WILLIAM BENNETT: EDUCATIONAL QUALITY

 

As a person heavily invested in schooling and learning, I am drawn to William Bennett. He has been a professor, university administrator, non-profit leader, government official, social commentator, conservative pundit, writer, historian, and is currently a semi-retired podcaster. Bennett is the author and co-author of about two dozen books.

Bennett was born on July 31, 1943, in the Flatbush neighborhood of Brooklyn, New York. A self-described “streetwise” kid, he attended both public and Catholic schools. His father left the family, and his mother moved to Washinton DC with William and his older brother Robert where he graduated from Gonzaga High School. With the absence of his father, Bennett’s football coach became a role model for him as did actors, athletes, and presidents. He believes that heroes and adult encouragement play key roles in a child’s moral development.

Bennett attended Williams College, a liberal arts school in western Massachusetts, to study philosophy and to play football. A lineman, he was nicknamed “The Ram” stemming from an incident in which he butted down the door to a female student’s dorm room..

In addition, he received wise counsel from his brother Robert, who went on to become a high-profile defense attorney. The 1960s was a tumultuous decade featuring the Civil Rights Movement and opposition to the Vietnam War among other events. At the forefront of unrest was the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) which was popular on college campuses, Bennett desired to join the SDS but brother Robert talked him out of it warning him that affiliation whit the group would hurt him in the future.

Upon graduation from Williams in 1965, Bennett enrolled at the University of Texas to study political philosophy under the tutelage of John Silber, another mentor who would guide Bennett. He also played guitar in a band named “Plato and the Guardians”, a nod to Republic by the esteemed ancient Athenian philosopher. Bennett also had a blind date with the rock star Janis Joplin; he remembered her as a rather sad and lonely person. Upon earning his PhD he was advised by Silber to teach at a state university rather than at liberal arts meccas like Oberlin or Williams. So Bennett taught philosophy and religion at the University of Southern Mississippi for a year before departing for Harvard to earning his law degree. He later recalled that in Mississippi he was considered a liberal and at Harvard a conservative but he had not changed his values.

Bennett spent the early 1970s in various teaching and administrative positions at Boston University where Silber had become president. He became the executive director of the National Humanities Center in 1976, Bennett’s involvement with the humanities and the national shift to conservatism following the perceived cultural excesses of the 70s decade also prompted a shift in Bennett. He changed his party registration from Democratic to Republican, He also found another mentor in Ronald Reagan who was elected president in 1980. Reagan appointed Bennett director of the National Endowment for the Humanities in 1981 and Secretary of Education in 1984.

As Secretary of Education, Bennett reinvented the cabinet position from secondary status to that of “bully pulpit” centered on the three Cs. As Bennett explained in an article entitled “Teaching the Right Stuff” (Kappan, October 26, 2020)-

·       Content- Every student is entitled to a rigorous and enriched curriculum infused with Western values.

·       Character- The ethos of our schools matters as character of our students is developed by rule, precept, and most importantly, by example.

·       Choice- Parents and students deserve to choose the schools best for them- public, charter, private, or parochial

Bennett, in addition, supported school vouchers, curriculum reform, classical education, and religion in education as well as decried the use of affirmative action. He urged stronger enforcement of drug laws on campuses. He opposed education bureaucracies, calling them “the blob.” He criticized schools for having low standards and it a regular practice to visit classrooms to teach.

Bennett’s pronouncements caused controversies, but he was supported by President Reagan. A story circulated in DC circles that during one cabinet meeting the President brought in copy of the Washington Post featuring an article dealing with Bennett. Bennett himself thought he was going to be chastised by the President for embarrassing the White House. Instead, Reagan said that Bennett had been busy and when were the other cabinet secretaries going to catch up with him. Just before Reagan left the presidency after two terms, Bennett resigned and began a private legal practice.

But Bennett’s hiatus from government service proved to be short. The new incoming president, George H.W. Bush, appointed Bennett to our first Director of National Drug Control Policy (aka “drug czar”). He brought the same activist mindset and practices to advocate against drugs as he did as Secretary of Education promoting quality education for all students. Bennett resigned from that position in 1990, and his best-selling work was The Book of Virtues, which he edited, was published in 1993. Other books by him focus on moral development, school curriculum, Western values, American patriotism, and Christian themes.

Bennett also served on boards of companies, especially those focusing on educational innovation. He currently writes for national publications and is a guest contributor on Fox News and other news outlets. As previously stated, Bennett is now a semi-retired podcaster and makes his primary home in North Carolina where he lives with his wife Elayne whom he married in 1982.

 

Lessons learned:

1.     Every American deserves a quality education regardless of zip code.

2.     A balanced education is infused with Western values augmented with Christian (and other religious) appreciation and American ideals.

3.     Work and service know no age limits.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PETER DRUCKER: INTELLECTUAL INQUIRY

 Peter Drucker is hailed as the founder of modern management. Often pigeon-holed as a business theorist, Drucker was that and much more. He was also a philosopher, professor, social commentator, and author of more than 30 books and numerous journal articles. He was an interdisciplinary thinker par excellence, and I maintain the last Renaissance Man.

I was first introduced to Drucker while a first-year student at the University of Oklahoma. While browsing through a local bookstore I came across a recent publication of The Concept of the Corporation, a book written by Drucker following World War II. Previously I had always thought of a corporation as a given and not a theoretical concept. And then through the years I was exposed to an expansive view of Drucker and his thinking cumulating to me being the founding president of the Drucker Society of Kansas City.

The lure of Drucker was cemented to my own leadership practice was accomplished through my study of Drucker’s life. He was born on November 19, 1909, in Vienna Austria into a cultured European family; his mother had studied medicine, and his father was an attorney and bureaucrat. Throughout his childhood and youth Drucker was exposed to leading intellectuals and artists of the day. Following the completion of his secondary education, Drucker moved to Germany for greater opportunities.

Drucker enrolled in the University of Hamburg and was employed in a day job as a clerk at a cotton commodity trading firm. While in Hamburg, he attended a opera production that was written by Verde when he was 80 years of age, He also read Reflections on the Revolution in France by Edmund Burke. These two activities had a profound impact on him as he began to understand that life imposes few limits on creative activity and that there is merit in history and traditions undergirding and guiding our creativity.

Drucker then moved to Frankfurt am Main where he enrolled in Goethe University of Frankfurt where he completed his doctorate in international and public law with his dissertation on the law of the sea and became a reporter and editorial writer for the city’s leading newspaper. Drucker witnessed with distaste the rise of Naziism in Germany, so he decided to move to England. While in London he worked first as an security analyst for an insurance company, then as the chief economist for a bank. In 1937, he married Doris Schmitz, a fellow university student from Frankfurt who went on to earn her own doctorate in physics.

Before leaving for the United States shortly after his marriage, Drucker had two insights. First, he realized that the rise of Nazism in Germany could in large measure could be blamed on organizations in all three sectors- public, private, and service- failing to enable people to find meaning for their lives. His second insight came from attending the Cambridge University seminars of the famed economist John Maynard Keynes. While Keynes focused on the behavior of commodities Drucker discovered he preferred to focus on the behavior of people,

Shortly after arriving in the United States Drucker became a freelance journalist, a professor at Sarah Lawrence College where he taught economics and later at Bennington College where he taught politics and philosophy. Then Drucker’s professional life took a trajectory professional life that brought him fame. With the entry of the United States into World War ll in December 1941, there was a need not only for people to be in the armed forces, but also for civilians to support directly the war effort. Drucker fell into the latter category. The Board of Economic Warfare secured his services and Drucker found that he had no title to describe his services. So he reached back into English literature to the fictional “consulting detective” Sherlock Holmes. So, Drucker fashioned himself a consultant and thus became the first person to use that title in an official capacity. (But he detested the term “guru”- he maintained that people use that title because they do not know how to spell charlatan!).

Towards the end of the war, Drucker was asked by the CEO of General Motors to study the operations of GM and report his findings. Although his conclusions did not find favor with the CEO, his published report, The Concept of the Corporation, was popular with the public (and it was this book that that had introduced me to Drucker). In 1950, following the success of his GM report, he became professor of management at New York University where his seminal work The Practice of Management was written (and published in 1954): the book has been reprinted with revisions numerous times.

In 1971, Drucker was appointed the Clark Professor of Social Science at Claremont Graduate University in southern California where his fame grew. He developed one of the nation’s first Executive MBA programs for working professionals and mentored a diverse group of leaders including Jack Welch, CEO of General Electric; farm labor organizer Caesar Chavez; Rick Warren, founding pastor of Saddleback Church; and business researcher and writer Jim Collins. In fact, Collins once remarked that the thought that Good to Great, his own work, should have been titled “Drucker was Right!”

Claremont named its school of management the Peter F. Drucker Graduate School of Management in 1987 (later renamed the Peter F. Drucker and Masatoshi Ito Graduate School of Management). Drucker established the Drucker Archives at Claremont in 1999 which became the foundation of the Drucker Institute in 2006. Drucker taught his last class in 2002 and died on November 11, 2005 at the age of 95.

Peter Drucker, in addition to what I have written, left behind a rich legacy

·       He coined the term knowledge worker to describe the person who works with his/her mind. There are several implications to having knowledge knower prevalent in society. Knowledge workers can be mobile, living and working from most anywhere in the world. Yet, most knowledge workers will not be promoted to the top of their organizations. So, to continue to find meaning in their lives and work, they will need to develop additional skills or hobbies. In the long term, a divide will split knowledge workers who will be highly valued and service workers who will exist, as economist Tyler Cowan explains, cheap food and cheap entertainment, because of the nature of their labors. Knowledge workers will need to take the lead to insure service workers also find meaning in their lives and work.

·       Management because it deals with primarily people and not commodities (the Keynesian approach) is a liberal art like history, economics, political science, psychology, etc. Organizing people and resources to complete common endeavors is worthy of our study and aspirations. It was this Drucker insight that prompted me to challenge Collins on his comments regarding hedgehogs and foxes. Hedgehogs are highly skilled in one area and do it well while foxes have numerous skills and interests. Collins maintains that hedgehogs are more effective in leading organizations because of their focus. In contrast, I maintain that foxes are more effective because of their diversity of thought.

·       Intellectual inquiry to know how things originate and work is necessary for anyone aspiring to manage others. Drucker set the example for us by writing two novels among his approximately three dozen books and by learning new subjects every three years or so. For example, Drucker’s self-study led him to become an expert in Japanese art.

MAGA AND THE MAINSTREAM PRESS

 [This essay was originally sent to Baptist News Global in response to an opinion article publish on Trump, MAGA, and the Press. It is slightly revised here.]

For the sake of transparency, I confess that I have voted for Donald Trump to be our president three times. Nevertheless, I do not consider myself to be a Trump supporter nor a card-carrying MAGA member. In fact, in 2016, I was prepared to vote for Governor Gary Johnson until my wife and late daughter talked me out of it. This past election cycle I toyed with voting for Robert Kennedy, Jr but decided even before he endorsed Trump to vote for the GOP ticket especially with JD Vance as the Veep candidate. As a political independent I fully expect that each party put forth their best candidates for each voter to consider.

That being said, I believe that the mainstream press has been, and in some cases continue to be, corrupt, misleading, and nasty towards Trump, MAGA, supporters, and mere voters like me.  My definition of the mainstream press is expansive and includes newspaper editorial boards, and opinion writers, and television hosts and pundits who regularly appear on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS, and sometimes even on Fox News. Examples include-

·       When the Obama Justice Department headed by Attorney General Eric Holder, Obama’s self-described wingman, wiretapped then-Fox News correspondent James Rosen and others, I read and heard almost nothing from the so-called freedom loving mainstream press.

·       Lies and hoaxes like “there are fine people on both sides,” Russian influence on Trump, and “there is going to be a bloodbath” were supported by the mainstream press. (I personally was repulsed by Trump’s Charlottesville “fine people” quote until I conducted my own research and discovered the true context.)

·       The mainstream press, as did President Biden and Vice President Harris, often compared Trump to Hitler and Mussolini (I wonder why never to Stalin- I will leave the answer to the reader’s imagination.) As a historian and former public school history teacher, I find the lack of context provided by the mainstream press to be disgusting, unethical, and morally bankrupt.

·       When it came to the Hunter Biden laptop story, the mainstream press demonstrated no interest in digging deeper. Rather, it put its support behind the 51 intelligence “experts” who lied to the public claiming the laptop was a Russian disinformation campaign.

·       President Biden was as “sharp as a tack” and would “run circles around the White House staff.” Really? This was yet another example of the mainstream press support for government lies over the public interest.

·       My final example concerns Aurora, Colorado and the danger posed by Venezuelan gangs. The mainstream press continues to booster the false assertions of the state governor and city mayor that there is nothing to see here,

Despite the seriousness of these examples, I do not advocate for press censorship. Rather, I prefer accountability and fairness like the 16 million dollar fine imposed against ABC for one of its correspondents repeatedly referring to Trump as a convicted rapist. I do think it is wrong to sue the Des Moines Register newspaper for its wacky state poll it published days before the election.

While the above examples are serious acts of bias from the mainstream press, I believe that a more thorough case of incompetence can be brought. Incompetence that stems largely from a general lack of intellectual curiosity, thinking like an elite globalist, and acting like everything has the potential impact of Watergate. The fall of the mainstream press will not come from the Trump Administration but from its hubris and sloppy thinking. The Washington Post may be correct that “democracy dies in darkness” but it can also die from lies and deceits against the vey folks it seeks to inform.

[Note to the reader: The editor of the Baptist News Global refused to publish the above opinion essay that I submitted. Below is the email exchange that we had. I will leave it to the reader to decide the accuracy of the examples that I used.]

 

FROM THE PUBLISHER:

Joe, I will not publish this. You are entitled to your perspective, but you are not entitled to misrepresent documentable facts. The examples you give are misleading and incomplete and sometimes flat-out wrong.

I’m happy to publish pieces that disagree with my own views, but I will not publish false information.

MY RESPONSE:

Thanks for your consideration and quick response. It is good to know your editorial policy of Baptist News Global and I will attempt to adhere to that policy in the future. By the way, what happened to the Findley Edge article I submitted several months ago?

Nevertheless, I am curious to know what was false in the in the opinion piece just submitted. I reread the letter several times and thought I was fair to the facts. Can you and I disagree over the meaning and significance of the facts? Yes!

Albeit, we Baptists can be a disagreeable lot. No hard feelings. Perhaps we will connect again next year. Have a Merry Christmas

 

MORE NUANCE NEEDED

 [This essay was originally a Letter to the Editor in response to an article that appeared in an issue of Bostonia, the alumni magazine of Boston University.  I graduated from BU in 1978 with a Master of Education degree.]

 

I have concerns about some of the assertions made by BU faculty members in “Is Our Democracy at Risk?” (Summer 2024).

First, the United States is a constitutional republic, a restrained form of democracy with checks and balances among three co-equal branches of government, a two-house national legislature, and an electoral system of selecting the president. To simply say the US is a democracy is to raise assumptions our Founders never intended.

Second, no evidence is presented with the assertion of voter suppression.  Indeed, required photo ID is easily acquired and is not a barrier to the franchise. While there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud, as long as humans and not angels are voting there will be fraud, and voter IDs help in maintaining trust that our votes truly count.

I trust that future articles of this sort published in the Bostonia will be more balanced and nuanced reflecting the complexities of our federal system.

 

Joe D. Marlow

Wheelock ‘78

Olathe, Kans

THE GOD WHO DELIVERS & GUIDES: MY ENCOUNTER WITH EXODUS

The summer of 1988 found my wife, our two children, and me living in an eastern state hundreds of miles from our home in Oklahoma. I was working in a moderate-sized non-profit organization providing services to about 300 direct clients and numerous others. I was the executive responsible for education and outreach, and reported to the CEO, the only other fulltime executive on staff. While the work was stressful, I did feel our organization was having an increasingly positive impact in the community.

Then the bottom dropped out. It was a Monday morning, and I was preparing to leave town for a work-related meeting lasting until Friday. Just before departing the CEO called me into his office and he matter-of-factly informed me that my position was being eliminated due to budget cuts. He told me that our revenue collections was down significantly and that our organization could not support two fulltime executives the following calendar year. So, I had about 4-5 months to find another job.

I immediately did not share this information with my wife because I did not desire her to worry about this situation alone. I drove several hours to the retreat center for the meeting processing all that I knew. I continue to process for the next several days. Then about mid-week it happened.

During a break in the meeting I was resting on the bed in my room. I was in the in-between zone of awake and asleep when I heard an audible voice saying, “Get up and go to town!” Now, I am a very rational person but I knew instantly the voice commanding me was God’s. So, I instinctively obeyed. I drove to a city totally unfamiliar to me, went to a mall I had never visited before, and entered a bookstore I obviously had never shopped in before. And in a minute or so, I found it.

“It” was a book entitled The Presence: The God Who Delivers and Guides by Bruce Larson, a Presbyterian pastor from Seattle. The book was a study of Exodus found in the Hebrew Scriptures. Exodus details how God delivered the Hebrew slaves from Egyptian captivity and guided them to the Promised Land. I purchased the book, returned to the retreat center, and began reading it.

In effect, the Exodus became my story of how God delivered my family and me, and guided us back towards home. Exodus was not just “their” story; Exodus became my story, also. My approach to Exodus at least in this sense was personal and not a formal academic study.  Indeed, by the January 1, 1989, we were living in Overland Park, Kansas, a few hours drive north of our home in Oklahoma. I was also again gainfully employed in yet another non-profit with similar challenges (and that is another story).

Some time later I wrote Bruce Larson, the author, to share my experience in finding his book and the impact reading it had on me. I received a very gracious reply from him. I have regretfully lost his letter.

Before leaving that eastern state and moving to Kansas, I was surprised by some research I conducted. I knew that the CEO had on occasion played loose with the truth. When I discovered that he was engaging in immoral (but not illegal) behavior, I checked the dates of when he commenced that behavior and when our organizational revenues began to show marked decline. They had occurred within a week of each other! In addition, when his behavior became the stuff of rumors in our community, he was fired after an investigation and left before I did. Pharaoh tried to outsmart everyone else and we know how that ended!

 

COLLEGE IS NOT FOR EVERYBODY

 

[This letter was sent in response to an article in BUWHEELOCK, the alumni magazine of the Wheelock College of Education & Human Development at Boston University. I graduated from BU in 1978 with a Master of Education degree.]

 

Concerning the recent 2023 issue of BUWHEELOCK I applaud the efforts of Anthony Abraham Jack to improve college access and culture for first generation students as he brings passion and commitment to the task.  Nevertheless, I am concerned about the title highlighted on the front cover- College Is For Everybody. I frankly disagree for several reasons.

First, some high school graduates do not possess the intellectual wherewithal to glean the benefits of the college experience. They are not dumb, rather they are unable or unwilling to assume the “life of the mind” to read, write, and think across the disciplines. They perhaps are more suited for vocational schools where they can be trained in high-paying skills and work with their hands. America needs skilled farmers, plumbers, electricians, etc. in which a traditional four-year college degree may or may not be applicable for success.

Granted, some students need lived life experiences before assuming the collegiate experience. For example, Vice President JD Vance served in the US Marine Corps before entering college and law school. Others enter the civilian workforce as one of my high school classmates did. After working in a factory for several years he decided college was for him and upon graduation, became a teacher and coach and later a school administrator before retiring.

And yet others go directly to college from high school without a plan, major in “insane” subjects, do not learn from the things that matter, run up ridiculous debts, and eventually drop out. Family and peer pressures often contribute to a warped sense of what the “good life” looks like for everyone.

Second, if the meaning of college in the article is the traditional brick-and-mortar school like BU, then college is definitely NOT for everyone. I thoroughly enjoyed studying for my master’s degree at BU. (Confession- I did my BU graduate studies in Europe while I was serving in the US Army.} But to go to Boston directly from a small farm town in Oklahoma would have been a disaster for me.

Many students need better options than traditional universities. Some would benefit greatly from community college and then a traditional university or an online platform. I have been an instructor on two online platforms. Contrary to what many critics think, online schools have academic standards, often rigorous ones.

 

 

I have been an instructor on two online platforms. Contrary to what many critics think, online schools have academic standards, often rigorous ones. For example, my son attended community college and then enrolled at a state university but left without a degree. Well into adulthood he entered Colorado State University Global Campus and once his online studies had concluded, he received an excellent job offer which he accepted. The graduation ceremony in the Denver area drew over 1.000 students, many of whom lived and worked well beyond Colorado.

That being said, I believe that traditional universities like BU have a moral obligation to assist first generational or others generally considered non-traditional students to be successful once those students are admitted to the university. This moral obligation makes the efforts of Anthony Abraham Jacks vital for both BU and its students.

In closing, I have an idea to propose to BU’s leadership. Create a preparatory academy for those students seeking admission into BU, but data shows they have the propensity to drop out before they complete their courses of study. The prep academy could be a natural extension of the work currently done by the Newbury Center. The mission of such a prep academy to is to place these students into a rigorous academic university setting and provide them with wrap-around services like academic counseling and testing to help ensure these students are a good fit for BU and if not, offer them entry into a partner community college for delayed admission into BU. Granted, attendance at the prep academy would extend their BU experience by an extra year, but BU could offer scholarships and other incentives to help make the prep academy worthwhile for the students needing this academic structure.

                                                                                      

JULY 24, 1651: ANTHONY JOHNSON AND THE NCM THEORY OF HISTORY

 Monday, July 24, 1651.dawned to the residents of this planet promising to be yet another normal day in their lives, as well as normal could be. Three centuries and 72 years later, Monday, July 24, 2023, dawned to the residents of this planet promising to be yet another normal day, as well as normal could be. Nevertheless, our normality on both dates was strangely altered by one Anthony Johnson.

But first, let’s examine what happened in 2023. Florida’s educational authorities had adopted new state standards for teaching slavery to their students in middle school. Vice President Harris then came to Florida to passionately decry those standards as being racist because of a single reference that slavery did have a minor positive role in teaching the slaves valuable skills even though all other slavery references in the standards cast the institution as horrific and inhumane. And then on Monday, the 24^th. the chorus of progressive media voices began damning the standards on the same key of outrage.

There are several ironies here. First, Harris probably did not read all the standards. Indeed, one of her political handlers essentially admitting the fact when he defended her by saying she was speaking from her heart, not from her head. Second, Harris in a debate preceding the 2016 presidential election passionately attacked the eventual winner for racist attitudes but gleefully accepted the candidacy for the number two office from the same man she had denounced in the debate, Third, most progressives and too many conservatives for that matter do not  have a sense of history. Or they or their advisors would have had known about Anthony Johnson. Thank goodness that the researchers for my “This Day in History” calendar knew about Johnson.

On Monday, July 24, 1651, Anthony Johnson became one of the first Black landowners in America, my calendar reported to me. So, 32 years after the first import of slaves to Virginia and hence to all the American colonies, a Black man could own property in a colony with slaves.  (So, another nail in the coffin of the false premise of the 1619 Project!) But Johnson’s story gets richer.

The records are sketchy but according to the calendar and a Wikipedia entry, Johnson was living in Portuguese Angola where he was captured by slavers and found his way to England where he learned English. He then became an indentured servant in the Virginia colony. Once his contract expired, Johnson was granted his freedom and was granted more than 200 acres of land. He and his wife Mary then had their own slaves (my emphasis). Eventually Johnson and his household moved to the Eastern Shore on Virginia’s portion of the Delmarva Peninsula and then on to Maryland to avoid the pressures of increased slave ownership and legal questions. The Johnson family tree becomes obscure at this point but some scholars speculate that descendants of Anthony and Mary migrated to Delaware and North Carolina.

Anthony Johnson and his life is but one reason why I ascribe to the NCM Theory of history- that history is nuanced, contradictory, and messy. And as such, I highly recommend to progressives and to conservatives alike to stop “weaponizing” history for their own narrow political agendas.  As my long passed mentor Edmund Burke famously stated, “Those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.”

GOD: INSIDE OR OUTSIDE THE BOX?

The senior pastor at my church is a terrific preacher. He can take any enigmatic biblical text and make it come alive with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. He also preaches with passion and energy, and with honesty about himself and his own spiritual condition. So, when it comes to a place where I and the pastor may disagree, if ever so slightly, on the interpretation of a text, I do so humbly.

Before going on, I confess that we Baptists can be a disagreeable lot. Perhaps our disposition is tied to our doctrine of priesthood of the believer in that we listen to our preachers and yet we also have a responsibility to listen to what God’s Spirit is telling us through our consciences. We may have free pulpits but we also have free pews.

Our pastor is currently preaching a sermon series on the Book of Romans in the Christian New Testament. Recently, in his sermon on Romans 4:16 and following, he stated that God is “outside the box” when it comes to God’s supernatural power. Since I am more of an “inside the box” kind of guy, my ears perked up. Permit me to “unpack the box” to give some context to my argument here.

In an earlier essay that was first published in my blog and later in Reflections, I wrote-  

          “The United States Marine Corps is known for its creativity and flexibility. For example, potential Marine officers at Officer Candidate School must face a grueling and often revealing exercise called the Reaction Course. Officer candidates are split into teams of four and taken to an area which resembles a children’s playground. There is rope, a barrel, a high wall, and two wooden poles present. The instructor presents each team with a scenario- one of the team has been severely wounded and the other team members must take him/her over a gully represented by the wall. The team has 15 minutes to accomplish the task.

The officer candidates are involved in a creative process called “think inside the box.” That is the opposite of what we are usually taught by teachers and consultants as we are told to think outside the box to be truly creative. While thinking outside the box is seen as the method to break through the stodgy traditional ways of problem solving and can indeed be very seductive, it is in reality a subversion of the creative process if it is seen as the only method to solve problems or even as the primary method. To think that we can pluck ideas from nothingness is to believe in magic, not creativity. Ideas we need to solve our problems are new combinations of existing ideas already in the box. To gain new insights we need to practice identifying, breaking, and creating patterns among the high quality “stuff” we currently possess.

Thinking inside the box is to make greedy, grateful use of limits (Imagination First). When I was an elementary school principal and needed to solve a problem one of the first questions I asked was, “What are my limits or constraints to solving this problem?” Knowing my limits presented me with what I called my “area of maneuver.” Acknowledging our limitations can be incredible prompts to imagination as limits beget inventiveness.”

Yet, how can an all-knowing and all-powerful God possess limits to divine knowledge and power? Paradoxically, God can choose limits, In the majestic and poetic prologue to the Gospel of John, the writer John declares, “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.” (1:14a, CSB). Or, as wonderfully paraphrased, “The Word became flesh and blood, and moved into the neighborhood.” (The Message)

The Apostle Paul continues the inside the box thinking in his Letter to the Philippians in which he declared,

          “Adopt the same attitude as that of Christ Jesus,

          who, existing in the form of God,

          did not consider equality with God

          as something to be exploited.

          Instead he emptied himself

          by assuming the form of a servant,

          taking on the likeness of humanity.

          And when he had come as a man,

          he humbled himself by becoming obedient

          to the point of death- even to death on a cross”

          {2:5-8, CSB)

 

Indeed, Jesus became like us. He hungered and thirst and had all the other human limitations. By having a human body Jesus was inside a box of sorts. And yet in all things, Jesus remained obedient to God the Father. He suffered the pains of death and yet, He rose from the grave. In doing so, He was outside the box.

 

Army West Point is having a wonderful football season. With ten wins and one loss (to Notre Dame), the Black Knights with a victory over arch-rival Navy will perhaps have their greatest season ever, even greater than the teams in the 1940s. In those years Army’s backfield possessed two amazing running backs who both won the Heisman Trophy in succeeding years- Felix “Doc” Blanchard (Mr. Inside) and Glenn Davis (Mr. Outside). Blanchard’s specialty was to run up the middle and Davis’s was to run sweeps. They formed one of the most powerful tandems of offense ever in college football.

Blanchard and Davis were indeed talented, and Army needed both to win football games. While their gridiron talents pale in comparison to the divine talents of God the Father and God the Son, they nevertheless illustrate the need for teamwork even among the Trinity.  Now we come to the chicken or egg question. Which comes first- the power or the limits? I will use another athletic illustration. An Olympic javelin thrower must have the power to throw the javelin but must put limits on himself/herself to put in the hours, the diet, and the overall training regimen to direct that power to throw for the distance to be successful. So, power before limitations.

On a personal note, my wife and I within the past year suffered the grief of losing our lovely and talented adult daughter to brain cancer. Nevertheless, through my faith in Christ and my study of the biblical texts and of secular history, I know that we will see our daughter again in the Resurrection. Her passing along with my advanced years and ailments had led me to a renewed interest in the Resurrection, Heaven, and New Jerusalem. Only a Divine Being with power and love outside the box of the human experience could prepare such an eternity for His followers. And only a Divine Being with power and love could place himself inside the box of human limits could communicate with us finites about the joys of following Him.

Finally, perhaps my pastor and I are both right about the box. It is where we place emphasis at any particular time at any particular place during any particular situation. Our God is both outside and inside the box simultaneously being where He needs to be to lead us to a saving knowledge of Him through Jesus Christ our Lord.

                  

 

   

 

 

         

 

  

THE ULTIMATE FIXER

A leader is often known by the people he/she surrounds himself/herself. This is especially true for a US president-elect because the modern presidency is too complex for any single person to get results. So, I am closely watched President-elect Biden make his staff and cabinet appointments and was pleased to discover his appointment of the Covid-19 coordinator- Jeffrey Zients.

If you have not heard of Zients, that is understandable. He apparently does not seek the limelight. From videos I have seen of him he is polite, respectful, and positive. One former colleague of his describes him as possessing a high level of emotional intelligence. During the Obama Administration he was known as “Mr. Fix-It” as he was often called upon to lead agencies or programs out of chaos. He is no expert in areas like IT or health care, but Zients knows how to lead people and manage resources. I consider him the ultimate fixer in the most positive way.

An ultimate fixer is almost an indispensable person for any leader. In the past I called such people “wizards.” These people cross boundaries to perform their magic with the total confidence of the leader. Franklin Roosevelt had his Harry Hopkins, Ronald Reagan had his William Clark, Donald Trump had his Mick Mulvaney, and Barack Obama had (and now Joe Biden has) Zients. Fixers are generalists rather than specialists in that they are flexible, adaptable, and have the agility to organize to get results.

Zients was born in suburban Washington, DC. After graduating from Duke University with a major in political science he moved to Boston and became a consultant. He returned to the Washington area and engaged in numerous business ventures. He is credited in helping to bring back major league baseball to the nation’s capital in the form of the Washington Nationals team.

President Obama first appointed Zients in 2009 as the federal government’s first chief performance officer. Then, over the course of the next several years, Zients was twice acting director of the Office of Management and Budget (once for 16 months), program manager for both “Cash for Clunkers” and the ACA Heathcare.gov website, and finally director of the National Economic Council. For the past four years Zients has been an investment banker.

When asked at a Washington economic forum during the Obama Administration on how he led the effort to repair the broken healthcare.gov website Zients answered in a typical fixer way- set a deadline, organize a team, get one general contractor, and work hard. Thus, Zients has a well-deserved reputation as a management expert who knows how to best use systems and processes to get the desired results. I expect to see him appointed to other posts in the Biden Administration.

Finally, Zients has served as White House Chief of Staff for President Biden since the resignation of Ron Klain on February 8, 2023. This post has been most enigmatic for Zients. With President Biden in political freefall due to health and policy concerns, the public has not heard from Zients, so, we are not informed of his management style with the President or with the White House staff. Even more specifically, we do not know of his attitudes towards such policy issues as immigration, inflation, crime, or even the presidential candidacy of Vice President Harris. Perhaps we political and policy wonks will learn something in 2025 and beyond.

 

 

GEORGE MARSHALL: QUIET DEMEANOR

 

[This biographical essay will have a different format than the others I write. Instead of a continuous narrative, this essay consists of six scenes from Marshall’s life and a lessons learned section.]

 

SCENE ONE: LEADING YOUR PEERS

George Marshall was born December 30, 1880. He grew up in Uniontown, Pennsylvania near Pittsburgh. Marshall was a distant relative of John Marshall, veteran of the American War for Independence and later the longest serving Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. His father was a local businessman who made unfortunate investments which marginalized his family. He was an indifferent student so when he decided to enroll at Virginia Military Institute (VMI) he once overheard his older brother Stuart, already a VMI cadet, pleading with their mother not to permit George to attend VMI because he would embarrass the family. This event only hardens George’s resolve to be a successful cadet.

VMI was more of a military trade school than a college. It was steeped in the glories of the Confederacy and the Southern cause. Although hazing of new cadets was officially forbidden, it was indeed a fact of life among the Corps of Cadets. Marshall arrived late his first year due to an illness and together with his Yankee accent, he instantly became a hazing target. So, not long after his arrival, Marshall was aroused out of his bed one night by older cadets, stripped of his night clothes, and ordered into a sitting position over a bayonet sticking out of the wooden floor in the barracks. But, due to physical weakness resulting from his recent illness, Marshall could not maintain the hazing position and a large slash in his body caused an injury. Marshall was rushed to the infirmary by the older cadets, who feared for both Marshall’s personal safety and whether he would inform the administrators of their activities.

Despite his serious injury, Marshall refused to divulge the names of the guilty cadets, earning their lasting admiration. Marshall’s instincts as a natural leader began to rise culminating in his selection as First Captain of the Corps of Cadets his senior year at VMI.

 

SCENE TWO: CONFRONTING THE GENERAL

Upon graduation from VMI, Marshall sought an officer’s commission in the US Army. He even went to the White House to lobby President William McKinley directly. The newly commissioned Lieutenant Marshall began to serve in variety of assignments from survey work in the Southwest to the Philippines. He began to shine in staff work. He also became a life-long learner particularly with his assignment to the Infantry and Cavalry School (now General Staff College) at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. First as a student and then as an instructor, Marshall took a renewed interest in history which surfaced while a VMI cadet.

With our entry into World War l, Marshall went to France as chief of staff of the newly formed 1^st Infantry Division. The rapid expansion of the US Army in 1917-18 strained training and logistics prompting a visit to division headquarters from General John Pershing, commander of the American Expeditionary Force (AEF). Pershing proceeded to roundly criticize the division commanding general for the lack of fighting readiness, which Marshall thought unfair. As Pershing began to leave, the usually stoic Marshall touched Pershing’s uniform sleeve to get his attention and then shared his own evaluation of the division’s situation including defending his commander. Pershing listened, said a few words, and quickly left the headquarters. Marshall’s fellow officers were stunned thinking Marshall’s military career was over.

Rather than relieving Marshall of his duties, Pershing sent for Marshall to serve as a staff planner at AEF Headquarters. Participation of American soldiers and marines in the fighting intensified in the summer of 1918 as the Allied forces made their final big push against the German Imperial Army. Marshall was assigned as the primary planner to move 800,000 US soldiers and their supplies and equipment from one battlefield to another without detection from the Germans. He spent a few hours walking and thinking. Realizing that nothing like this had ever been attempted, Marshall worked throughout the night and submitted his operations plan in the morning, It was adopted with few changes and the operation was a huge success. Colonel Marshall was recommended for his first star as a brigadier general but unfortunately for him personally the war ended before the promotion was finalized.

 

SCENE THREE: DOUBTING THE PRESIDENT

Following the end of the war, Marshall resumed his permanent rank of captain as his colonelcy was temporary for wartime purposes. He also resumed staff duties as the personal aide to Pershing, soon to be appointed as the Army Chief of Staff. But Marshall finally got field duty by being posted to the Army regiment serving in China. A decade after drafting an operations plan for hundreds of thousands of soldiers in combat, he drilled soldiers in small unit tactics but with the same sense of duty and attention to detail.

Promotion in the peacetime Army was slow and postings were often mundane. But Marshall was assigned to a task that paid many dividends in the coming second global conflict. As Director of Instruction of the Infantry School at Fort Benning, Georgia he revised combat planning and tactics, and he noticed which officers were talented, officers who would be ready to assume greater responsibilities. Finally, in the 1930s, Marshall was promoted to general and ultimately was assigned as Deputy Chief of Staff at the War Department in Washington, DC.

As Deputy Chief he was part of a group meeting at the White House in 1938 with President Roosevelt. The President had hoped that the group would rubberstamp his proposal to expand the Army Air Corps by greatly increasing aircraft production. As FDR polled the group members, they all agreed. When the president came to Marshall, he asked, “George, don’t you agree?” To which Marshall replied, “No, Mr. President, I do not, “and proceeded to brief FDR for his reasons. The others sat in stunned silence as FDR quickly adjourned the meeting. As with his encounter with Pershing two decades earlier, many observers felt Marshall had a career ending disagreement with the President.

Poland to begin World War Il, Marshall became Army Chief of Staff, a post sought by many other generals more senior than him. Marshall would serve as Chief of Staff for six years throughout US preparation for and involvement in the second great war.

 

SCENCE FOUR: DOING YOUR DUTY

Throughout the remainder of FDR’s presidency until the president’s death in 1945, Marshall was a valued and trusted adviser. A large measure of success in this arena was attributed to Marshall’s management of their relationship. Marshall refused to be drawn into FDR’s informal inner circle. When FDR persisted to address Marshall by his first name, Marshall bluntly protested, “That’s General Marshall, Mr. President.” FDR was initially perplexed by his formality but soon realized that he could count on Marshall to give clear-headed counsel supported by facts. For example, when the need for a Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to coordinate the war efforts became apparent, Marshall recommended that the president recall Admiral William Leahy out of retirement for the post rather than lobby for the position himself. FDR did so and Leahy became according to one biographer, the “second most powerful man in the world.”

When he became Chief of Staff in1939 and throughout the war, Marshall gleaned the senior officer rolls of all generals he deemed too old or infirmed to lead effectively during wartime conditions, He also brought into higher command junior officers he thought had potential demonstrated by their actions. One such junior officer was Colonel Dwight Eisenhower, who was stationed at Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio. Just a few days after the Pearl Harbor attack, Marshall ordered Eisenhower to the War Department to direct the War Plans Division. Later, in 1942, General Eisenhower was ordered to England to commence planning for Operation Torch, the Allied attack into French North Africa. Then came Operation Husky into Sicily ad Allied operations into Italy proper until Ike was recalled back to England to finalize plans for Operation Overlord, the famed D-Day invasion of France to forge the final defeat of Nazi Germany.

Back in Washington, who was to become the supreme allied commander of Overlord was not settled. FDR knew Ike could handle the job, yet he also knew Marshall had earned the position.  While the president could not readily make the decision, he pre-determined that Marshall in any way desired the Overlord assignment, he would get it and Ike would be returned to Washington as Chief of Staff. So, FDR and Marshall had their final meeting about the Overlord command. FDR hinted that the name of the supreme commander would make history, and the chief of staff would be forever obscure. Then he waited for the general’s response. Even though Marshall definitely wanted the Overlord command, he believed in duty first. He replied, “It’s your decision, Mr. President.” FDR decided that Marshall was too valuable to leave Washington, so Ike would be the Supreme Allied Commander, Marshall sent the orders to Eisenhower.

 

SCENE FIVE: CONFRONTING THE PRESIDENT

The death of FDR in April 1945, was a shock to the nation. Ane yet, our constitutional system worked as Vice President Harry Truman was quickly sworn in as our new president. He immediately face the use of the newly-developed atomic bombs, how to deal with the Soviet Union and related Communist aggression and influences in Europe and Asia, and the integration of the US armed forces among other challenges.

Marshall was a partner of Truman’s throughout much of the late 1940s and early 1950s. In November 1945, the day after he retired from the Army, he was recalled to public service at Truman’s request to become US special envoy to China. Following his China venture, Marshall became Secretary of State and then Secretary of Defense in the President’s cabinet. Not only did British Prime Winston Churchill consider Marshall to be the architect of victory in winning World War ll, and President Truman also hailed him as the greatest American since George Washington.

Imagine Truman’s dilemma when Marshall confronted him about another major foreign policy decision the president needed to make- whether or not recognize Israel as an independent nation. Truman leaned toward the humanitarian argument in that the Jewish people needed a homeland after the Holocaust while Marshall took the pragmatic approach of supporting the Arabs and their vast oil reserves. Marshall threatened to resign if Israel was recognized. Truman did indeed recognize the State of Israel and Marshall, to his credit, did not resign.

 

SCENE SIX: FORGIVING THE PRESIDENT

The postwar years were also kind to Eisenhower. After serving as Army Chief of Staff, he retired from the military and became president of Columbia University. Eisenhower was recalled to active duty to become the Supreme Allied Commander for NATO. He again retired to choose a different retirement path than Marshall.

Like many other military officers of era, Eisenhower was apolitical. He did not vote and he did not discuss partisan politics. But after the war, things changed. As FDR prophesized, people remembered the Overlord commander, and both the Democrats and Republicans wanted Eisenhower as their presidential candidate.  Ike finally identified with the Republicans, and he became a candidate to become that party’s presidential nominee in 1952. He beat his chief party rival Robert Taft of Ohio, son of President Taft and was the victor of both the 1962 and 1956 general elections defeating Adlai Stevenson, grandson of Vice President Stevenson during the second term of Glover Cleveland, both times.

A big issue of the election of 1952 was the Red Scare, the supposed Communist infiltration of the US government. Although there were Soviet spies in the US and two of them, Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, were executed, many accused were innocent. The truth did not hinder demigods such as Senator McCarthy of Wisconsin from exploiting the issue. At a campaign rally held in Milwaukee in 1952, McCarthy, with Eisenhower in attendance, accused Marshall of being a Communist sympathizer, and Eisenhower did not utter a word of protest against this lie.

I personally have always considered Eisenhower’s inaction in this matter as an act of moral cowardice on his part. After all, Marshall was his chief mentor in high command and Eisenhower would not ever been elected president if Marshall had actively sought command of Overlord seven years earlier. Apparently, Ike had come to regret the incident.  At Marshall’s funeral service, Ike attempted to apologize to Marshall’s widow. Mrs. Marshall replied to the President in effect that her husband understood politics and that he did dwell on Ike’s inaction that day in Milwaukee.

George Marshall died October 16, 1959. At his request, his body did lay in state and his funeral service was simple, befitting a soldier and statesman who simply did his duty. He wrote no autobiography, lest he embarrass or offend someone. And he forgave the man who did not defend his reputation. Marshall was a hero and leader, a “Defender of the Republic” as one biographer described him.

 

 

 

LESSONS LEARNED:

1.     A quiet demeanor, a stoic personality, if used consistently and effectively, can be a “force multiplier” for leaders to inspire confidence among their followers especially during a crisis or adversity.

2.     An effective leader knows when to break out of the quiet, so others know that the leader is serious.

3.     A leader understands that he/she must be a “thermostat” regulating emotions rather than being a “thermometer” merely expressing emotions.

 

WILLIAM WIBERFORCE: CHRISTIAN CHANGE AGENT

 

William Wilberforce was one of the greatest reformers, spiritual or secular, in world history. When one thinks of reformers, they think often of Martin Luther, John Wesley, Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, or Martin Luther King Jr; one rarely thinks of Wilberforce. His primary purpose in life-ending the slave trade in the British Empire- eventually led to the abolition of slavery which freed millions of people without violent revolution.

William Wilberforce was born on August 24, 1759, in Hull, England. His family was in the merchant business as Hull was the leading English seaport trading in the North Sea and Baltic regions of Europe.

Through relatives, he had an early exposure to Methodists, evangelical reformers founded by John and Charles Wesley. But Wilberforce remained thoroughly secular in his worldview until much later. He entered Cambridge University in 1776 at the age of 17 and the deaths of his grandfather and uncle in 1777 left him independently wealthy.

Almost immediately following graduation from Cambridge in 1780, Wilberforce was elected to Parliament. He befriended William Pitt the Younger, one of the greatest British politicians of the time who became his political mentor. Yet Wilberforce continued to focus on his personal pleasures of gaming and drinking.

Then in 1785 the “big change” in Wilberforce’s life occurred. The brother of the popular headmaster of Hull Grammar School, which he attended as a youth, was Isaac Milner, professor of mathematics at Oxford University and one of the leading scientists in Europe. On a trip to the European continent that year, Wilberforce and Milner spent much time together with Milner witnessing to his young friend about surrendering his life to Jesus Christ. This he did and Wilberforce began to re-prioritize his life with new attitudes towards his money, time, and talents. He also began to engage others in discussing spiritual matters.

England, the home base of Great Britain and indeed of the entire British Empire, during this time was a cesspool of moral decay. Despite contemporary nostalgic views, English life was generally brutal, decadent, violent, and vulgar. Societal evils included alcoholism; child prostitution; child labor; public executions for petty crimes, often with public dissections and burnings of the executed criminals; animal cruelty; and the presence of about eight thousand African slaves. While the Church of England gave a thin veneer of respectability to the upper class, the non-conformists or dissenters who were often the reformers- Methodists, Quakers, Moravians, etc.- often appealed to the lower and were generally “tolerated.”

Wilberforce’s Christian faith produced two “great objects” of his life. His first objective was to eliminate slavery within the British Empire.

In 1787, the Committee for the Abolition of the Slave Trade was organized and in short order, Wilberforce was asked to lead the efforts.  While Wilberforce was the public face of the abolition movement, an impressive team was assembled for support, encouragement, and action-

·       Henry Thorton, economist

·        John Wesley, Methodist evangelist

·        James Stephen- attorney & Wilberforce’s brother-in-law

·        Thomas Clarkson- Latin essayist & researcher

·        Hannah More- writer, poet, & playwright

·        James Ramsey- ship’s surgeon & Anglican priest

·        Sir Charles & Lady Middleton- naval officer & politician

·        Sir Joshua Reynolds- painter

·        Josiah Wedgewood- potter

·        William Cowper- poet

·        Granville Sharp- linguist, musician, & biblical scholar

·        Ottobar Cugoano- former slave & philosopher

·        Olaudah Equiano- former slave & writer

 

But Wilberforce’s most influential counselor was his second great love after Jesus Christ, his wife. Barbara Spooner had had a Christian conversion early in her life, and as a result, her parents were concerned about her “Methodist sympathies.”  When Barbaraa met William, it was the proverbial love at first sight. When they married in 1797, Barbara was 20 and William was 37. Their union produced six children.

The Clapham Circle reinforced the antislavery movement. The Circle was an informal community of evangelical Anglicans in the London suburb of Clapham, four miles from downtown. It included both residents and visitors, and had spiritual, intellectual, and activist dimensions. Mutual interests among the Circle’s members included Christian fellowship, abolition of slavery and the slave trade, and other reforms.

The Circle was conceived by John Thornton, whose sister Hannah married Wilberforce’s uncle, also named William.  John’s son Henry invited Wilberforce in 1792 to live with him and several others in a bachelors’ “chummery,” Wilberforce continued to live in Clapham after his marriage in 1797 at least for another decade,

Wilberforce also had key allies in the political arena. Among these were three prime ministers- William Pitt the Younger, William Grenville, Spencer Perceval, and a Member of Parliament, Charles Fox. But he also faced opposition from members of the royal family and from Banastre Tarleton, Member of Parliament and infamous British army officer during the American Revolution.

 

Wilberforce introduced a bill in Parliament in 1791` for the abolition of the slave trade. In 1807, the slave trade was finally abolished. And in 1815, slave trading was deemed a felony with punishment of 14 years in Australia. In 1823, the Anti-Slavery Society was formed. Finally, in 1834, 800,000 slaves were freed in the British Empire. The abolition was accomplished by the British government paying the slaveholders at value of 5 percent of Gross National Product (100billion pounds in 2016 rates).

In addition, the Royal Navy was tasked to help end the global slave trade until the 1920s. It has been estimated that several thousand Royal sailors and marines died from disease and injuries performing this duty. Thid was the beginning of end for socially acceptable slavery. Wilberforce also became a hero to many Americans, including Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass, in their efforts to end slavery in the US.

In the later years of his life, Wilberforce turned his attention to the second great objective of his life, the reformation of manners-

1.     He introduced a bill to end the burning of women at the stake and selling corpses of hanged criminals for dissection

2.     He proposed sending teachers and missionaries to India, and ending female infanticide and the practice of suttee

3.     He sought to reduce the number of crimes punishable by hanging

4.     He opposed floggings in the army and navy, animal cruelty, and the use of “climbing boys” to clean chimneys

5.     He worked for Catholic religious freedom, and to improve conditions for orphans, widows, and single women

Wilberforce’s legacy in reforming the manners of civil society is not as well-known as his anti-slavery efforts, nevertheless his efforts in this arena were vital.  British society became more humane with civility and respect. Hanging offences were reduced from 200 to 8. In British India, the extreme native customs were eliminated. And the reformed habits and attitudes gave Britain a moral force in the anti-slavery movement.

Christians and others can learn some valuable lessons from Wilberforce-

·       Before advocating for reform in others, one must be personally reformed

·       Personal faith can effectively guide public policy

·       Systemic reform takes public and private partnership

·       Great causes take great amounts of time

·       Team up and build alliances

·       Create opportunities for small wins

William Wilberforce died July 29, 1833.  Despite his instructions for a private funeral, Parliament decreed a public service. He was buried in Westminster Abbey near hi friend, Pitt the Younger.