Asian History and US Presidents, Research Paper Example

This is the emerging role of the United States in mid-20^th century world affairs.  After the allied victories of World War II, there was a sharp change in the United States’ role in the world.  The schism between east and west and the cold war shaped American politics at this point in time.  Since the great depression, and all through the second world war, presidential powers became more important.  The position of the president became more than just a figurehead.  Now, the president must be someone who can sway both the American people as well as the congress that has the authority to challenge him.

At this point, the president had to be someone who could make both domestic and foreign policy decisions quickly and flexibly in order to walk an increasingly narrow line.  While Dwight Eisenhower had been commander of allied forces in Europe during world war II, Kennedy was the youngest elected president, who held charismatic sway with the public.  This is an evaluation of the leadership styles of Presidents Dwight Eisenhower and John Kennedy, as well as a discussion of what made them effective or inhibited their effectiveness.

Dwight Eisenhower had a leadership style that was built upon the back of his military accomplishments.    “In 1952, the Republicans chose this balding, anuncular, mild-mannered soldier to win the White House back for the GOP” (Beschloss 318)  While he wasn’t as overtly charismatic as his successor, Eisenhower presided over the post WWII economic boom of the 1950s, which is still regarded as one of the most prosperous times in U.S. history.

However, Eisenhower was, at heart, a republican, and whether he ever grappled with the issue or not, his refusal to take a position on civil rights has left an impact on the integral structure of the republican party.  He was also abstract in the way that he communicated with the country.  “He seemed to design his language to make sure that no one would remember-or in some cases understand-what he said.” (Beschloss 325)  In this sense, though Eisenhower had the understanding and ability to lead the country, he didn’t necessarily have the charismatic ability to rally the people.

Kennedy had his own type of leadership style, distinct from that of Eisenhower’s.  “In sharp contrast to presidential scholars, the American public has had an ongoing love affair with the slain president.” (Beschloss 318)  Although he was young, Kennedy was immensely popular with the people.  This allowed him to persuade the public in various ways, however, it didn’t garner him much respect with the elected congress of his day.

Because his presidency was so short, it is difficult to compare his accomplishments to others.  “A difficult task, given the relatively breif period.” (Beschloss 319)  Furthermore, presidential power, which had rised to unprecedented heights during WWII, peaked with Eisenhower.  Furthermore, Eisenhower’s landslide victory was much more thorough than the slim margin that Kennedy won by.  This meant that he was up against much harsher criticism from all sides.

This is why, in the United States, the direct leadership of the styles of the President is important.   “Enormous political damage can result from mismanagement, which may lead to failed Presidential promises, scandal, and loss of public trust.” (Ink 242)  “The peak of federal government coherence, with a professional civil service, covered the years from the mid 1940s to the mid 1960s.” (Ink 243)  Prior to this, there had been a tension between the idea that the president should have a more passive or active role in government.  The tumultuous events of the mid 20^th century, however, gave rise to the necessity for a strong leader, thus the idea of the president as activist won out during this time.

What this means is that the importance of the President became not only more preeminent in the world during after to the mid 20^th century, but the power of the office itself has also become much more solidified and strong.  After the 1960s, the president had his own staff, as well as the ability to restructure his staff into newer organizational hierarchies.  This is important when the fact that prior to WWII, the president had little or no authority to choose the small staff that he was allowed to have.  “Tension between political control and partisan neutrality in the management of the executive branch has characterized American government since the Jacksonian era. [and] Political control of executive branch policy has always been appropriate for a democratic republic.” (Pfeffner 12)

In this sense the importance of the presidents role in leadership is indicated by the deeply held notions that those within America feel represent it.  Not only does the president create and implement important policies and decisions that have both domestic and foreign implications, but the role is also seen as a sort of role model, a representation of the direction that the country as a whole wishes to take.  “An important element of a chief executive’s job may be creating the organizational and personal conditions that promote innovative thinking, the frank and open presentation and analysis of alternatives, and effective implementation of decisions by advisers and members of the bureaucracy.” (Edwards 2)

So the president’s role is not only to know, understand, and implement policies, but to also communicate those policies in an effective manner to the citizens of the country.  “Presidents invest heavily in leading the public in the hope of leveraging public support to win backing in Congress.” (Edwards 5)  The idea of leadership is represented here in the idea that the president not only goes forward with doing whatsoever that they decide, but that they create a dialogue with the people, a sort of relationship that allows them to trust in the leadership of the office.

References

Beschlos, Michael R. (2003). The Eisenhower and Kennedy: Contrasting Presidencies in a Fearful World.. Perils of the Cold War.

Edwards, George C. (2004). Persuasion is not Power: The Nature of Presidential Leadership. Oxford University.

Ink, Dwight. (2007). The President’s Managerial Leadership Responsibilities. Triumphs and Tragedies of the Modern Presidency.

Pfiffner, James P. (1998). Foundations of Public Administration. Managing the Executive Branch in the 20^th Century.