Автор неизвестен - A Warning

Trust me, though. This is not the same. In the history of American democracy, we have had undisciplined presidents. We have had incurious presidents. We have had inexperienced presidents. We have had amoral presidents. Rarely if ever before have we had them all at once. Donald Trump is not like his predecessors, everyone knows that. But his vices are more alarming than amusing. Any entertainment derived from seeing this sort of irreverent behavior in the West Wing quickly wears off and is replaced by lingering dread about what comment, tweet, or direct order might come next.

The character of a president should be of the utmost concern for citizens. We are ceding day-to-day control of the government to that person, after all. Along with it, we are delegating decisions that affect our children’s futures and our personal well-being. That is why it’s every American’s responsibility to assess the occupant of the Oval Office and consider the leader’s disposition and moral qualities, especially when deciding whether that person remains suited for the role. Before we look at any other aspect of Trump’s presidency, this is what we must do.

To judge a person’s character, we first must know what it is, how to measure it, and ultimately why it matters.

The debate about character is a philosophical one, specifically a branch of philosophy known as “ethics.” Ethics is the study of how a person should act, particularly toward others. That is where character comes in. People have written volumes on the subject and how it should be defined, but you know it when you see it. A person of character is someone who is upstanding, who is reliable, who carries him- or herself with dignity. A basic definition says character is “the mental and moral qualities distinctive to an individual,” but it’s not enough to have good morals. Your behavior must spring from them. Simply put, your moral code is your “software”—your belief system—that operates your “hardware”—your body and its actions.

The important question when looking at a president is: What should those moral qualities be? What are the ideal traits we expect a leader to demonstrate?

The question of character consumed the Ancient Greeks. Their greatest philosophers, including Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, all asked themselves, “What makes a man ‘good’?” A rough consensus emerged about core elements. These qualities came to be known as the “cardinal virtues”: wisdom, temperance, courage, and justice. They were deemed to be the behaviors a person needed in order to reach high moral standing.

A few hundred years later, another thinker took these virtues a step further. Cicero, a revered Roman luminary, was interested in more than just a man’s character. He wanted to explore a statesman’s character. The Roman Republic was in crisis, overrun with arrogant and dishonorable men, so Cicero decided to examine what moral qualities were needed in great leaders. Influenced by the philosophers before him, he wrote a seminal work, De Officiis (or “On Duties”). In the form of a letter addressed to his son, Cicero spelled out how a public servant should behave. His tome has since inspired great figures throughout world history, including America’s Founding Fathers.

What does this have to do with Donald Trump? Well, Cicero gave us a useful guide for measuring a leader’s character. His four-part rubric will sound familiar: (1) “understanding and acknowledging truth”; (2) “maintaining good fellowship with men, giving to every one his due, and keeping faith in contracts and promises”; (3) “greatness and strength of a lofty and unconquered mind”; and (4) “the order and measure that constitute moderation and temperance.” In short, it was a version of the cardinal virtues—wisdom, justice, courage, and temperance. His formula is as relevant in today’s fractured political climate as it was during the rockiest days of the Roman Republic, which is why we are going to use it to assess the current president.

Before we inspect Trump’s character, we need to ask ourselves whether it matters at all. As I said, the United States has been led by men who displayed less-than-model behavior during their presidencies, to put it mildly. They cheated on their wives and the public. They broke their promises. Yet these executives still managed to accomplish admirable feats to advance civil rights, spur economic growth, and defend the country against foreign enemies. Can’t Trump still do great deeds without being a man of impeccable character? If Trump is flawed, or deeply flawed, does it really make a difference?

The answer to both questions is “yes.”

Great deeds can be done by imperfect men. We just need to decide whether it’s worth it. Unscrupulous presidents have been successful at times, but it came at a cost. Was it worth it to elect James Buchanan, for example, a president who delayed the nation from plunging into civil war, but only by defending the institution of slavery and protecting the slave-holding interests of the South? In hindsight, most would say no. He should have had the spine and grit to confront the scourge of slavery. Buchanan is now considered to be one of the worst American presidents.

Our leaders don’t need to be superheroes. Most are far from it. However, we should invest in someone whose virtues outweigh their vices. A president must be equipped to do more good than harm for the people. His or her character may not inform every single decision, but it will shape their overall record, which is important because we depend on our president for a lot. We rely on the president to manage the largest enterprise in the world, the US government; to lead the nation through crises, whether it’s a natural disaster or an attack; and to set an agenda to move the country forward. Finally, we rely on the president to be a role model. Those who are exalted get emulated. When we put the chief executive on a pedestal, young people in particular will learn from the leader’s behavior, setting the tone for future civic engagement.

A man’s character is tested when he’s given power. That much we know from history. President Trump has been in power for several years, and he’s been thoroughly tested. The results are revealing. It’s been said that character is a tree, and reputation its shadow. The character of the president casts a long shadow across all Americans, and in time, his reputation will become our own. As you read this chapter ask yourself: Is this who we are? If not, is this who we want to be?

When I contemplate President Trump’s “wisdom,” I’m not talking about encyclopedic knowledge. Cicero said true wisdom doesn’t require knowing all the facts up front. Rather, it consists of “learning the truth,” an eagerness to seek the facts and to get to the root of an issue. He warned it is wrong to claim to know something you don’t, or to waste time on frivolous issues. It is “dishonorable to stumble, to wander, to be ignorant, and to be deceived.” In other words, a leader should not fall for “fake news” and assume something is true when it’s not.

Does Donald Trump possess these essential characteristics of wisdom?

Let’s start with a curious mind. Trump doesn’t have a deep bench of knowledge about how government works. He’s never served in it, and he’d never run for any office prior to the 2016 campaign. It would be unfair to expect him to understand all the nuances of the legislative process or how a large bureaucracy functions. What is troubling about the president is not that he came into office with so little information about how it runs. It’s that he’s done so little to try to learn more in order to do his job.