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