 |
| Seeking spiritual
solace: Jimmy
Swaggart faces up to his indiscretions |
| © Bettmann /
Corbis |
|
Political leaders may suddenly accelerate into the
apology mode when their political fortunes are at stake. But that
is not their instinct, says Michael Munger, chair of the political-science
department at Duke. "People who have that sort of sensibility
in terms of fairness are not likely to become politicians. Such
people are turned off by the process itself--it's ugly. And even
if you wanted to apologize, your advisers would tell you not to.
If you put yourself out to be president, and if you are to have
any kind of serious chance, you have to be an essentially different
kind of person. That involves personal qualities that we wouldn't
necessarily think are admirable in other contexts--a kind of resilience,
and also an ability to shut out other people's feelings. And for
an apology to be real, what you're trying to do is reach out to
others and say, 'I care about your feelings.' "
Reportedly, Vermont Governor Howard Dean, in his run for the Democratic
nomination, sought advice from Gary Hart, whose own presidential
ambitions were derailed by what was widely perceived as reckless
personal behavior. Hart's basic message was: Wimps don't become
president. Dean took Hart's message a little too much to heart
and later was compelled to apologize after remarking that Democrats
should reach out to the population of truck-driving Southerners
who display Confederate flags. He had touched on a hypersensitive
theme, Munger says, though he certainly was correct in recognizing
the need to broaden the Democratic appeal.
 |
| Seeking spiritual
solace: Cardinal Law acknowledges his oversights |
| © Reuters
/ Corbis |
|
Wimps seemingly won't become governor of California either. So
Arnold Schwarzenegger succeeded with a rather strained apology
to California voters: "Yes, it is true that I was on rowdy
movie sets, and I have done things that were not right.... Those
people that I have offended, I want to say to them, I am deeply
sorry about that." In Munger's view, anyone who was already
opposed to the movie actor wasn't won over. Those who supported
him but were wavering could take solace in his stated contrition.
But it was less an apology than a "framing of the issue," or
an explanation that hinged on perceptions of Hollywood behavior.
That kind of pseudo-apology also seems to shift the blame to overly
sensitive victims--those who were somehow "offended." There
are two ways to understand such a statement, Munger says. "One
is that it's a strategic ploy to try to diminish blame. The other
is that it's an honest psychological reaction on the part of someone
who is just not capable of thinking of himself as doing wrong.
I wonder if some capacity for self-delusion is a requirement for
being a politician."
In electing our politicians, we favor "an absence of self-doubt," Munger
says. The greatest characteristic of Ulysses S. Grant, as a Union
general, was that "he never second-guessed himself," says
Munger. After he took over, "finally, the Union started to
win the Civil War. And if he lost troops, well, that's the price
we pay. There were at times unbelievable numbers of casualties,
and he was quite cavalier about it. But it probably could not have
been otherwise." People either give up their positions of
public leadership or they become so thick-skinned as to be incapable
of apologizing, he says.
Self-doubt wasn't evident in mid-March, when Senator John Kerry,
the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, found himself
entangled with an unexpectedly "live" microphone. Kerry
was overheard calling his opposition "the most crooked, you
know, lying group I've ever seen." He later told a news conference
that "I have no intention whatsoever of apologizing for my
remarks." Conservative columnist William Safire speculated
that Kerry had bought into the view that "apologies are for
wimps.... John Edwards just proved that nice guys get great press
clips but don't win elections."
And nice guys can't recast their place in history. The current
documentary The Fog of War centers on the endlessly enigmatic Robert
McNamara, former secretary of defense and an architect of the Vietnam
War. Filmmaker Errol Morris ponders the consequences of McNamara's
finally explaining--or apologizing for--his longtime silence about
his doubts on the war. "Damned if you do, damned if you don't," Morris
muses. McNamara responds firmly that he'd prefer to remain in "the
damned if you don't" camp.
Not only is it out of character for a politician to apologize,
it's also rare, Munger says, for a political apology to reverse
political fortunes. Trent Lott profusely and repeatedly apologized
for his comment that the nation would have been better off had
Strom Thurmond won the presidential race in 1948. Lott's remarks
were seemingly off-the-cuff and clearly meant to hearten the aging
senator, and onetime ardent segregationist, as he marked his milestone
100th birthday. Still, his detractors observed that Lott had a
track record--supporting discrimination at Bob Jones University,
speaking up for the segregationist Council of Conservative Citizens,
standing against the Voting Rights Act, rejecting several minority
judicial candidates. It was that personal history, says Munger,
that made the apologies ring hollow and led to his giving up a
Senate leadership role.
"If Bill Clinton had been caught telling a racist joke, he
would have been forgiven. That's because people had a lot of experience
with him that made them think he's not really a racist. For Trent
Lott, it seemed with this episode that he was acting in character.
And that is much harder to apologize for."
It's hard, then, to see a scenario for an apology developing in
the White House--though the rationale may be there. In late January,
David Kay, chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq, reported that
no weapons of mass destruction (WMD) had been found or were likely
ever to be found. Kay said that he had "innumerable analysts
come to me in apology" as they realized that "the world
they anticipated" didn't match the facts on the ground. The
New York Times' Paul Krugman titled a column on Kay's findings "Where's
the Apology?" But Munger's speculation about the ultimate
presidential position is that President Bush "will never apologize,
because, if he does, he owes an apology to Saddam Hussein, the
U.N., and the French.... I would guess that the Bush line is going
to be that Saddam would have developed WMD. It was just a matter
of time."
After all, says Munger, an American business icon, Henry Ford,
is said to have lived by the doctrine "Never apologize, never
explain." It was an American literary icon, Ralph Waldo Emerson,
who said, "No sensible person ever made an apology."
But a public apology can resound in big ways, even in small places.
Last November, villagers of the tiny Fiji Islands settlement of
Nubutautau wept as they apologized to descendants of a British
missionary killed and eaten by their ancestors 136 years ago. The
villagers and relatives of the missionary were taking part in a
ritual intended to lift a curse that, the locals believe, had caused
an extended run of bad luck. According to The New York Times, a
cow was slaughtered and a hundred sperm-whale teeth were given
to eleven of the relatives who made the trip. A fourth-generation
descendant of the missionary got a kiss from the village chief,
himself a descendant of the chief who cooked the missionary. It
seemed that the circle of misdeeds, repentance, and forgiveness
was complete.
return to page one
of this article. |