Throughout
Stanley Renshons' book, High Hopes: The
Clinton Presidency and the Politics of Ambition, the president's ability to
govern has to do with three main concepts:
ambition, courage, and integrity.
Proving this, Renshon believes that the presidents psychology explains
everything. "By examining the
range of choices available to the president as well as those he selects, both
within and across circumstances, one can begin to discern the underlying
patterns of psychology that shapes his behavior" (4). I tend to agree with Renshon when he states
that Clintons' psychology has a lot to do with how he reacts to a given
situation and performs all tasks
bestowed upon him.
"The term
character is derived from the Greek word meaning 'engraving'" (38). It can be defined as a trait or distinctive
combination of traits. Bill Clinton's
personality, beliefs, and attitude are a very distinctive part of his character. As Renshon states, "Character
shapes
beliefs, information processing, and, ultimately, styles of behavior. It is therefore deeply embedded in the
foundation of psychological functioning" (38). The three elements of character that Renshon states as being the "core" factors
of a persons character are: ambition,
character integrity, and relatedness.
Ambition is a
strong element is one's character which can be defined as; a persons
achievement and self regard. I tend to
disagree with Renshon, when he states that their is a danger with ambition, it
"reinforces their sense of being special... it may facilitate their
grandiosity" (40). According to
Microsoft Bookshelf '95, grandiosity is someone or something that is
characterized by the greatness of scope of intent. Renshon says that childhood grandiosity is
the foundation of adult ambition and that this is all instituted by a person's
parents. I believe that a person's
ambition is something that should be elaborated on more often. It shows a person's moral and ethical
beliefs.
A person's
integrity is an important element when shaping a person's ambition and
relatedness, according to Renshon.
Throughout the book, when Renshon refers to a person's integrity, in
actuality he is referring to their honesty and how well they adhere to commendable
values. The reason he is using the
vocable, character integrity is, the term shares the same perspectives but uses
a more "psychologically grounded perspective" (41). He believes that ideals are an important
part of the word integrity's definition.
He states that they are the framework for interpersonal and personal
ethics, they show how a person conducts themselves when dealing with many
different types of situations, they are a person's goals. "Ideals are aspirations that are often
easier to hold in the abstract than they are to live by the face of real-world
temptations and disappointments" (41). I feel that one's ideals are
obtained early on in one's life. In
Clinton's experiences, those who influenced him and prepossessed his ideals the
most were his mother and stepfather. A president's
integrity, or lack of, suggests his basic motivations, skills, and ideals into
an coherent understanding of who he really is.
When one speaks
of relatedness, I feel that they are referring to one's relationships with
others and how it is formed. Renshon used a very interesting quote from Freud,
which he first stated in 1921.
The contrast
between individual psychology and social or group psychology, which at first
glance may seem to be full of significance , loses a great deal of it's sharpness
when it is examined more closely...In the individual's mental life someone else
is invariably involved, as a model as in object, as a helper, as an
opponent: and so from the very first
individual psychology...is at the same time social psychology as well (qtd. in 46).
Through the use
of this quote, Renshon was able to prove that from the start, "analytic
theory stated that the others are always central to an individual's
psychological development and functioning" (46).
Every since Clinton was a child, he was always
involved in many activities. He had to
always come out on top and be the best of the best, he was always full of
ambition. Throughout his presidency,
Clinton has also shown to be a very ambitious man. After an intense three hour meeting with the
president, Alan Greenspan said, "He
wouldn't need a chief of staff. He would
be his own. The president-elect was not
only engaged, he was totally engrossed (56).
Even though I feel that having a lot of
ambition is a positive quality in a person, I have noticed that there are also
a few downfalls to it. Renshon feels
that there are four skills that have facilitated Clinton's ambition. They are:
a high level of physical and emotional energy, the ability to invest in
one's work, a high level of understanding, and the ability to express one's
self and to engage in meaningful conversation.
Renshon says that, "a president who feels
he can or must do everything will not be able to delegate and will have
problems setting appropriate limits for himself and others" (57). He also states that since the president is so
motivated to be unconditionally involved, he runs the risk of overextending
himself both physically and psychologically.
Another complaint
that has been made about Clinton's ambition, is his need and ability to
"wing it." Critics say that
since Clinton is so intelligent, he has a great advantage. This great ability allows him to rely on his
ability to pull something together at the last minute, and has been fairly
dependable in the past. However, Renshon
feels that for a president this a potentially dangerous psychology.
Intelligence is not equivocal with good
decision making, or the level he applies himself, these are matters of judgment
and character. Intelligence also doesn't
guarantee that a situation is always going to go the way it was planned. Just because he is president, doesn't mean he
won't make mistakes, but it alleviates the chances that it will reoccur. Understanding that once in a while he will
make mistakes, although he is not the type of man to openly admit it, Clinton
began his term by stretching the limits of government.
In the recent
past we have learned again the hard lessons that there are limits to what
government can do-indeed, limits to what people can do. We live in a world in which limited
resources, limited knowledge and limited wisdom must grapple with the problems
of staggering complexity (66).
I feel that this
quote has more to do with Clinton protecting himself and all of his decisions
throughout all of his term, instead of admitting there was a problem.
Taking his ambition to the limit, Clinton
proposed that he was "a president who would return to traditional values
and who, in discussing the importance of personal responsibility, seemed to be
conveying an appreciation of the limits of government" (67). This new approach that Clinton swept his
nomination away with, is commonly being referred to as a New Democrat. Through this approach Clinton believed he
understood the limits of government, but, upon gaining office he attempted to
launch an, "ambitious personal and public agenda" (68).
"Character integrity reflects our fidelity
to our own ideals as we pursue our ambitions and forge out identities"
(69). Realistically and psychologically
a president must be committed to his own ideals and values. It seems to be very important that a
president's integrity reflects his ability to maintain boundaries. Renshon ultimately refers to two specific
questions that can help one determine about character integrity: Is Clinton honest? Can Clinton be trusted?
When examining the president's integrity, there
are four interrelated dimensions that must be examined. The first is the president's ideals and
values; where he draws the line that "separates right from wrong, yes and
no" (73). The last three concern
fidelity and follow through, president's own fidelity, and last is the concerns
the president's degree of self confidence in himself and his personal identity.
Political identity requires a clear, general
consistent set of ideas and values. When
one refers to the "traditional Democrat, "New Deal liberal,
"goldwater conservatives," or "new Democrat," according to Renshon,
they are all relatively the same basic idea.
Clinton and Gore have stressed that a New Democrats policies are,
"neither liberal of conservative, neither Democratic of Republican. They are new. They are different. We are confident they will work"
(74).
When it comes to fidelity, "it reflects a
person's willingness and capacity to follow through on the commitments that he
has chosen to the best of his ability" (76). According to Microsoft Bookshelf '95,
Fidelity means faithfulness to obligations, duties or observances. I feel that in this circumstance a related
synonym that could be used is allegiance.
In my opinion, I feel that this is one of the most important
characteristics a president should have.
Renshon points out many instances that Clinton has backed out of his
promises at the time, but some of the situations have become law since this
book was written. For example, one of
Clinton's campaign promises was to raise the minimum wage, and he never
followed through. Again, in the 1994
midterm election, in his State of the Union Address, again Clinton promised to
purpose an increase in the minimum wage, to only withdraw his statement the
next morning. During the last few months
though, Clinton has been arguing with Congress to get an increase past. After many hours of heavy dispute, Clinton
got a bill passed and the new minimum wage went into affect October 1,
1996.
Many might say that Clinton was just following
through with his promises, I still feel the only reason he did this was because
he realized that the '96 election is approaching faster than he thought and
wanted to make a better presentation to the public.
Throughout this argument, the opposition stated
that Clinton "could change his mind in an instant" (83). This could be denoted as a logical and
psychological oxymoron. Renshon agrees with
this metaphor but argues that,
"it is not
impossible for a president to find some merit in divergent views and still be
able to apply his own developed framework
of ideals and values to sort through them. Not all views can have equal weight, and not
all claim equal worth. The ability to
make these distinctions ultimately what distinguishes judgment for
empathy" (83).
Another instance
where Renshon rebukes the "myth" about Clinton is when critics viewed
Clinton as a, "rambling, insistent defense of his own
character." Renshon feels that
Clinton's self image is: "fair,
open, honest, and genuinely interested in responsive to others' points of view
and concerns," (85) He also feel that Clinton reflected a strong component
of self-idealization, which most people wish to think of themselves as.
Personally I feel
that being ambitious is a very good quality but, I also feel that there is a time when you are
ambitious or over-confident. I feel that
this is one of Clinton's downfalls. For
instance, Clinton feels that he can make speeches without any notes, he can
just do it off the top of his head. Some
might argue that a high level of confidence masks a deeper sense of insecurity
or it can even lead to vulnerability.
When one speaks
of relatedness, one could also say, in psychological theory, affiliation
motive. Affiliation motive is the most
common way of examining a person's connection with others. To affiliate means to want to belong, they
are joiners and want to spend most of there time with others. In others words, I feel that you can classify
this type of person as being insecure.
Throughout this
book, one can see that Clinton doesn't need to be liked, he just desires the
need for validation. "Validation is
a more comprehensive concept than respect, affection, or, more generally, an
individuals need for external assurances of his own positive self-image"
(330).
On the outside,
Clinton appears to be a very, "attractive, outgoing, charming" man
but in the inside, he has a very, "angry, demanding, entitled inner
psychology" (104). Many of his
friends say that he wears a mask on the outside hoping that it won't eventually
reveal his inner-self.
"Clinton has
been characterized frequently as a man who is too trusting, but his persistent
use of charm suggests otherwise. The use
of charm can also stem form the belief that if you don't use it, you cannot
depend on others to respond to you.
Clinton's tendencies to mislead and equivocate, to market and sell his
policies rather than deal with his cost and implications honestly, and his
rages ..." (105). To me, this again
leads to a very interesting question, Is Mr. Clinton trustworthy?
From the
beginning of this book, I have been
pondering that question. Renshon makes
many statements that could rebuke my idea, but I found that there are many gaps
in a lot of Clinton's ideas. He has made
many promises but has not followed through unless his idea's were going to be
viewed in a positive manner. I believe
that he has plenty of good ideas and he is a very intelligent man, but I tend
to agree with critics when they say he is too smart for his own good. He feels that he can do anything and with
that ambition, it leads him to overexert himself.
Through this
book, I have learned to respect Clinton in a different way. I have realized that there are reasons he
reacts in the way he does. I believe
that he is a reliable man and can be trusted to a point. I would recommend this book for one reason,
to understand how the president reacts.
I found it very interesting to see how Clinton was so much like his
mother. The whole section revealed how
Clinton became the man he is.
Understanding Clinton to the extend I know do makes me want to learn
more about Dole so I can make a more educated vote this November.
No comments:
Post a Comment