One after 101

[H2O Man]

“A good leader inspires people to have confidence in the leader. A great leader inspires people to have confidence in themselves.” —Eleanor Roosevelt


I read a comment by DUer "muriel_volestrangler" today that got me thinking that maybe a quick review of DU-Sociology 101 would be of value. There have been several OPs and numerous comments blaming President Biden, Merrick Garland, and even Jack Smith for the failure of the DOJ to prosecute and convict the sociopathic felon for the numerous federal crimes he is guilty as sin for.

Perhaps a review of both types and styles of leadership would be of worthy of consideration. And as an added bonus, I will add a brief review of the justice system. A combined understanding of these is essential, in my opinion, because there is going to be a test on it from January 20, 2025 to January 20, 2029. Hopefully, it will not be the final exam.

There are three types of leadership: Tradition, generally associated with tribal people who do things "the way they have always been done." Bureaucratic, which one understands if they have a unique issue when entering the Department of Motor Vehicles. And charismatic, which involves a leader who captures the imagination of his/her followers, and is a shooting star usually replaced by their aide with bureaucratic skills.

There are five styles of leadership. These include the authoritarian, which is the felon's wettest dream. There is the democratic style that encourages group participation and consensus-building. There is expressive leadership, most often found in non-profit social services groups focused on caring about human beings. There are instrumental leaders, who have specific goals in mind. And there are laissez-faire leaders, who are hands-off and allow group members autonomy in decision-making.

Rather than have an open-book pop quiz, here are the answers. Joe Biden, like every US president with but one exception, provided bureaucratic leadership throughout his political career. His style encouraged group participation and building consensus. More, when it came to the DOJ, he correctly took a laissez-faire approach. Merrick Garlan has been a bureaucratic leader, though he has followed the traditions of the DOJ in investigating organized crime. However, one can debate if that was appropriate in the case of the felon. Jack Smith also works within bureaucracy, though he seemed somewhat charismatic when appointed. His style is definitely instrumental, with clear goals.

Now, for a quick comment on the US justice system. It is, by definition, a bureaucracy. Thus, like the DMV, it is geared to deal with the most common issues in the same way. For example, it tends to deal with traffic tickets the same way. But it is imperfect. Most people realize it is a two-tiered system, with wealthy people treated differently than the poor or middle class. Obviously, there are other factors that can come into play, including one's skin color. There is corruption. If one enjoys wealth and social status, they can hire lawyers who can delay a case. In this instance, the case was dragged out until the felon won the 2024 presidential election.

I hope that this information assists in the understanding of why things have unfolded the way they have. I'm not happy, nor am I saying, "Oh well. Shit happens." Rather, we need to understand systems in order that we might use them to our advantage. And keep the focus on the actual criminals.

[Easterncedar]

1. Thank you. A valuable analysis as always.

I am saving this for closer reading later. Right now, I am cooking. There are still many many things for me to feel grateful for, and I will celebrate with family. The dark side can’t take that.

I am grateful for you, H2O Man, and the good folks here at DU.

[H2O Man]

3. Thank you!

I hope that you & yours have a great holiday! I'll be spending it with three of my children, their significant others, and my grandson. There are few things that compare to not only playing with a two year old, but also watching him eat! And in December, my other daughter, her husband, and my two month old granddaughter will be visiting from Europe.

[msfiddlestix]

2. you quite succinctly summed up in a very organized manner, what most of us have learned by observation

for a life span of over 3/4 of a century. We know these things about our system, not from university's or pundit classes preaching, to theor audiences but simply what have been forced to observe and accept on a certain level for a very long time.

So to me, understanding how our system has been working with warts and all,.. are now having to face the shocking reality it's all going to change quite radically and not for the good.
Instead of making improvements, fixing what's broken, it looks like it's going to be pretty much an enclave for the most corrupt, twisted,diabolical den of vipers that not even Mark Twain had once described. Worse. So much worse.

I have no idea how we are going to overcome this, or be able to achieve a democratic process of change, where the institutions intended to protect democratic process is itself controlled by anti-democratic fascists elites. Elections? In California, maybe we'll be able to have elections, but nationally?
I don't see it happening with these shit fucks in control of it all.
Do you?

[H2O Man]

4. Interesting.

I agree that a person does not need to attend college to understand systems. Heck, I set a state university record by challenging the classes for my 3rd and 4th years -- at the same time -- and maintained the old 4.0. And I'd attribute that to observation, though the quality of said observation was improved by both reading and talking with intelligent people. But that's just me. (Note: While I saved quite a bit of money, I readily admit that I was wrong in thinking it would be worth something in the future. Grocery shopping recently has made this clear.)

While many people are equally able understand systems, there are advantages to knowing the correct definitions of the various things involved in leadership and styles in an organized way. Over my many decades of life, I've found that helpful in communicating with government officials. That may be moreso when communicating with politicians (and their staff) that have attended college.

Now, I fully agree that those who have been to their llocal DMV encounter an obvious exception to proper forms of communication including systems. And they have a bureaucratic experience worthy of any higher institution of education. Yet the "proof in the pudding" is in the application. I will suggest that those who "get it" have no need to read my organized nonsense ..... but there have been a number of our friends here who have expressed outrage at President Biden and Jack Smith for the felon's escaping conviction in federal court. Thus, my essay was aimed at those friends. And also anyone who may have trouble getting to sleep.

The other topic which you mention -- which absolutely is the essential issue -- is survival. I wish I had the answer. Heck, I'd be happy with even little parts of the answer. Or how to be part of the answer. There are times when I am 100% subjective -- by at times worrying about the younger generations in my extended family, and others when I have almost a sense of relief in thinking at my age and in my health, I won't be around for many, if any, future presidential elections. Maybe that's why I am delighted when I have young adults in real life ask me what I know about systems in sociology, anthropolgy, and/or boxing.

Objectively, I've posted a few long and tedious essays recently about how all organic life on earth, from the single celled to human empires, either grow or decay, and about the factors found in human history's crumbled empires. As a life-long gardener, I think there might be advantages to considering bringing new growth from the compost the next four years will bring. I'll start by saying I think there should be an increased amount of attention to grass roots organizing and cooperative efforts.

Thank you for a very good response!

[malaise]

5. K & R

For visibility

[H2O Man]

12. Thank you!

[duhneece]

6. Gotta come back to this nt

[H2O Man]

13. Thanks!

[malthaussen]

7. It is, however, a failure of leadership of any kind not to recognize when special conditions apply.

It may be a failure of imagination, it may be a failure of nerve, it may be a failure for any number of reasons. But if the Democratic Party seriously thought DJT and his cabal were a serious threat to democracy, it was incumbent upon them to do something to defend the US Constitution in line with their oath. Instead, they allowed things to proceed as though they were just the normal grinding of the mills of justice. There can, again, be many reasons for this, and all sorts of arguments one might offer to demonstrate that things had to be that way. But if they really thought it was an emergency, they fucking well didn't act like it, and so here we are.

I cannot regard it as anything less than a complete failure of the US Government that, presented with a clear traitor who violated so many laws it is impossible to count, they were unable to bring him to justice and deal with his threat. If that is a necessary consequence of the way we do business in the United States of America, then maybe the nihilists are right and the country has no right to exist. In realpolitik, after all, only the country that can defend itself is considered justified in existing. If DJT and the people behind him were such a threat, we have manifestly failed to defend ourselves from him. Blame the voters? Why does the government get a free pass?

-- Mal

[BeerBarrelPolka]

8. +1,000

[H2O Man]

14. Right.

It isn't as if there haven't been other criminal presidents, and so the very thought had not ever been considered. Nixon, Reagan-Bush, and bush-Cheney all provided -- at very least -- food for thought. Or am I reading too much into other White House criminals, where only those carrying out their orders are at risk of facing consequences?

There were people like Mark Meadows and Roger Stone who should have been grilled. Considering how fast the January 6 Committee got answers, it would seem the DOJ could have.

[malthaussen]

23. My biggest gripe has been the indulgence of the tactics of delay.

When a defendant makes an appeal, Higher Court has the right to expeditiously and decisively tell him to shove it. When an advocate requests a delay, in sentencing, in discovery, in any of the processes of justice, again, the presiding judge has the right to tell him to shove it.

It was quite obvious to anyone that the defendant was manipulating the system to create delay in order to render the judgement moot. If the people with the authority to rule on his motions had acted like they understood this, and expedited the process rather than allowed delay after delay, it is possible defendant would have been brought to justice before he received the "Get Out of Jail Free" card he was so desperately trying to acquire. They did not act expeditiously, though, for whatever reasons seemed good and sufficient to them at the time.

Defendant received toothless "warning" after "warning" to moderate his conduct. He never did, and nothing was done. For whatever reasons. When defendant was finally convicted on lesser charges, the presiding judge delayed and postponed sentencing, until we are finally at the point where it won't come until 2029 (LOL), by which time defendant as well as you and I may well be dead anyway. And do you know, I have seen pundits who consider this a "victory" of justice, that defendant will be sentenced in the great by-and-by rather than the conviction being vacated or some other such nonsense.

I don't even blame the USSC, much, for codifying what was already clear: that Presidents are above justice. It seems to me that much too much deference was paid to the fact that defendant once held an elective position of trust and responsibility in the Federal government, and not enough on his manifest crimes (to say nothing of his abuse of that office of trust and responsibility). Perhaps too much credence was given to the brags (threats) that there would be armed insurrection if defendant was treated in any way remotely worthy of the number and nature of his crimes. Again, there may be many reasons why defendant was treated as no other individual suspected of crimes of his nature has been treated, but he was, and here we are.

Extraordinary individuals can overcome systems, and inertia. Ordinary ones are usually the prisoners of them. (It is this truth that gives me the most hope for the next four years: it is much easier to brag about what you're going to do, and wave your radical "plans" in everyone's face, than it is to actually implement those plans) Nobody who was in a position to deal with the emergency and invoke decisive actions did so (Mr Smith is probably an exception, but his power was limited). This is a failure of the systems, yes, but also a failure of the individuals within the system. But it is, arguably, fruitless to blame people for not being what we wanted them to be.

-- Mal

[MuseRider]

9. Thank you!

Long, long, loooooong day today and tomorrow morning so I just wanted to get my place set so I do not lose it before I can read it.

[H2O Man]

15. Thanks!

[Saoirse9]

10. It is useful to understand systems and leadership styles

But it doesn’t change anything that happened.

I am willing to do just about anything to salvage democracy. But I think it’s too late.

Any action I am given to do that would help, I will do it. For example I will write to DOJ as you suggested in your last essay.

I am teetering on the edge of leaving the country. I don’t want to. I love my life here. Maybe I can be more useful outside the country so any protesting I do can’t be punished.

I don’t blame any one person for this failure. Well okay I do blame Garland. I think no one was prepared for a man as evil as 45. Our systems were overcome by the evil coming at us from so many different directions. From the media, to the DOJ, to Congress, hundreds of people failed to protect us. No one ever expected this country to be overrun by fascism. No one was prepared and even when they knew for sure what was happening they weren’t strong enough to take the necessary steps to stop it.

We have been conquered by fascism and we just have to get used to it. Like they have done in other fascist countries.

I honestly believe my safest course of action is to leave here and take my
money with me, little that there is. Else I will lose it all.

But I don’t want to leave. I am making the best of a terrifying situation.

[H2O Man]

17. Okay.

I see I need to make a long and boring response. In post #14, I responded to a Good Friend's comments. Those comments, similar to your's, are right on target. I mentioned the recent history of presidents committing crime while in office. My hopes when posting on DU is to start conversations on topics like this, where others move it forward.

Now, Nixon resigned before being impeached by the House, and convicted by the Senate. And, of course, Ford pardoned him. In today's context, Nixon, Reagan-Bush, and bush-Cheney would be safe because of the USSC ruling. But the felon's case is different: he was twice impeached, with two not-guilty decisions by the Senate. Had they convicted him in the Senate, he could have been prevented from holding public office again.

So we know that Article 2, Section 4 of the Constitution provides for the houses of Congress to deal with criminal presidents. So that isn't the problem. That raises the question of why that system does not work? It's easy and accurate to blame republican party in Congress. Or some of the federal judges, including the majority on the USSC. As I noted last week, the first factor that is easily identified in the decay of empire is government corruption. And we can trace the damage to the workings of the government -- all three federal branches -- back to the Nixon era, at an increasing pace.

The Constitution provides for self-correcting corruption in government in more ways than Article 2, Section 4. It allows citizens to vote out compromised or corrupt politicians. Obviously, it is a slow process. But the biggest problem is the quality of men and women the public puts in office. Do you remember quotes about "government" from Chief Waterman and Rubin that I've posted on DU? The other quote from Rubin I'll look for tomorrow has to do with how to change government, we must change ourselves. I note that both Malcolm said much the same. I think that it is worth considering, as individuals and groups.

[malthaussen]

22. Pat, your comments are never boring.

And because they are never boring, they are also never too long.

Now, your children may have different thoughts on the matter.

-- Mal

[Saoirse9]

24. I agree with all the points you make here

and in reply #14. Trust you to make an intelligent and well thought out reply.

But what is causing a lot of anxiety is what to do *right now*. And there are very few courses of action that feel 100% right.

I feel we're fucked. No matter how it happened that is the bottom line. We can't go backwards and fix what is broken in arrears.

Sorry I am not being very supportive and I do appreciate what you're trying to do here.

[Hekate]

11. KnR

[H2O Man]

18. Thank you!

[AKwannabe]

16. Thank you! This is brilliant

I am sick of the Biden & Garland blame race

[H2O Man]

19. Or Jack Smith.

I think that one shows a lack of familiarity with the federal court system that Mr. Smith was operating in.

[dmr]

20. K&R

Wonderful thread!

[Blue_Tires]

21. Bookmarked for later