Trump's chaos and self-inflicted leadership failure

It's important for those interested in leadership to look around at the things in our daily lives that help us understand success and failure in leadership. Donald J. Trump's run for the Presidency of the U.S.A. and his service in office provides one of the most interesting examples of leadership failure that historians, and particularly leadership scholars, will ever witness. Regardless of political achievements he may claim, his leadership failures have been largely self-inflicted, which by contrast to previous U.S.A. Presidents, other world leaders, and leaders in all sectors, makes him unique.

The routine chaos of the Trump White House has been evident in the revolving door of staff, asserted and withdrawn policies, conflicting communications messages, and declining trust in what he says among both devoted followers and detractors. The COVID-19 response in the U.S.A. is the easiest and most immediate example demonstrating failure, with the moment when he declared (and later denied) that injecting light or disinfectants in those who contracted the disease could be a possible treatment modality to investigate on April 23, 2020. At the core of this and other stupid things Trump has said is his privilege, privilege that has been debilitated by a) lack of exposure to diverse people, science, and life experience and b) the fact that he has not been subject to, or chose to ignore, criticism that could have helped him.

It's hard to accept Donald Trump as a tragic figure because he so visibly displays his privilege (witness the picture included with this post). How can a person whose NYC residence is a gilded cage atop the tower that bears his name - Trump Tower - be tragic? The tragedy is that Trump's lifetime privilege resulted in his constantly asserting ideas that make no sense but stand unchallenged by those who surround him and by escaping accountability for his thoughts and actions. Many Trump detractors have repeatedly said that he is a narcissist and lacks the character and disposition to be President. While this may or may not be a fair judgment, it is unnecessary. What's important is to look at the cause or causes for Donald Trump's failings; the core of his failure as President of the U.S.A. is privilege that has blinded him and power over others that causes them not to challenge or question him. For those who claim that Trump has people who push back against him, one only needs to review the bodies of those who dared to question him thrown under the Trump chaos train tracks. Adding to this, Trump's advisors have been unable to keep Trump from destroying himself and the people, organizations, and issues he has influenced. Chaos is part of the strategy, which is based on Trump's approach to media - stir things up on a constant basis so that your name is always in the headlines and discredit dissenters or blame someone or anything else when criticized.

Contrasting Trump's Presidency with four U.S.A. Presidents who are accorded relatively high marks, Doris Kearns Goodwin's book, Leadership in Turbulent Times, analyzed the life experiences and presidencies of Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, and Lyndon Johnson. One thing they all shared was that they had experienced tragedy in some way that defined them. The individual behavioral characteristics that define these four presidents include: Lincoln - find time and space in which to think, anticipate contending viewpoints, set a standard of mutual respect and dignity, shield colleagues from blame, and keep your word; Theodore Roosevelt's 'embattled hero' view led to - calculate risks of getting involved, remain uncommitted in the early states, adapt as a situation escalates, be visible, cultivate public support, frame the narrative, keep temper in check, find ways to relieve stress, shared credit for success; for Franklin Roosevelt - infuse shared purpose and direction, tell people what to expect and what is expected of them, lead by example, forge a team aligned with action and change, address systemic problems and launch lasting reforms, stimulate competition and debate, adapt and change course quickly when necessary; and finally, for Johnson - make a dramatic start, lead with your strengths, simplify the agenda, know for what and when to risk it all, impose discipline in the ranks, identify the key to success, set forth a compelling picture of the future, know when to hold back and when to move forward, and celebrate by honoring the past and building momentum for the future.

These attributes stand in stark contrast to what is observed in Donald J. Trump. One has to conclude that privilege isn't necessarily the cause of failed leadership as witnessed in the cases of the two Roosevelts (both of whom were very privileged). What is different about all four former U.S.A. Presidents from Trump is their exposure to people and ideas outside of their privileged bubble and responsiveness to critique and guidance and ultimate willingness to accept responsibility for their decisions. There were those who thought that Trump would learn to be a good President, even though early conduct predicted otherwise. His unfortunate place in history will be one of failed leadership resulting from the blinders of privilege and arrogance.

Those who seek to lead, leadership scholars, and those who strive to develop leadership in others should take heed from the Trump example, considering the role privilege plays and how it can undermine success.

Figes - Natasha's Dance: A Cultural History of Russia

The title of Orlando Figes' book, Natasha's Dance (2002), is derived from a scene from Tolstoy's War and Peace, that depicts a privileged young countess, Natasha, as she first discovers her 'Russianness" when invited to dance in a simple peasant cottage with an endeared Uncle. As Figes recounts, "Are we to suppose, as Tolstoy asks us to in this romantic scene, that a nation such as Russia may be held together by the unseen threads of a native sensibility?" (Kindle locator #125) The question here is if there is such a thing as Russian consciousness or if there are only impressions from folklore, religion, beliefs, and habits that have accumulated over generations?

Figes' recounting of Russian history from the 18th through to the middle of the 20th centuries incorporates many different artistic voices (Karamzin, Pushkin, Glinka, Gogol, Tolstoy, Turgenev, Dostoevsky, Chekhov, Repin, Tchaikovsky, Rimsky-Korsakov, Rachmaninov, Diaghilev, Stravinsky, Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Chagall, Kandinsky, Mandelstam, Akkmatova, Nabokov, Pasternak, Meyerhold, and Eisenstein) who were; authors of novels, poets, painters, architects, urban planners, dancers, and musicians. Because of my own interest, the last category (music) will be the primary content summarized in this review.

Although numerous cities and regions of Russia were introduced by Figes, it was St. Petersburg (successively called Petrograd, Leningrad, and now back to St. Petersburg) that stands out. St. Petersburg was the vision of Tsar Peter the Great who established St. Petersburg at the western edge of Russia so that it would face Europe and would, through its architecture and art, both emulate and surpass Europe's dominance in all things creative. Peter the Great's aspiration seemed to capture the imagination of Russians, and artists in particular, who "took it upon themselves to create a national community of values and ideas through literature and art." (locator #145)

St. Petersburg was a central location to advance art and it was a catalyst for other aristocrats who had vast numbers of serfs and who built and acted in serf theaters and played in orchestras for the entertainment of the elites. The style of the monumental buildings erected on these estates was Italian and the early Russian composers were equally inspired by the Italian style (Glinka, Tchaikovsky, and Stravinsky among them). A French influence emerged somewhat later and was equally impactful, resulting in the adoption of French as the 'language of the court' until late in the 19th century.

The unfortunate reality of the period of Tsars from Peter the Great through Nicholas II (the last Tsar) was that the privileged elites were given so much power over the serfs and peasants, power that would eventually be challenged in political and activist movements. The 'Decembrists,' who believed that every human should be accorded worth and dignity, emerged from encounters with western countries that were beginning to democratize in the early 1800s. The liberating views of the Decembrists led to idealizing the lives of peasants, celebrating childhood as an important and impressionable time, and incorporating folkways into art, particularly in music.

Prokofiev's The Ugly Duckling (1914) and Peter and the Wolf (1936) are examples of the delightful attention given to children's entertainment and learning. The "Mighty Five" Russian composers (Balakirev, Ckui, Musorgsky, Borodin, and Rimsky-Korsakov) adopted folk music and incorporated distinctive Russian elements (tonal mutability, heterophony, and use of parallel 5ths, 4ths, and 3rds) into their music, with Musorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition reflecting and defining this style. Stravinsky, was the first Russian "composer to assimilate folk music as an element of style - using not just its melodies but its harmonies and rhythms as the basis of his own distinctive 'modern' style" in The Firebird and Petrushka. (locator #5169) The later Soviet era ushered in other great Russian composers such as Khachaturian and Shostakovich whose scores came to prominence in film (Shostakovich - The New Babylon). Shostakovich eventually offered the ultimate satire under the watchful eye of Soviet authorities in his Symphony #7 (Leningrad), Symphony #13 (Babi Yar), and other works. The talented composers and other artists who were able to escape the growing hegemony of the Soviet regime from 1917 forward dispersed to Berlin, Paris, New York, and Hollywood where they would form diaspora communities reveling in and transcending the cultural legacy of Russia's past.

The Decembrists emerged from the encounters of aristocrats with peasants during the war of French invasion in 1812. A growing belief was that the military was a family where respect was accorded to all, regardless of rank or class. From the Decembrist movement forward, the distinction between the elites and peasants was broken down and would eventually lead to erasing former class distinctions. This was a seed that would lead to a greater sense of shared 'Russianness' and advocacy for a national language and other cultural indicators of national pride. Sergie Volkonsky, exiled for his Decembrist affiliation, was a central figure of the privileged class abandoning its loyalty to class as it embraced the emerging national fervor. The February revolution of 1917 swept the Tsarist monarchy away and Bolshevism followed in October as a dictatorship under the Proletariat. "Striving for pravda, for truth and social justice,... gave the Revolution its quasi-religious status." (locator #7935) The "Soviet 'war against the palaces'" would become "a war on privilege and the cultural symbols of the tsarist past." (locator #8076)

Religion played a prominent role throughout the 18th and 19th centuries with the devoted asserting Russia to be the only place where Orthodox (assuming "correct ritual") religion survived after the fall of Constantinople in 1453. Moscow was the center of this religious fervor. Figes quoted a Russian proverb that "'Petersburg is our head, Moscow is our heart'" (locator #3002) that captures the tension between the modernizing, westernizing environment of St. Petersburg versus Moscow where Russians felt they could really be 'Russian.' Religious orthodoxy based on the "'Russian principle' of Christian love," that "would save humanity from the selfish individualism of the West" (locator #5764) made Russia a ripe environment for anarchists and utopians, of which Tolstoy was a prominent example.

"This book will seek to demonstrate, there is a Russian temperament, a set of native customs and beliefs, something visceral, emotional, instinctive, passed on down the generations, which has helped to shape the personality and bind together the community." (locator #198) A statement from the beginning of Figes' book, this quote captures where many readers will end up - Russia has a distinct culture that is reflected in its art but is like St. Petersburg, an amalgam of many ideas, philosophies, and customs. This book documents what many Russian people know, which is that Russia is like many countries around the world - connected by the flow of people, ideas, and cultures across artificial borders.