The results of recent polls reflect a remarkable American ability to separate our personal values from our expectations of leadership. According to a Wall Street Journal poll conducted on Sept. 15, 73 percent of Americans disapprove of Clinton's moral and ethical values and believe he is a poor role model for our children. On the other hand, 66 percent of the public approve of Clinton's job as President. It seems impossible to escape the conclusion that most Americans believe that moral and ethical values are irrelevant to civic leadership.
Some of us speak a good deal about our mission at Dartmouth College to educate the next generation of social leaders, so it is worth taking a minute to think about what we mean. If Bill Clinton had gone to Dartmouth College, would we consider him a successful product? Even those who oppose Clinton's policies marvel at his leadership talent and intellectual competence. Those who know him speak of his curiosity, breadth of knowledge and rational mind. All these are the marks of a good education, but are they enough?
Thomas Jefferson, who founded the first public university, the University of Virginia, to educate the leaders of our new nation, hoped to create an "aristocracy of talent and virtue," not talent alone. In 1951, John Sloane Dickey, the 12th president of Dartmouth, wrote, "To create the power of competence without creating a corresponding sense of moral direction to guide the use of that power is bad education." President James O. Freedman wrote in "Idealism and Higher Education," "Part of the task of training the leaders of tomorrow is to nurture in students a sense of idealism, a sense of personal destiny, a sense that service counts in meeting the daunting tasks that confront us."
And, most recently, President Wright noted in his inaugural speech that "the purpose of a Dartmouth education is not merely the enhancement of the self. This is not a sufficient consequence of privilege. At Dartmouth and elsewhere, education needs to engage and sustain a life of broader responsibility." This is a luminous list of advocates for educating the heart, but how do we do so?
Colleges and universities cannot presume to suggest what moral values are important, but we fail if we convey a sense that moral values are irrelevant to leadership. Our society has come to see leadership as a means to material ends. Leadership courses define leaders as those who empower and motivate others to achieve results. But, to my mind, leadership is something more difficult to measure. It embraces all those qualities that inspire others to follow, including a way of living and a sense of honor -- characteristics that may not lead to tangible results or greater productivity.
Although leaders may inspire us to follow because they create a vision of the future that is good for us, great leaders inspire us to follow even when they require our sacrifice for a vision that is good for others. Great leaders are able to connect our sense of self with a deeper meaning and a broader community. Moral and ethical values are profoundly important for this task.
So what has gone wrong? Have we abandoned Jefferson's ideal of talent and virtue among our leaders? Another look at the polls may offer a different view. The Journal/Gallup poll indicated that 46 percent of the American public believe that the moral values of the country have a great effect on their lives. I believe that the American public has decided that some moral values are important for social leadership and some are not.
Although most of us are deeply troubled by the notion that President Clinton may have obstructed justice and lied to a grand jury, many of us are not so deeply troubled by the notion that he lied about a private sexual encounter, no matter how much we may disapprove. As much as I am disappointed in Clinton's character and appalled by his judgment, I have been surprised by how much gut-level sympathy I continue to feel for his Presidency.
Another question in the Journal/Gallup poll turned up what may be a clue to my feelings and those of others: 52 percent of the American people believe that President Clinton cares about average people, while only 26 percent do not. Perhaps above all, we want our leaders to care about the common good, to care for those who need help. Even an obsessively honest and righteous person may be a failure as a moral leader unless that person reaches out to others.
This should be part of our mission at the College: to encourage you to think beyond yourselves; to be social leaders, not just business leaders; to connect your vision of the future with the common good of others. Values are not irrelevant to leadership -- they are more important than ever.
