Lack of trust is a reoccurring theme through out the three cases. One might ask, why you need trust in any civil society? Lack of trust in a civil society has the society with no real stability. Trust in authority is lacking in each case.
The approval rating for Bill Clinton is high. Does this mean that most Americans trust Bill Cliton? Most polls would tell that trust is a serious issue. So, what is the consequences of Americans not having trust in there president? It can’t be to bad because the economy is doing great and the budget and finally balanced. Most Americans are happy so what is the problem?
The lack of trust is a direct correlation with weak and/or illegitimate authority. Trust with our president has always been a sensitive issue. Richard Nixion broke that trust with the country and sealed the fate for himself and his party for a short term. No one really understood why Nixon had ordered the break in of the democratic offices in the first place. What made matters worse is Nixion never came out and admitted his mistake even when the evidence was overwhelming. Clinton’s case has some similarities to it. While he finally did come out and admit what he had done he showed little remorse and accusations still remain about a cover up.
The lack of trust in a political position in this country tends to the norm. It is created and redefined every day in Washington with a political figure. This creates an image and a strong stereotype for all political figures. This in turn hurts all of our civil society. Without the trust then how do you have the legitimate authority to lead the country. Most would say that Clinton’s leadership really is not the question but his judgment is. To me, that is a contradiction and that poor judgment leads to poor leadership. His poor judgment leads to his ethics and morals that he has. People with weak family values will have a hard time trusting Cliton with just recognition of their own problems.
The lack of trust is not just with Cliton in the impeachment arguments. All of the political system seems to be lacking credibility. How mush faith do people have that their representative will represent their opinion and not act in the best interest of their party? Who in all this has the best interest in the country? If Congress does not represent the majority and decides on the rational of what party they are in then it is a illegitimate use of authority.
Cananada’s theme in the early part of the book was an issue with trust. In such a community, trust was not apparent and was earned. The lack of trust went further then authority. In his neighborhood trust was earned the hard way by a serious of tests. The policy matrix in that community dictates that trust when earned is essential for survival. Trust within sub cultures of the society also lead to survival. Even with individual families trust was earned. Geoffrey Canada’s mother sent his bothers out to retrieve a jacket to prove that the family could trust in each other in adversity.
Federal mandates dictated massive efforts to extent efforts to improve the equality of the educational opportunity. A lack of trust was apparent in Hamiltion High in the 60’s and 70’s. This was in part do to the end of segregation of schools. At such a great time of transition there were so many outside influences trying to control the policy matrix. Most notable was the federal government mandating the segregation.
The lack of shared values during the transition played a crucial role in the process. The civil rights was suppose to be a trickle down effect from the federal government. The problem there is that not all respected government officials believed in equality for education. Conflict arose and with it side were drawn. Ho could the government decide on what a “moral education” is when such confusion existed on what morals were for many political figures. The lack of shared values weighed heavily with trust of many just to provide a safe educational environment.
The lack of values can be an argument traced back to the Clinton’s scandal. Who is to say that Clinton himself did not help dictate what many people believe is a society that is severely lacking values. To many, he began this process early when he answered what kind of undergarment he wore or when he admitted to trying marijuana even when he didn’t inhale.
Shared values was the theme in Sturgis’s educational mission. Sturgis was an example of Grants of a school that had a strong positive ethos. They had a strong ethos because the parents, staff, and faculty all had shared the belief that education was development in not just academic but in emotional and mental development. These shared values were evident with the quality of work that the faculty put in and the amount of trust that the parents had. Parents understood the role of the educators and teachers demonstrated their commitment during meeting when they were carefully prepared to talk and help assess every student.
The positive ethos represented the enduring shared values and character at Surges. At the heart of the ethos was trust with legitimate use of power. The parents had strong trust with the leadership at the school. They recognize that the leaders of the schools were chosen because “they best exemplify values and that they are the best of us, persons capable of symbolizing tradition.” How many people would agree that Bill Clinton is capable of symbolizing American tradition?