Tomorrow, on the President’s birthday, there will be a military parade more in the style of Kim Jong Un than that of any earlier U.S. president at peacetime. To show how far the presidency has fallen from its constitutional origins, it might be helpful to remember the story of George Washington’s spectacles.
After the Revolutionary War ended, many soldiers had not been paid. There was a movement among the soldiers of the Continental Army to reject the governance of Congress and to choose George Washington as king.
When George Washington heard about the possibility of an insurrection, he sadly and wearily showed up at the meeting of his beloved troops. Washington had been a charismatic and powerful leader through the war, but the job of a president in times of peace is to PRESIDE over the democratic process. As frustrating as the checks and balances of a democratic republic can be, they are our only safeguard against the tyranny of one person.
I don’t know if it was intentional or not, but when Washington stood before his troops, he chose to put on his spectacles. “Gentlemen,” Washington said, “you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray but almost blind in the service of my country.”
Washington no longer looked like a military icon, but an elderly man. Washington was strong enough to know that vulnerability is sometimes a better expression of leadership than bluster. Washington implored his troops “…to express your utmost horror and detestation of the (Person) who wishes, under any specious pretenses, to overturn the liberties of our Country, and who wickedly attempts to open the flood Gates of Civil discord, and deluge our rising Empire in Blood.”
Nothing could be further from the saber rattling of our current president than the time when Washington used his spectacles to lead with humility instead of bravado. After Washington’s amazing act of humanity, the army voted unanimously to submit to Congress.
Thomas Jefferson expressed marvel at Washington’s humility, saying, “The moderation and virtue of a single character probably prevented this Revolution from being closed, as most others have been, by a subversion of that liberty it was intended to establish.”