to partisan excess, a toxic environment where perceived enemies are everywhere; when you consider the seemingly endless lines at food banks, the desperation of a collapse that cut the legs out of those least able to respond across the country; when you consider the enormity of the impending political, economic and legislative decisions… the opportunity for internal conflict, for literal violence in our streets and disruption in our cities on a massive scale is higher than at any time in our lifetimes.

It is with an understanding of what a lit match means to a pool of gasoline, that we must look at the President’s words most critically. The role of leadership in encouraging the nation to unite, to sacrifice, to respect authority, and to trust its dictates (to whatever degree that can be recovered) cannot be overstated. Equally, the potential for leadership to feed division, to elevate the risks of active confrontation, to diminish in a thousand ways the ability of the country to respond to offered solutions and directions, is enormous and critical. It is in that moment, in that context, that we must find the President’s words far more meaningful than his actions, particularly when those words directly contradict and defeat the intentions of his own crafted policies and programs.

Realities Behind the Gamesmanship and Falsehoods

America must reject, loudly and publicly, the failed and politically motivated pronouncements of this administration. The media must, clearly and without bias, help the nation to best understand the realities behind the gamesmanship and falsehoods. The political universe must find room to withstand the artificial pressures of mob rule and govern through these crises for the far greater masses of people who will in fact determine the actual success or failure of the government’s laborers.

There is no more time for watching and equivocation. The nation must pull together, must move toward the best possible solutions as one. We must accept sacrifice and share support for those most affected without hesitation. Whether or not we understand the full magnitude of what is before us, we are being challenged as we have rarely been, and history strongly suggests that the key to our rising up and surviving, even succeeding, will be largely the emerging voices of true leaders and patriots, the words that ultimately resonate and motivate.

Sadly, our current President has failed, and continues to fail, utterly in that regard. He has consistently demonstrated that his intentions and instincts are directly in opposition to the emergence of a united country, and the nation is being deeply endangered by his office. We must find a way to overcome his inadequacy, and to empower leadership that elevates rather than demeans and foments confrontation; it is entirely possible that our futures, and the futures of the coming generations, will depend on it.