President Carter's Use Of Moral Leadership

596 Words2 Pages

Moral leader is often times viewed as an oxymoron contradicting the each other. Many believe that a moral leader is absolutely ill equipped to lead a nation of a great power and that morality is an unnecessary factor in such leadership. Commonly, a leader is defined as one who guides through efficiency and persuasion. One key component of persuasion is personal integrity. Without personal integrity, a person can’t easily radiant their leadership onto the crowd. Moral leadership is a very different kind of leadership similar to servant leadership in a way that the whole purpose is to serve for others than for themselves. The term good leadership coincides with moral leadership, as seen through the most common example Hitler. He was an effective leader at that time for the future of Germany, but as an absolute authority, was the most immoral leader in history leaving tragic remarks on humanity despite his known …show more content…

Although his impact as president is little known to the public and perhaps disproved from the public’s eye, Carter positively led changes in many aspects of American foreign policies. First of all, President Carter effectively led compromises in Israel-Egypt peace treaty, the Panama Canal treaties and heavily advocated for human rights. For the duration of his presidency, his support of human rights had been derided as major fault of his presidency, however, this support created many lasting long term impacts. First of all, he changes the military dictatorships in Latin American to democracies keeping with the theme of “spread of democracy” and stood against the movement of dictatorships in Argentina and Chile. Majorly, his support for the solitary movement in Poland was an essential element in deteriorating Communism in the years to come. Carter’s effectiveness in solving the America’s foreign policy points that morality isn’t an obstacle in phase

Show More
Related

  • Washington's Farewell Address

    1624 Words  | 4 Pages

    George Washington, the first president of the United States, had written a very important historical speech and document towards the end of his time in office. He had written the Farewell address which focused on helping America understand the importance of preserving unity, acknowledging the rise of political parties forming, strengthening religion and morality, and he stated his position on American foreign policy. He addressed these ideas with strong tone and used incredible amount of dictions that strengthens his tone as well as representing his appeal to ethos to a strong degree. However, today’s society seemed to forget Washington’s position on foreign policy and has created a new form of the policy. But nonetheless as time grew, change occurs. In today’s society Washington’s foreign policy would include many positive and negative manifestations, but it is still a speech and document that will always apply to America.

    Read More

  • The Nature of Leadership in Billy Budd The Scarlet Letter

    979 Words  | 2 Pages

    While it would be logical for good character to be in accordance with good leadership ability, this is rarely true in application. History has proven that many effective leaders were cruel and corrupt, and even American literature has reflected the commonplace nature of corrupted politicians. Upright politicians have existed but do not stay in the brief spotlight of American attention as the ones consumed by scandal. Therefore, Americans labor under the misconception that it is acceptable for a politician to be dishonest. Politicians will ignore moral guidelines to suit the lackadaisical characters of the voters as well as for their own personal gain. Only when Americans decide that personal character is more important than charisma will quality of leadership be supplemented by the moral awareness that the job demands, but which ironically the voters often complain that American leaders do not have.

    Read More

  • American Foreign Policy in World War II

    1612 Words  | 4 Pages

    As we approach the next Presidential election the topic of American foreign policy is once again in the spotlight. In this paper, I will examine four major objectives of U.S. foreign policy that have persisted throughout the twentieth century and will discuss the effect of each on our nation’s recent history, with particular focus on key leaders who espoused each objective at various times. In addition, I will relate the effects of American foreign policy objectives, with special attention to their impact on the American middle class. Most importantly, this paper will discuss America’s involvement in WWI, WWII, and the Cold War to the anticipated fulfillment of these objectives—democracy, manifest destiny, humanitarianism, and economic expansion.

    Read More

  • Healthy Narcissism: Morality In Leadership

    814 Words  | 2 Pages

    When you think of morality in leadership you think not being followed, but leaders aiming to serve. Leaders who do not showcase their own skills, but demonstrate that they can do whats right for society. Morality in leadership is not about rank – any person holding any position can be a moral leader, but such individuals are always characterized by a deep sense of ethics, are driven by core ideals (such as justice) and are motivated by the pursuit of a higher purpose. Nonetheless, this is not the same personality that we associate with the world's greatest leaders, the abnormal ones. The most powerful minds with the most twisted thoughts and morals. Thomas Mann of University of Michigan stated that psychopaths know right from wrong, but they frankly do not

    Read More

  • Jimmy Carter's Foreign Policy

    533 Words  | 2 Pages

    Per this writer, at the beginning of his government Jimmy Carter had been governor of a southern state with no national or international involvement. Nevertheless, while having his own foreign policy goals. Carter believed in the rule of law in international affairs and in the principle of self-determination for all people. Furthermore, he wanted the United States to take the lead in encouraging universal human rights. Carter believed that American power should be exercised carefully and that the United States should avoid military interventions as much as possible. Thus, he wanted that American relations with the Soviet Union would continue to expand, and that the two nations could come to economic and arms control agreements that would diminish Cold War tensions. Carter's

    Read More

  • Becoming a Leader in High School

    643 Words  | 2 Pages

    ‘’Leadership consists not in degrees of technique but in traits of character; it requires moral

    Read More

  • Components of Leadership in Fullan's "Leading in a Culture of Change"

    1194 Words  | 3 Pages

    The first component of effective leadership is moral purpose. “Moral purpose is about both ends and means (Fullan, 2001, p.13).” Moral purpose is how people treat others and how they evolve over time by working together. Fullan states that in order to have moral purpose the other four components of leadership have of be present (Fullan, 2001). Moral purpose is natural, but it will only flourish if leaders cultivate it (Fullan, 2001). Leaders have to have strate...

    Read More

  • ABRAHAM LINCON: A Transformational Leader?

    717 Words  | 2 Pages

    Throughout history, there have been leaders who are considered as admirable due to positive influences over other individuals. For example, in my opinion, Abraham Lincoln was able to influence the masses of people because he chose to think and behave differently from other leaders before him. When a person is considered as a leader, there are several responsibilities and qualities that will attract others to follow after the teachings that are demonstrated. Leadership can be described as the process for “guiding individuals, groups, and entire organizations in establishing goals and sustaining action to support goals (Shockley-Zalabak, 2015, p. 220). Additionally, each leader will usually have a distinctive

    Read More

  • Pseudo Transformational Leadership Essay

    1234 Words  | 3 Pages

    Everyone has their definition of what makes a great leader. Some individuals base it on values, character, and ethics that a leader demonstrates. Others believe that leaders are born; that their ability to lead is natural, something that cannot be taught. Hollander and Julian (1969), argued that it is possible leaders are risen from situations, stating “there are no absolute leaders, since successful leadership must always take into account the specific requirements imposed by the nature of the group” (para 13). Many theories and definitions can play into followers’ idealized perception of a great leader but what if the leadership has behaviors that is not positive or is unethical? How do negative types

    Read More

  • Machiavelli

    562 Words  | 2 Pages

    Great leader must be seen as being great not actually being one. Machiavelli suggests this idea in D1. To seem to have the qualities is necessary as opposed to having the qualities without the people knowing about them. This is true for all leaders not just political. D1 suggests flexibility is needed, "… but you must have the mind so disposed that when it is needful to be otherwise you may be able to change to the opposite qualities." Flexibility is important; the leader all in all has to give the people what they want satisfying the majority. D1 says that great leaders are sometimes obligated to do evil if constrained without deviating from what is good (if possible), "… being often obligated, in order to maintain the state, to act against faith, against charity…"

    Read More

  • Scandals

    662 Words  | 2 Pages

    Contemporary society is always portrayed as a civilized society, in which the sense of democracy has come to woven throughout the fabric of our lives. Thanks to the mass media, the public has become more informed about what is happening in the world, from the political field such as the state and national government to the business area such as the international stock market. At the same time, people are paying more attention to the leaders. Some insist that since the major mission of the leaders is to lead the whole group to succeed in the intense competition, a leader should try every means to achieve his goal rather than care much about the ethic and morality. Those from the other camp hold a strong belief that to be an effective leader, a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards. As far as I am concerned, I prefer the latter point of view. In the following discussion, I would like to present several evidences to support my standpoint.

    Read More

  • Business Etiquette: The Importance Of Moral Leadership And Business Communication

    795 Words  | 2 Pages

    Moral leadership is based, to a greater extent, on the authority, not on power, the sources of which is coercion and punishment and its strength depends on the magnitude of these parameters. If we talk about the power, there is always the opportunity to buy or inherit it, but the authority is rather an intrapersonal entity, and the only way to get it is to earn by demonstrating the values being proclaimed in your behavior. The main mechanism of the influence of a moral leader is identification. Receiving a "credit of trust," the leader becomes an object of imitation for the subordinates who actually copy his behavior, launching an identification mechanism that takes the form of the desire to be like his leader. The influence of the moral leader lies in the ability to create, set and broadcast the standards of highly moral behavior. The identification with such a leader allows the subordinates to internalize his values ( i.e. to absorb social norms and assessments). The uniqueness of a moral leader lies in his ability to convey the values to employees at emotional and behavioral levels, to "materialize" these values.

    Read More

  • How a leader can change a society

    881 Words  | 2 Pages

    In my view most important character of a good leader is that they must be compassionate. Having a personality of caring about people is important. You can?t be a good leader unless you generally like people. That is how you bring out the best in them. No matter what credential they have and how much experience they have in administration but without being compassionate they can't ever become a responsible and successful leader. For example Hitler is known for his cruelty and he had no feelings for his own race. He failed to understand the feelings of Jews and thus persecuted them. He also failed to know the fact that the strength of his country lies in them, while opposite is Mahatma Gandhi, a major political and spiritual leader of India, followed nonviolent actions, avoiding any bloodshed in the country during their struggle for Independence. Because of his compassionate nature many leaders in today's world has looked him upon. So leader must be compassionate first without being influence by any ulterior motive.

    Read More

  • Advantage Of Moral Leadership

    716 Words  | 2 Pages

    The main different between immoral leadership and moral leadership are the way they lead. Immoral leader will be just focus on gain and increase their profit without have any thought about ethics and the environment. On the other hand moral leader will consider all matters to make a decision. They would be more people oriented and they will consider what effect will occur because of their decision. Therefore their employee will feel respected by their leader. Thus they will be more speak up, innovative and help them make a better decision then it will increase their performances on the job and their loyalty to the business or

    Read More

  • The Nature of Leadership in Billy Budd The Scarlet Letter comparison compare contrast essays

    1087 Words  | 3 Pages

    While it would be logical for good character to be in accordance with good leadership ability, this is rarely true in application. History has proven that many effective leaders were cruel and corrupt, and even American literature has reflected the commonplace nature of corrupted politicians. Upright politicians have existed but do not stay in the brief spotlight of American attention as the ones consumed by scandal. Therefore, Americans labor under the misconception that it is acceptable for a politician to be dishonest. Politicians will ignore moral guidelines to suit the lackadaisical characters of the voters as well as for their own personal gain. Only when Americans decide that personal character is more important than charisma will quality of leadership be supplemented by the moral awareness that the job demands, but which ironically the voters often complain that American leaders do not have.

    Read More

More about President Carter's Use Of Moral Leadership

Open Document