Examining Bush's Leadership Style (MUST READ)

[impeach the gop]

Be sure to check the links within the text

It has been my observation that Bush as a President is a purely fabricated hero-leader created by some of the best marketeers around. Bush is the CEO president: bold, demanding action, a risk taker, and amoral. This allows him to make decisions easily without worrying about the consequences. As a CEO president, he concentrates on the 'bigger picture' and asks his executive team to provide him with proposals that will implement the big picture. However, he lets his advisors control all the information he gets and sometimes they just don't bother to give him information that might change his perspective or dissuade his course. Because he is so far removed from the actual facts, his decisions are really their decisions and although he thinks he is in charge, he really is not. Even his words are not his own as he has the best speechwriters putting words into his mouth to sell the rightwing policies. One has to wonder if he is aware himself about how carefully manipulated he is and how little control he has himself over his own destiny. Bush is a symbol of leadership for the rightwing, all style and no real substance.

Yet, style is very powerful and as David Gergen noted, many people are attracted to the symbols of leadership even if it is only a chimera.


At the heart of that solid support is a belief that he is an effective leader. A survey in spring 2003, when his approval was in the high 60s, asked his supporters what they most admired about him. A smattering said they liked his economic policies; larger numbers liked his policies on terrorism, but over half—52 percent—said they were drawn to "his general personal strength and sense of leadership." Columnist David Broder concluded, "Democrats may challenge Bush on the issues, but it will be tough to topple him from his leadership pinnacle." His leadership is his most valuable political asset.


Gergen's column enumerates the Bush leadership style which make him so attractive, but also the very real dangers of such a closed and secret, command and control style which we are now unfortunately living with now.

To find ways to combat the powerful (and very expensive) messages and symbols used by the Bush team, we will need to look at all the ways they use language, symbols and control to bind people to Bush. Last summer Dr. Renata Brooks wrote a very insightful article called A Nation of Victims where she discussed the way Bush uses emotional language to dominate and control people. In that article, she compared Bush's use of emotional language to that of an abusive spouse.

Now she has written another article that goes right to the heart of why Bush continues to be perceived so positively by people even if they don't agree with his policies. She too says that the secret to Bush's appeal is he "acts" like a strong, purposeful leader at the same time as he is using emotional language that assert that only he can save you from the bad guys. She calls this The Character Myth.


Bush's handlers project the President as a man of character. His team has carefully crafted an image of him as a man who is strong and moral, someone who sticks to his principles and is capable of making tough decisions. This phenomenon was foretold by media philosopher Marshall McLuhan, who warned: "Politics will eventually be replaced by imagery. The politician will be only too happy to abdicate in favor of his image because the image will be much more powerful than he could ever be."


One of the most difficult things for progressives to work on is how to expose the fraud of leadership that is so destructive for our country. Yet, one of the ways to help depose a leader is to empower people by having them have a real say in their lives and making them part of the "leadership" rather than having all decisions dictated from afar. In other words, one solution is to enable a democracy where citizens are not just passive observers, but also responsible for the decisions made. One of the greatest dangers of Bush's leadership style is that it is so closed and thus so blind, especially these days when the world is so much more volatile. But, this is precisely where democratic styles are the strongest, because they are much more flexible as they are open to better information and more capable of balancing the needs and views of all parties. And when people are involved in decisionmaking over important matters in their lives, their sense of control over their lives and their future is strengthened and their susceptibility to fear-mongering is lessened.

http://www.pacificviews.org/

[dae]

1. She's right, it's a BIG f*@king myth.

[StClone]

2. Great analysis...but

If you were reading up and paying attention the article just verifies what I have come to believe to the point of reiteration.