'Tis the greatest day of them all! Today is the day we all get to forget our proper English grammer and speak like Pirates. So avast ye!
--Patrick
Friday, September 19, 2008
Thursday, September 11, 2008
What is wrong with ideal?
George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, James Madison, Theodore Roosevelt, and Harry Truman are examples of some of the greatest president's this, or any other country, have ever had. What is it about these men that set them apart? That qualified themselves to be considered among the greats of our time? I could easily apply this to all of these great men, but I just want to look at the leadership style of George Washington and I think we will find the answer.
George Washington is probably the only man ever elected president who did not want to be president. At the end of the war all he wanted to do was retire in peace. James Madison had to compel him to attend the Constitutional Convention, knowing that the Convention would only happen if Washington attended. When the Convention ended Washington once again wanted to retire in peace, but the public would not have it. They wanted him to be there leader. They did not have to decide on an election between two candidates. They could choose from the entire population at the time, and they choose George Washington.
At the end of his first term in office Washington was done. He was ready for his retirement. He was tired of the power and responsibility that came with it. When the election rolled around he was shocked to discover that no one would run against him. This happened two more times. Nobody wanted to replace the man as president. The people realized that the best man to have in office was the only man who did not want the office. Washington understood that just because he held the office of president, it did not necessarily mean that he would have any power over the people. He knew that the people could not be compelled to follow him, but that he would have to lead in a way that would make them want to follow him. The same reason his troops were willing to follow him into Valley Forge was the reason that the citizens of the new country should follow him, because he earned the right to be their leader. His heart was not focused on the things of the world, nor did he aspire to the honors of men. He understood that his right to the presidency was only legitimate if he lived according to righteous principles. The people completely trusted him to govern the affairs of state. He was not accountable to them. He did not feel the pressure to make decisions based on what the people wanted, but based on what he thought was best for the country. They trusted him, and followed him. Period. They felt the need to follow him, and knew that if they did not they would be held accountable for it. The people were accountable to him, and he did not betray their trust. He earned it. Without being compelled the people followed him.
I know some people disagree with my position. Arguing that the Lord's way of governing and the world's way should not and cannot be combined. Yes, it is an ideal, something that is highly unlikely to happen in our world, but if we do not believe in it then it will not happen. Somewhere out there is another George Washington, but this man will only come to power if we find him and believe in him.
My problem with having a president who is accountable to us is that it leads to self-serving interests. Few vote for the candidate they feel will best serve the country. The tendency is to elect those who will best serve the selfish needs of people. Immigrants vote for those with lax immigration policies. People who want abortions vote for those who support abortions. Gays vote for those who will let them marry. Because candidates want votes they will base their decisions on the whims and passions of the constituency. They will not base their decisions on what is best for the country, but what is best for them to remain in power. Only a president who is not directly accountable to the people can serve in the capacity we need him to; and the only president who would not have to be accountable to the people is one who has earned the right. One that has earned the respect and admiration of the country to the point that their loyalty flows without compulsion, like George Washington.
Think about it, and then read D&C121: 34-46. It is all about real leadership. Both in the church and out of it. Real leadership flows from leading in such a way that no one feels compelled to follow you. Why do we follow God? Because He executes perfectly the principles taught. Those who are true followers of God follow because they want to, they are never compelled. Why do we follow the prophet? Because he executes the principles taught. We are never compelled. Why do you follow your boss? The one boss you are loyal to? Because he executes these principles, and you are never compelled. Teachers, civic leaders, and even friends who we would follow anywhere. Why would we follow them? Because we want to, and we are never compelled. In face in many ways we feel we should be accountable to them, because of the way they lead. That is true leadership.
--Patrick
George Washington is probably the only man ever elected president who did not want to be president. At the end of the war all he wanted to do was retire in peace. James Madison had to compel him to attend the Constitutional Convention, knowing that the Convention would only happen if Washington attended. When the Convention ended Washington once again wanted to retire in peace, but the public would not have it. They wanted him to be there leader. They did not have to decide on an election between two candidates. They could choose from the entire population at the time, and they choose George Washington.
At the end of his first term in office Washington was done. He was ready for his retirement. He was tired of the power and responsibility that came with it. When the election rolled around he was shocked to discover that no one would run against him. This happened two more times. Nobody wanted to replace the man as president. The people realized that the best man to have in office was the only man who did not want the office. Washington understood that just because he held the office of president, it did not necessarily mean that he would have any power over the people. He knew that the people could not be compelled to follow him, but that he would have to lead in a way that would make them want to follow him. The same reason his troops were willing to follow him into Valley Forge was the reason that the citizens of the new country should follow him, because he earned the right to be their leader. His heart was not focused on the things of the world, nor did he aspire to the honors of men. He understood that his right to the presidency was only legitimate if he lived according to righteous principles. The people completely trusted him to govern the affairs of state. He was not accountable to them. He did not feel the pressure to make decisions based on what the people wanted, but based on what he thought was best for the country. They trusted him, and followed him. Period. They felt the need to follow him, and knew that if they did not they would be held accountable for it. The people were accountable to him, and he did not betray their trust. He earned it. Without being compelled the people followed him.
I know some people disagree with my position. Arguing that the Lord's way of governing and the world's way should not and cannot be combined. Yes, it is an ideal, something that is highly unlikely to happen in our world, but if we do not believe in it then it will not happen. Somewhere out there is another George Washington, but this man will only come to power if we find him and believe in him.
My problem with having a president who is accountable to us is that it leads to self-serving interests. Few vote for the candidate they feel will best serve the country. The tendency is to elect those who will best serve the selfish needs of people. Immigrants vote for those with lax immigration policies. People who want abortions vote for those who support abortions. Gays vote for those who will let them marry. Because candidates want votes they will base their decisions on the whims and passions of the constituency. They will not base their decisions on what is best for the country, but what is best for them to remain in power. Only a president who is not directly accountable to the people can serve in the capacity we need him to; and the only president who would not have to be accountable to the people is one who has earned the right. One that has earned the respect and admiration of the country to the point that their loyalty flows without compulsion, like George Washington.
Think about it, and then read D&C121: 34-46. It is all about real leadership. Both in the church and out of it. Real leadership flows from leading in such a way that no one feels compelled to follow you. Why do we follow God? Because He executes perfectly the principles taught. Those who are true followers of God follow because they want to, they are never compelled. Why do we follow the prophet? Because he executes the principles taught. We are never compelled. Why do you follow your boss? The one boss you are loyal to? Because he executes these principles, and you are never compelled. Teachers, civic leaders, and even friends who we would follow anywhere. Why would we follow them? Because we want to, and we are never compelled. In face in many ways we feel we should be accountable to them, because of the way they lead. That is true leadership.
--Patrick
Monday, September 8, 2008
In My Defense
Some of you have previously read my last entry may notice some differences in the end. Joseph brought up the fact that I was comparing the eternally insignificant office of president with that of the priesthood. I apologize to any who may have gotten this impression. I only wanted to demonstrate that the perfect organization and attributes of church government could easily be applied to secular government. Choice and accountability are essential to our progression as a nation, and who better to be accountable to than a good president?
--Patrick
--Patrick
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Leadership
The more I thought about what would make a good president the more I realized the leadership qualities we as Americans look for have become greatly skewed. We are looking for someone who will solve all our problems and make the world a better place. Leadership is not supposed to work that way. What we need is a leader who will inspire us to be better; who, as Joseph Smith once stated, "[teaches us] the principles, then let's [us] govern [ourselves]. Instead of a electing a president to fix our economy, we should elect a president who will teach us good economics and then let us fix it ourselves. A president who openly taught living within our means, honest business practices, and the importance of building a savings would be far more effective than one who tries to fix the economy through legislation. The president's role is the cheif of the executive branch, or the part of the government that executes. It should be his role to teach the law and then show the consequences of not obeying it. He should not create policy, enact policy, or try to change policy. He should teach, preach, expound and exhort.
Another thing I would like to see change is the accountablity of the president to the people. Why is it that a man who's primary position is to ensure that laws are followed is accountable to us? Shouldn't we be accountable to him? Shouldn't we have to report to him on our personal economic, social, and foreign policies? If he followed his true job as a leader we would become responsible to him for the way we followed what he told us, he would not be accountable to us.
It is my opinion that one man can't change the world, but one man can lead the world to change. Leadership principles taught in our church government would qualify any man to lead this nation. We need a president who can exercise persuasion, long-suffering, gentleness, meekness, love unfeigned, kindness, pure knowledge, who can reprove and show love. This is the type of president I would follow into battle, and who I would trust to lead our nation.
--Patrick
Another thing I would like to see change is the accountablity of the president to the people. Why is it that a man who's primary position is to ensure that laws are followed is accountable to us? Shouldn't we be accountable to him? Shouldn't we have to report to him on our personal economic, social, and foreign policies? If he followed his true job as a leader we would become responsible to him for the way we followed what he told us, he would not be accountable to us.
It is my opinion that one man can't change the world, but one man can lead the world to change. Leadership principles taught in our church government would qualify any man to lead this nation. We need a president who can exercise persuasion, long-suffering, gentleness, meekness, love unfeigned, kindness, pure knowledge, who can reprove and show love. This is the type of president I would follow into battle, and who I would trust to lead our nation.
--Patrick
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
