• English Site
• > World

America, Land of Extremes

An Enigmatic Country Elects a New President

By Gerhard Spörl

Part 3: The Next President Should Have a Greater Degree of Modesty and Humility

The 44th president of the United States has his work cut out for him. Back in 1980, America elected Ronald Reagan to the White House in a similar situation because he exuded unflappable optimism and left no doubt that America could bounce back from any crisis. His country saw him as a kind of prophet -- and ignored his incompetence and his reluctance to work long hours. The Republicans have chosen him as their icon, the standard by which all subsequent candidates are measured.

But what distinguishes a good president? The most common answer is "experience." The idea here is that politics is an occupation where you have to start at the bottom and work your way up. You get a feel for the terrain and observe how others react in situations that demand decisions. You learn how to do things right and what mistakes to avoid -- and how to behave in a competitive climate and under intense pressure. Eventually, at least according to political philosophers, your powers of judgment have been sufficiently honed by years of practice to meet the key qualification for the highest public office in America.

Essentially, this view of political values is rather widespread in Europe. In Germany and France, future presidents and prime ministers often serve as cabinet members and ministers, and thus gain essential knowledge and skills. Helmut Schmidt, for example, was a German politician who particularly appreciated the importance of experience, and served in a number of traditional ministerial positions before he took the helm as chancellor. In addition, aspiring politicians have to gain acceptance within their own parties, which constitute the other receptacles of power. German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy may not be products of their parties, but their parties are a crucial condition for their power.

America is different. In the US, parties have no life of their own, but are merely products of their protagonists, structures designed for an election and organized around the top candidates. Before they become president, most candidates have served either as a state governor or as a senator in Washington. That is an exceedingly small playing field compared to the White House with its abundance of power.

In addition, experience doesn't play the key role in America that it does in Europe.

Roosevelt picked Harry S. Truman as vice president because he was no competition. Truman served as an artillery officer in World War I, and that constituted his knowledge of the world. He remained proud of his roots in Missouri, and was a senator for his home state. When he died, he was extremely unpopular. Meanwhile, scholars rank him as one of the greatest US presidents, as the man who gave America a philosophy during the Cold War.

John F. Kennedy was 43 years old when he moved into the White House. His experience was primarily based on a number of years as senator for the state of Massachusetts. That alone would not have been enough to overcome the Cuban Missile Crisis, a confrontation between the US and the Soviet Union which brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. It took other time-honored statesmanlike qualities to master this situation: excellent judgment, Kennedy's ability to put himself in Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev's shoes, patience and nerves of steel.

By contrast, Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard Nixon had a wealth of experience as members of Congress and vice presidents. Johnson failed in Vietnam and bitterly complained that his historical accomplishments to enhance the civil rights of blacks have been forgotten. Nixon's presidency is well known for ending the Vietnam War and establishing diplomatic relations with China -- and for his shameful resignation due to the Watergate Affair.

America has actually never had qualms about sending beginners to the White House. "Learning by doing" is the confident advice that is given to inexperienced presidents. The job builds character. If the experiences with novices had generally proven to be a disappointment, the Americans would have changed their basic attitude. Jimmy Carter, the respectable peanut farmer from Georgia, was pious and ineffective. Bill Clinton, the sunny boy from Arkansas, learned quickly how to stand his ground under the most difficult circumstances -- which he brought upon himself with his escapades. And if a president really requires the benefit of experience to be successful, then Bush's first cabinet would have been the best of all times. Marshaling a team with more experience than Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Cheney and Colin Powell is virtually an impossible task. However, it failed to prevent the administration from making enormous blunders and horrendous mistakes.

In 2008, two candidates face off that represent nearly a perfect contrast between experience and exuberance. John McCain is plugging his image as the veteran politician with a discerning and balanced sense of judgment. He has very little choice. At his age, 72, he can't sell himself as a passionate reformer. The boyish inexperienced candidate is Barack Obama, who represents the next generation, which feels that it is time to replace baby boomers such as Clinton and Bush.

In a historic sense, McCain follows in the footsteps of Dwight D. Eisenhower, the general who became president at a time when his country had grown weary of war. McCain's main reference for the job is the Vietnam War, especially his suffering as a prisoner of war in Hanoi. He sees himself as an American patriot who always puts his country first -- yet, paradoxically, in an act of ultimate personal ambition, he would now like to become president at a ripe old age.

By contrast, Obama portrays himself as the political heir to the Kennedys and Martin Luther King, Jr. His credentials are also based on his biographical background, a black father and a white mother, raised in Hawaii and Indonesia, with roots in Kenya. The legacy that he would like to represent aims to achieve reconciliation between blacks and whites. If he is elected president, he will be living proof of the long road that America has traveled since the murders of the Kennedy brothers and King. His candidacy alone is a groundbreaking event in the history of this country.

Still, being President of the United States still remains a dream job, no matter how many crises the country may be facing. The man in the White House is both head of state and head of the government -- he is the leader of the Free World. He has "hard power" at his disposal, a vast military force on water, land, and in the air, and a formidable arsenal of nuclear weapons. His country also still possesses a wealth of "soft power," in other words, the allure of American culture in the broadest sense. He is the ideal overall representative of this wildly exuberant country as it rushes toward the future, a nation that would rather look forward than backward, always on the move, evolving, and changing the world beyond its borders.

A dream job? A killer job. The 44th president will have to maintain an upbeat mood in the country and soften the blow of the economic crisis. His historic mission will include winning back America's lost moral and political authority. He may well end up primarily occupied with setting things straight in Iraq, the entire Middle East and in Afghanistan. If Friedman is right, and America has lost eight years, how long will it take to make up for this?

America elects a new president and the entire world looks on, party impressed, partly amused and partly disconcerted.

It is impressive how this country, 232 years after it was founded, has lost none of its vitality. Americans have no doubt that crises are natural a part of life -- that they present an opportunity to turn over a new leaf, for each individual as well as the entire country. It is also amusing to hear the political romanticism that all politicians need to muster if they want to be heard. Even in Europe, all democracies rely on pat slogans about change and transformation, about a new awakening and a new beginning. But America has a different quality. America believes enthusiastically in the ability to change the world and mankind.

America's enduring claim to rule the world, however, can be rather disconcerting. In America, the writings of Reinhold Niebuhr are currently experiencing a minor renaissance. Niebuhr, an American theologian whose parents came from Germany, died in 1971, but during his best years, he basically acted as the voice of reason in America. He is attributed with the statement that America bears the "shining armor of self-righteousness," as if it were born to lead the world. Niebuhr wrote: "Our greatest weakness as a nation is our exaggerated image of America's virtuousness. ... We believe that America is exceptional in the world, a people of unsurpassed generosity and benevolence. We assume that God is always on our side and that we have a special bond with the Almighty."

This weakness has characterized the past eight years. If he is well advised, the 44th president will start his first term of office with a greater degree of modesty and humility, either based on his wealth of experience, or thanks to his power of judgment, which stems from an extraordinary life. The world will be rapt with attention as it watches and hopes for a satisfactory ending.

Gerhard Spörl is the chief editor of DER SPIEGEL's foreign desk.