Can the tea party revive America’s higher law?

Leadership studies and Constitutional scholar Gary L. McDowell co-authors article in Jan. 16, 2011 Richmond Times-Dispatch that explores the staying power of the tea party movement.

The tea party movement is arguably one of the most exciting and promising developments in American politics in quite a long time.

At the most simplistic level, it is as if Richard Nixon’s great sullen and silent majority has finally been roused from its slumber of political indifference and is simply not going to take it anymore. But it also has the potential of being something much deeper than a mere guttural growl of dissatisfaction with the status quo.

The promised depth of the movement comes from its unapologetic insistence that it is, first and foremost, a constitutional movement, that it is committed to nothing less than the recovery of the Founders’ Constitution.

To demonstrate that commitment, the newly assembled Republicans in the 112th Congress began their work with the recitation of the Constitution itself. It was a gesture to make clear that to them the Constitution still matters.

But if the tea party movement €” and, by extension, the Republican congressional party €” is to prove that it is offering not mere symbolism but real and clear direction, it will take more than the mere recitation of our basic law. There will have to be a serious focus on exactly what the Founders’ Constitution means within the context of contemporary politics. … More

Conversations on Leadership touch on success, ethics, morality, democracy and more

The Jepson School of Leadership Studies each year is host to many of the world’s top scholars and deepest thinkers on matters related to leadership. Some of these august visitors from the 2009-10 academic year sat down with Jepson faculty members for short interviews about leadership. In addition to these brief interviews, many of these experts also give full lectures or serve on panels. Lectures may also be viewed online.

Conversations on Leadership

  • Steven Pinker on Leadership and Democracy
  • Irene Khan on Human Rights and Poverty
  • James MacGregor Burns on Leadership
  • Dambisa Moyo on Keys to Successful Leadership
  • Scholars’ Reflections on Haiti 
  • Father J. Bryan Hehir on Ethics of War
  • Jesse Prinz on Leadership and Morality
  • Robert Cialdini on Influence and Leadership
  • Patrician M.C. Brown on Leadership and Health Care

The Chilean Miners: A Heroism Narrative

The latest from UR professors Scott T. Allison and George R. Goethals, authors of Heroes: What They Do and Why We Need Them.

Chilean minersThe world seems hungry for heroes.  That appetite was on display when the Chilean miners were set free after 70 days being trapped under a half mile of rock and rubble.  At different times, all 33 miners, or their leader, Luis Urzua, or the rescuers, or the Chilean president, or the whole country seemed to be heroes.  An undoubtedly great event had taken place, and observers craved to identify the heroes of the historic rescue.  The individual who seemed to be the most obvious was Urzua.  As the foreman of the crew locked underground, he seemed to have performed magnificently as the group's leader.

Most impressive seemed to be Urzua's ability to get the miners through the first seventeen days, before a probe finally reached them.  During that time the miners had no way to knowing whether they would ever be rescued.   Urzua persuaded the men to stringently ration their food and water.  They had enough for 48 hours, but Urzua anticipated that the rescue might take much longer than that.  At first the men limited themselves to a few bites of tuna fish, some fruit, and a half glass of milk each day.  But as the days stretched on, the men were issued rations only every 48 hours.  Finally, the outside world made contact with the men, and hopes rose that they might in good time be rescued.  Initial estimates were four months.  Chilean minersBut the efficiency of the rescue operation was truly magnificent.  In that context, the behavior of the miners as a whole and of Urzua as leader seemed flawless.

But then other information trickled in that suggested that their story was not so simple or so neat.  As the men faced starvation, and possible cannibalism, discord and despair descended on the group.  While Urzua tried to maintain cohesiveness, subgroups began to form, each with its own agenda.  Some planned their own escape.  Petty squabbles and even fist fights broke out.  Some men refused to get out of bed, seemingly overcome by hopelessness and depression.  As food became more limited, and the men had to drink filthy, polluted water, their bodies began to consume themselves.  And their minds just waited for death. Continue reading The Chilean Miners: A Heroism Narrative

Muhammad Ali: The Odyssey of a Heroic Champion

The latest from UR professors Scott T. Allison and George R. Goethals, authors of Heroes: What They Do and Why We Need Them.

Declaring oneself a hero doesn't ordinarily do the trick.  But former Heavyweight Champion Muhammad Ali is an international hero in the eyes of sports fans and ordinary citizens around the world.  Ali began calling himself "The Greatest" early in his career, and clearly alienated many.  Now people generally realize that his braggadocio was always part of the act, something that enabled him to perform at his best in the ring, and entertain and inspire millions.

As we describe in our HEROES book, Ali's odyssey to heroism was complicated.  But by the time of the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta, Georgia, there was no question as to which American medal winner would light the torch at that year's Games.  Two years later, it was only a bit of a surprise when corporate America fully endorsed Ali by putting him on a box of Wheaties cereal, The Breakfast of Champions.  The citation on the box credited Ali's impact in sports and beyond:  "he was a courageous man who fought for his beliefs" and "became an even larger force outside the ring with his humanitarian efforts." Continue reading Muhammad Ali: The Odyssey of a Heroic Champion

Secretariat: The hero who obliterated Triple Crown records

With all the interest in the new Disney film Secretriat, consider these thoughts from Legendary Heroes By Scott T. Allison and George R. Goethals, authors of Heroes: What They Do and Why We Need Them.

Secretariat’s performance is noteworthy in the context of the nation’s state of mind. Sporstwriter George Plimpton says he was the “only honest thing in the country” in 1973. With Vietnam and Watergate, our national confidence was at a low point. And, along came a horse. Much like the 2003 film Seabiscuit, which spun the yarn of a scrappy, underdog of a horse that gave people pride and hope during the Great Depression, Secretariat the movie may have good timing as well.  

SecretariatThe current cinema often reveals either the creation or the reworking of hero narratives.  Drama in the movies emerges from the struggles that make heroes so engaging, especially underdog heroes.  But it's not always the underdog that becomes the hero.  No better example is that of a non-human hero about to be celebrated in film this coming October.  That individual is the racehorse Secretariat.

Secretariat burst onto the national consciousness in 1973.  It had been twenty-five years since the great horse Citation had won racing's triple crown: the Kentucky Derby, the Preakness, and the Belmont Stakes. After Secretariat won the first two races, millions of people rooted for him to win the Belmont, the final trial.  As race day approached, he was the favorite, not the underdog.  But in some ways the challenge of the Triple Crown itself made him an underdog and the sentimental as well as the betting favorite.

Secretariat was born in Caroline County, Virginia in 1970.  As a two-year old he enjoyed spectacular success and was voted horse of the year, a rarity for so young a colt.  A very large chestnut horse with distinctive white markings, he was nicknamed "Big Red."  His fame slowly spread outside of the racing world.  His great strength and grace inspired many. Continue reading Secretariat: The hero who obliterated Triple Crown records

Christopher Columbus: A Globally Transforming Figure

The latest from Legendary Heroes By Scott T. Allison and George R. Goethals, authors of Heroes: What They Do and Why We Need Them

With Columbus Day fast approaching, we've been encouraged to write about Christopher Columbus and his unsurpassed impact on the world we live in today.  Recently, we proposed a distinction between a hero or villain whose influence on the world is very short-lived (an ephemeral or transitory figure) and a hero or villain who forever changes an entire society (a transforming figure).  Whether you believe his impact to be positive or negative, Christopher Columbus and his 1492 voyage to the Americas left an indelible mark on nearly every corner of the globe.

Christopher ColumbusTransforming events do not take place in an historical vacuum.  To understand Columbus's motivation to establish a shipping route to Asia, we must look to the city of Constantinople, now Istanbul, Turkey.  For centuries, as the capital of the Orthodox Christian Byzantine Empire, Constantinople had been an important center for trade between Europe and Asia.  But in 1453, the Muslim Ottoman Empire conquered Constantinople, forcing Europeans to search for a sea route to Asia that would bypass the Muslims.

Interestingly, Columbus may never have attempted his initial voyage had he not held several misconceptions about global geography.  Christopher ColumbusHe underestimated the circumference of the earth; he overestimated the size of the Asian landmass; and he believed that Japan lay much farther east of China than in reality.  He did, however, have an accurate understanding of the prevailing easterly trade winds that would propel his ships from the Canary Islands to lands far to the west.  With about 90 men and sailing under the flag of Spain, Columbus's three ships were fortunate to avoid both tropical storms and the "doldrums" €” pockets of sea where there is neither current nor wind.

Most of us know the rest of the story.  On October 12, 1492, Columbus and his men landed on the island of Guanahani, and called it San Salvador.  Although he failed to reach Asia, Columbus made the western hemisphere known to Europeans, forever altering human history on a global scale.  Until very recently, generations of Americans grew up learning that Columbus "discovered" America – a Eurocentric notion that ignored the presence of 50 million indigenous people inhabiting the Americas in 1492.  Moreover, other Europeans, such as the Norsemen, had ventured to America 500 years earlier.  "Columbus's claim to fame isn't that he got there first," explains historian Martin Dugard, "it's that he stayed."

The heroic interpretation of Columbus is that his daring voyage into unknown waters required courage and conviction.  In 1989 U.S. President George H. W. Bush said that Columbus "set an example for us all by showing what monumental feats can be accomplished through perseverance and faith."  Christopher Columbus Extraordinary changes resulted from Columbus's voyages.  The Columbian Exchange was established, referring to the two-way transfer of culture, foods, plants, and animals between the continents of Europe and the Americas.  The Americas were introduced to crops such as wheat, rice, coffee, bananas, and olives, and animals such as horses, cows, pigs, and chickens. Europeans also received from America many important crops, such as corn, potatoes, tomatoes, lima beans, squash, peanuts, cassava, cacao, and pineapple.

The past few decades have also seen Columbus cast into the role of villain.  Deadly European diseases were introduced into the Americas, including diphtheria, measles, smallpox, and malaria.  The Americas, in turn, contributed a virulent form of syphilis to Europe.  All told, Native American populations suffered to a much greater degree than did Europeans.  Epidemics wiped out 80 to 90% of the native populations in Hispaniola, and European settlers enslaved many Native Americans.  In fairness to Columbus, the worst of these problems occurred after he died, under the watch of later European governors and colonists.

In preparing this blog post, we googled "Christopher Columbus hero villain" and obtained over 100 websites debating Columbus's status as hero or villain.  It's clearly a muddied picture.  All we can say with certainty is that Columbus's voyages had a permanently transforming effect on the world.  "Every hero is somebody else's villain," said Felipe Fernandez-Armesto, a scholar and author of several books related to Columbus, including 1492: The Year the World Began.  "Heroism and villainy are just two sides of the same coin."

One of our readers suggested that we profile Christopher Columbus.  We welcome your suggestions as well.  Please send your ideas to Scott T. Allison (sallison@richmond.edu) or to George R. Goethals (ggoethal@richmond.edu).

A New Voice on the American Way of Life: Scholar’s data-rich book suggests new ways of seeing the suburbs

Suburban living is the most popular choice for the good life for Americans. But must the strip mall and the eight-lane highway define the quality of 21st-century American life?

That is a central question about the modern metropolis€”with its center city core, suburbs, and exurbs€”that political scientist and leadership scholar Thad Williamson explores.

In his new book “Sprawl, Justice, and Citizenship: The Civic Costs of the American Way of Life,” Williamson takes a data-rich look at the world of soccer moms, gated communities, cul de sacs, big-box stores and gas-gulping commutes.

What makes this book fresh is, first, its use of a landmark 30,000-person survey to examine life in America today, and second, the nuanced portrait that emerges from this study. On the one hand, Williamson shows how sprawling neighborhoods contribute to diminished civic life and increased social inequality.

For instance, suburban residents (controlling for other factors) are less likely to belong to a political organization or to have participated in a protest. On the other hand, suburban dwellers are happier than urbanites with their communities and more likely to trust their neighbors. These varied findings point to the following paradox: Suburban sprawl is damaging to equality, damaging to political engagement, and damaging to the environment yet Americans (by and large) like it anyway. "Finding ways to preserve what is good in America's metropolitan areas while addressing the long-standing inequalities between cities and suburbs that have produced endless sprawl is one of the most pressing and challenging leadership problems of this generation," Williamson says.

Thad Williamson is Assistant Professor of Leadership Studies and Political Science at the Jepson School of Leadership Studies, the University of Richmond. His next book is on the politics of Richmond, Va.

[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/yLYL0yzB3YE" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]

Kaine, Obama COO, company CEOs and scholars present on Evolving Perspectives on Ethics

Highlights, articles, videos and photos from: Evolving Perspectives on Ethics

It’s a rare occasion when scholars from varied disciplines meet with business leaders, non-profit leaders, laywers and professionals to discuss doing the right things. That’s what happened last month at the “Evolving Perspectives on Ethics” conference at the University of Richmond.

“Ethics is at the heart of leadership. For centuries, philosophers have exchanged opinions about right and wrong but only recently have scholars collaborated to integrate their research in fields such as sociology, psychology, social justice, leadership studies, business and the law,” said Dean Sandra J. Peart of the Jepson School of Leadership Studies.

Keynote speakers and panelists addressed many themes, including respect, collaboration and identity.

The Evolving Perspectives on Ethics Symposium is a collaborative effort of the Jepson School of Leadership Studies, the Robins School of Business, and the University of Richmond School of Law at the University of Richmond in Richmond, Va. The symposium is made possible by a grant from the Richard Davoud Donchian Foundation, dedicated to “building the framework for intelligent, ethical and compassionate leadership.”

Bios and conference details

Photos from the conference

Ethics in an Uncivil Age

USA Today published this opinion piece by Jepson School of Leadership Studies Dean Sandra J. Peart in the current College edition. 

Almost 20 years ago, the Jepson School of Leadership Studies opened at the University of Richmond in a bold initiative to teach for and about leadership.

Today, many would claim that the experiment has been a huge success: Leadership is woven into the fabric of campuses across the United States and around the world.

Yet even as additional colleges and universities have opted to teach for and about leadership and citizenship, incivility in public debate – among politicians, journalists, artists and many others who speak publically on various topics – has flourished.  Why? Because key public debates take place without reference to any ethical framework. 

How is the lack of training in ethical reasoning linked to incivility in public debate? Without a coherent set of arguments in favor of one policy or another, debate descends into insult and innuendo. 

We see this in highly emotional reactions to events like the proposed building of an Islamic center near Ground Zero and plans of a pastor of a tiny church in Florida to burn copies of the Koran.  Not only are discussions heated, but these matters also raise deep questions about ethical foundations.  

So, too, debates about the role of markets and government intervention in society are factionalized. Critics of capitalism rarely hit the mark because arguments fail to provide a clear critique of markets on utilitarian or other grounds. Those who defend markets often rely on efficiency arguments but fail to provide a consistent rationale that gives efficiency ethical weight. And, in the end, debates about capitalism, markets, taxes, income distribution, bail outs and subsidies often turn into claims that one side is right and good and the other side is wrong and bad.

Precisely what Adam Smith worried about – the factionalization of public discourse – is the state of our uncivil times.  In 1759, Smith wrote that all people seek approval.  More than this, he held that our desire for approval means that we seek the approbation of an impartial spectator: conscience.  We want both to be praised and praiseworthy.  The key to acting in accord with rules of common civility, of course, is praiseworthiness, acting in such a way as to deserve praise. 

For some reason, many who seek public office or to influence public policy and public opinion no longer can abide the other side.  Perhaps they never really were civil, but recently the problem of incivility seems to have become more pronounced.  Smith suggested that this happens when people join groups, such as political parties, and seek the approval that comes from pleasing one side at the expense of the other.  In doing so, in pleasing one side with their wit and debating skills, they cross a line from praiseworthy behavior to sycophancy.

Voluntary exchange is generally mutually beneficial. But if coercion or taking is involved, one person benefits at the expense of another. When people debate in such a way that the point of the debate is only to win or to win by humiliating the other, debate turns from being an exchange of ideas in which both may gain to a zero-sum game we win by disparaging the other.  We treat them as if they were unworthy of respect: We seek to humiliate them publicly, we call them names.  Disagreements about policy – about what is right and just and about moral worth – play out in increasingly harsh tones. 

At such a time, there is a need for another bold educational endeavor:  teaching ethics across the curriculum.  This sort of educational commitment needs modest resources. Schools and faculty are in place already.  What is required is modeling ethics for all to see.  On campuses across the country, we must help students learn to manage competing moral claims, which means they must first at least hear and not dismiss the other side.      

Though many of the resources are in place, the academy would need substantially to reform itself.  Certainly there is more talk on campuses today about collaboration than a couple of decades ago. But we squabble amongst ourselves; we often fail to listen with respect to the other side(s); and we too rarely teach for and about ethics. As a consequence, the young men and women who graduate from colleges and universities have no reason to be other than utterly dismissive of the other side.

At a time when public disagreements play out uncivilly, the academy might take a lead in teaching for and about ethics. Ethics knows no disciplinary boundary.  It intersects with the study of the law, leadership, business, government, science, history and civics. It lends itself to practical lessons, internships, doing. 

Teaching ethics obviously does not guarantee that university graduates will successfully navigate today's many challenges to ethical decision making.  Yet a student who has been given some of the tools to face these challenges and who has tried to put them in play in the "real world," enters the world outside the university with the potential to overcome them successfully and, at a minimum, an appreciation for the sorts of challenges that exist out there. This is why we say "for and about" at Jepson.

It goes without saying that ethics knows no political boundaries.  Scandals abound in both parties. Perhaps then the first lesson for the student of ethics is that we are all subject to temptation and so it is important to understand how best to deal with those temptations. Adam Smith was not the first moral theorist to study the effects of various institutional frameworks on ethical decision making; our students will be better served if they think deeply about how ethical choices are influenced by the institutional framework of life. 

Sandra J. Peart is an economist and dean of the Jepson School of Leadership Studies at the University of Richmond.