Andrew Johnson A Misunderstood Leader

Transcription

1 Andrew Johnson A Misunderstood Leader Morgan Warner Abstract In the wake of Abraham Lincoln s death, newly elected Vice President Andrew Johnson had the task of reuniting the North and the South in a time of substantial political, cultural and social divide. His policies had a large influence on the Reconstruction policies of Presidents who later came to office and thus had a long-term impact on the direction of his successors courses of action. This article examines Johnson s leadership during post-civil War America; applying modern leadership theories and investigating the influence of contextual factors. This article seeks to challenge the interpretation of Johnson s presidential leadership as a failure by instead arguing that his decisions in regard to the obstacles he faced were still demonstrations of leadership. Morgan Warner is a junior at Christopher Newport University. She is a Communication Studies major and Psychology major as well as Women and Gender Studies minor and Leadership Studies minor. Morgan is a member of the President s Leadership Program and Vice President of Making the Impossible Possible. She also serves her community as a volunteer at Grafton Middle School. After graduation, she plans to work as an administrator in the public education system. ULR Volume III Issue I 1

2 The Civil War expanded the large political, cultural and social divide in the United States. The end of the war left the South devastated, and in order to fully repair the nation, the South needed to be reconstructed. In the wake of Abraham Lincoln s death, newly elected Vice President Andrew Johnson had this task thrust upon him. The measures that he enacted, whether judged good or bad, influenced the Reconstruction policies of the presidents who later came to office. As B. D. Simpson (1998) notes, the decisions during his first year in office fundamentally shaped the course of postwar reconstruction for decades to come (p. 99). This article examines Johnson s leadership during this difficult time in American history, applying modern leadership theories including trait theory, Manz and Sims Superleadership, ethical leadership, and investigating the obstacles he faced. While Johnson is neither a well known great leader nor a vilified bad leader, it is important to investigate the full range of leaders rather than simply focus on the extremes. Leadership Obstacles To understand Andrew Johnson s leadership, one must understand the obstacles he faced during this trying time in American history. In his effort to return the Southern states back to Union politics and prevent the northern republicans from punishing southerners for secession and the war, Johnson made a bold move to initiate Reconstruction measures before Congress convened. Additionally, due to circumvention of his initial plan, Johnson was faced with skepticism from an overwhelming majority of northern republicans controlling congress. Finally, he was met with challenges from within his own cabinet which he had inherited from Lincoln. Johnson was inclined to act in ways similar to Lincoln, even though he did not have the same support from Congress and the American public. Johnson began his reconstruction measures while Congress was out of session just as Lincoln had when he declared the start of the Civil War (Coulter, 1947). Johnson viewed bringing the southern states back into the Union as the only presidential action within his Constitutional authority (Winston, 1928). His initial Reconstruction plan returned statehood to the southern states with the stipulation that they amended their constitutions to state that secession was illegal. A prominent Radical Republican, Thaddeus Stevens, commented in response to this, I fear before Congress meets [the President] will have so bedeviled matters as to render them incurable (Simpson, 1998, p. 74). Immediately upon the start of the next congressional session, however, the Radical Republicans framed legislation that barred Confederate politicians from being part of Union politics, thus virtually voiding Johnson s actions during the congressional recess (Thomas, 1968). The Radical Republicans in Congress viewed Johnson s reconstruction measures as too lenient, although it followed Lincoln s original plan. Johnson s Reconstruction measures infuriated the Radical Republicans who wanted to distribute southern property to former slaves (Hearn, 2000). The obstinacy of the Radical Republicans was a tremendous obstacle that Johnson was unable to overcome in his limited term as President. Johnson s Cabinet consisted of the members also chosen by Lincoln before his death. As such, they acted as advisors for Johnson, but they were not truly committed to his presidency. Johnson trusted the majority of the cabinet members, with the exception of his War Secretary Edwin Stanton (Simpson, 1998; Hearn, 2000; Winston, 1928). When Johnson discovered the extent of Stanton s sympathies to the Radical Republicans, he risked impeachment for ordering away an officer [Edwin Stanton] who I [Johnson] believe is doing wrong- afflicting and oppressing people instead of protecting and sustaining them (Hearn, 2000, p. 132). Leadership Analysis When going through the impeachment process, Johnson said, If I cannot be president in fact, I will not be president in name alone (Simpson, 1998, p. 123). This statement demonstrates his strong desire to enact change rather than simply hold power. However, his ability to truly utilize authority was stripped during the impeachment process. Despite being blocked from engaging in meaningful leadership, Johnson still attempted to lead. In order to understand Johnson s leadership during this tumultuous time in American history, several theories may be used to analyze his actions as president, including trait theory, behavioral tax- ULR Volume III Issue I 2

3 onomy, SuperLeadership and ethical leadership. Leadership Traits While no traits can predict leadership, there are some traits that increase the likelihood that a leader will be effective (Yukl, 2006, p. 183). Northouse identifies five major leadership traits that are central to many leadership studies. These traits include intelligence, self-confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability (2007). The three Johnson demonstrated strongest were integrity, determination and sociability. He demonstrated integrity throughout his political career, from his time as local mayor to the presidency. He was determined to do no wrong to secure right (Winston, 1928, p. 333). When he was urged to approve bills he viewed as unconstitutional in order to alleviate the tension between Congress and himself, he refused to go against his values and beliefs. This occurred so often that he was considered obstinate and bullheaded. Johnson s sociability changed from his time as a local politician to the time when he was president. As a local politician, he was sociable with his constituents and even had debates with them in his tailor shop. As he entered higher political positions, his sociability declined. He could relate to the working class, but not to classes of wealth or privilege. The last major leadership trait of Northouse that he exhibited was determination. Johnson was convinced that his policy would bring success and therefore was determined to stick to it until the end (Simpson, 1998). Yukl (2006) identifies the big five personality traits as surgency, conscientiousness, agreeableness, adjustment, and intellectance. Surgency is the most correlated to leadership, and is least exhibited by Johnson. He was hard-working and would spend hours researching for speeches in the Library of Congress when he was a member of Congress, which demonstrates his energy/activity level. Johnson does not exhibit extroversion or a need for power. He affiliated with neither southerners due to class distinctions or northerners due to his southern roots in congress. While Johnson held much power throughout his life, he did not seek it. Conscientiousness is the second-most correlated trait with leadership. He demonstrated an achievement orientation, personal integrity and dependability through accomplishments throughout his life. Johnson s need for achievement is shown through his desire for education and continual pursuit for the nation to prosper. He showed personal integrity through a strict adherence to working class public values and an unwavering conservative interpretation of the Constitution. Johnson also kept a regimented work schedule which exhibits dependability. Intellectance and adjustment are the next most correlated traits to leadership. Yukl (2006) identifies intellectance as curious and inquisitive, learning oriented and open-minded. From a young age, Johnson exhibited a curious and inquisitive nature as it related to government and politics. While working as a tailor, he hired a reader to read the newspaper, governmental reports and congressional speeches (Winston, 1928). Additionally, Johnson also was driven to become educated. While he was unable to pay for a formal education, he learned from his wife and engaged in self education throughout his life. The final aspect of intellectance as outlined by Yukl (2006) is open-mindedness, which Johnson did not display. He was not open to different ways to accomplish the reconstruction of the South. Johnson does not display adjustment as clearly, he only has one of the specific traits associated with the personality trait. Johnson had extreme confidence in his beliefs which fueled his self esteem. As Johnson s political career progressed, his lack of self control was emphasized. During his term as President, he would react to outcries from crowds. The final personality trait is agreeableness, which is only weakly associated with leadership. To the humble man and to the ignorant he [Johnson] was tender and merciful (Winston 1928 p. 225). This quotation demonstrates the nurturance Johnson showed toward average southerners. The final two traits associated with agreeableness are need for affiliation, and cheerfulness and optimistism. These traits are difficult to find in discussion of Johnson. Leadership Behaviors It is difficult to categorize leaders of the past in relation to their leadership styles when they lived in tumultuous times. The literature on Johnson throughout his presidency is focused on the tensions between Johnson and Congress, especially the Radical Republicans. Leaders are usually defined in terms of task-, relationship-, or change-oriented behaviors. Johnson is best characterized as a change-oriented leader, one who uses change-oriented behaviors to modify objectives, strategies, and work processes and facilitate adaptation ULR Volume III Issue I 3

4 to the external environment (Yukl, 2006, p. 442). Some of these behaviors include interpreting events to explain the urgent need for change; make symbolic changes that are consistent with a new vision or strategy; and influence outsiders to support change (Yukl, 2006, p. 66). While this may seem strange when considering that he wanted to restore the southern states to the Union and keep the government working as it had for the near century before, these goals were dramatic transformations to the current situation of post-civil War America. The United States and the world at large had been swept up in a rise of nationalism, bringing with it a desire for change, which Johnson was determined to reverse (Coulter, 1947). He wanted the United States to return to a weak national government and stronger state governments, with the southern states devoid of slavery. His secondary orientation was to task. He delegated power to provisional governors in the South but did not regulate them in any way. This is similar to the position of Military Governor that was bestowed upon Johnson by Lincoln for the majority of the Civil War. Throughout the literature, Johnson is rarely described as relationship-oriented, and a much greater focus is placed on his reliance on task-related behaviors. SuperLeadership SuperLeadership states the most appropriate leader is one who can lead others to lead themselves (Manz and Sims, 1995, p. 213). This theory relates most to modern situations and concedes that in the past, strong man leadership was highly regarded as good leadership (Manz and Sims, 1995). Johnson best fits the strong man type of leadership. In the strong man dimension of SuperLeadership theory, the focus of the followers is on the commands given by the leader. Johnson was able to implement his vision of Southern reconstruction in his first few months as president before Congress began its session, and the South complied. As outlined by the theory, the Southerners had fear based compliance; they feared further conflict with the North after the Civil War. A majority of Southerners also took an oath of allegiance for fear of being barred from citizenship. Strong man leaders, like Johnson, typically give assigned goals and use intimidation. Johnson showed strong man leadership when he outlined the requirements for the states to regain state status, including adopting appointed governors, holding elections for legislatures and abolishing slavery. In doing so, Southerners were granted their property, with the exception of their slaves, and in Johnson s views brought fully back into the Union, thus accomplishing the political aspect of his mission. Johnson s vision and direction are his sole creation, which is consistent with this theory. Furthermore, his power is derived exclusively from his position as the President. His followers comply simply because they feel obligated to do so. While this type of leadership is not desired for modern leaders, it was effective and widely used throughout history. Strong man leadership was not highly effective for Johnson due to the context of overwhelming Republican control in Congress. Ethical Leadership There is also evidence to suggest that Johnson exhibits moral/ethical leadership. Northouse (2007) identifies five principles of ethical leadership: respect for others, service to others, justice, honesty, and community building. Johnson respected the Southerners and trusted that they were competent to accomplish reconstruction in their own ways with his guidance rather than imposing extreme reconstruction measures on them, such as black suffrage (Winston, 1928). He also served others but not in ways consistent with Northouse s definitions. Rather than putting his followers welfare above his own plans, he believed that through his plans their welfare would increase after the passage of time. Johnson was impartial throughout his presidency; one of his guiding principles was to remain fair and just. He especially demonstrated this principle in his interactions with Congress. After Congress overrode his vetoes, Johnson did not attempt to prevent the legislation from being carried out. His honesty is demonstrated by his constant articulation of his reasoning when he vetoed legislation; he was transparent in his interpretation of the Constitution and how it applied to the proposed laws. Finally, the last aspect of ethical leadership is building community. This component is characterized by a mutual direction defined by the leader and followers, concern for the common good in the broadest sense, and the leader avoiding imposing his will on others. Due to the situation in the United States after the Civil War, an ULR Volume III Issue I 4

5 agreed upon direction between the Southerners and Johnson was not politically possible, though Johnson took into account many factors that would affect Southerners and tried to act in their best interest. He advocated for our country first, our country last, our country all the time- disregarding party for the public good (Winston, 1928, p. 365). His Reconstruction policies suggest that he was overwhelmingly concerned with the common good of Southerners. It is necessary to note that he believed that in working primarily for the common good of white Southerners it would bring them back into Congress and work toward the renewal and strengthening of our relations as one people (Winston, 1928, p. 374). Additionally, ethical leaders have integrity and act in ways consistent with their values (Yukl, 2006). Johnson shows personal integrity through constructing policy that was based upon his values derived from the Constitution (Winston, 1928). Ethical behavior includes having no intention of harm and respecting the rights of all parties involved. In trying to avoid civil unrest and rioting in the South, Johnson was willing to place cities under military rule (Winston, 1928). However, due to slavery being an accepted institution up until the Civil War, Johnson had less respect for blacks than is required for ethical leadership according to Yukl (2006). At the same time, he was not advocating for limited rights for blacks, he merely believed that the southern states could determine the rights to grant blacks in order to ensure the best relationship between the races. Yukl also identifies criteria for determining ethical leadership. The ethical leader serves and develops followers and balances their diverse interests, seeks input from followers in developing a vision, acts with integrity, takes necessary risks, discloses relevant information, and encourages constructive criticism and dissent. While Johnson meets some of the criteria, he falls short in three important areas. Ethical vision setting includes the followers in creating the vision. Johnson presented his vision as the only way for the South to succeed in becoming reintegrated into the Union. Nor was he open to critical evaluation that may have resulted in an alternative to his plan for Reconstruction. He was thus unable to balance the interests of North and South. The New York Nation wrote, if the President were to commit to-morrow every mistake or sin which his enemies have feared, his plan of reconstruction would still remain the brightest example of humanity, selfrestraint, and sagacity ever witnessed (Winston, 1928, p. 320). This quotation illustrates his ethical approach to leadership. Unfortunately, because of his close-minded nature the meaningful change he wanted to accomplish could not be done by a single, heroic individual (Yukl, 2006, p. 419). Conclusion: Leader Success Johnson s inability to achieve his desired vision for Reconstruction during his presidency and his impeachment commonly leads one to assess his leadership as unsuccessful. The schism between North and South that shaped the historical context of his presidency erected insurmountable barriers, and his southern heritage and political ideology placed him at odds with Congress and Northerners. Johnson s steadfast commitment to his values and Reconstruction policy made compromise impossible; however, his views did become the prevailing driving force of Reconstruction. He had a strong lasting impact on both Reconstruction and the politics of the future (Mellow & Tulis, 2004). This impact manifested itself in the path that Reconstruction took until the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960 s. It was jointly influenced by Johnson s lenient Reconstruction policy, and the harsher Reconstruction policy that was implemented by the Radical Republicans. Johnson s policy allowed for the states to limit and grant rights to blacks while still adhering to the national policies such as Amendments Thirteen, Fourteen and Fifteen, passed by the Radical Republicans. Johnson s Presidency is a prime example of leadership overlooked. He was neither a great leader nor a poor one; however, it is important not to disregard less successful leaders as they reveal fascinating aspects of leadership often ignored. ULR Volume III Issue I 5

6 References Coulter, E. M. (1947). The South during reconstruction Baton Rouge, Louisiana: Louisiana State University Press. Hearn, C. G. (2000). The impeachment of Andrew Johnson. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company, Inc. Manz, C.C. and Sims, Jr. H.P. (1995). Superleadership: Beyond the myth of heroic leadership. In J. T. Wren (Ed.), The leaders companion: Insights on leadership through the ages (pp ). New York: The Free Press. Mellow, N. and Tulis, J. K., ( ). Andrew Johnson and the politics of failure. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Hilton Chicago and the Palmer House Hilton, Chicago, IL. Retrieved May 26, 2009 from p59469_index.html. Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc. Simpson, B. D. (1998). The reconstruction presidents. Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas. Thomas, L. (1968). The first president Johnson: The three lives of the seventeenth president of the United States of America. New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc. Winston, R. W. (1928). Andrew Johnson: Plebeian and patriot. New York: Barnes & Noble, Inc. Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall. ULR Volume III Issue I 6