Customer Reviews

Hubris and the Presidency: The Abuse of Power by Johnson and Nixon

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I've just put down Richard Curtis' book, "Hubris and the Presidency," and it has left me with a great sadness. It leaves one with a sense of shame, almost,that such a glorious conception as democracy has become so subverted, and perverted, as to have become a battle between two almost indistinguishable groups of politicians intent on maintaining their positions of power, and access to the money derived thereby. What makes me the saddest, however, is the realization, through the examples Curtis has chosen, that it might be said that any president (or other politician) will pay the price of overwhelming hubris eventually even if he was not born with traits that encouraged the development of that hubris in the extreme in the presidency.

The quote on page 613 by David Frost, in trying to pin Nixon down on how he justified the illegalities he (Nixon) had resorted to, tells a great deal about my hypothesis: "Nixon's answer will probably resonate throughout history as the epitome of an hubristic president: 'Well, when the president does it, that means it is not illegal.'"

Since I was teethed on the age of FDR, and have lived through many and varying types of presidencies since then, we feel most acutely the risk that any mere man must run if he is to persuade his party he can persuade the electorate to make him president. Although few presidents have reached the horrifying levels of pure criminality permitted by that hubris as LBJ and RMN with Vietnam and Watergate, if the lives and deeds of others before and after them were examined as closely as Curtis does these two, the similarities, I am sure, would be even more striking than appears to us through limited memory alone.

I am also mightily impressed by the sheer volume of research, from details of their lives to the quotes of those who "knew them when." More significantly, I am impressed with Richard Curtis' ability to pull it all together in such a masterly way that one can read through the whole thing and find a sense of continuity, a nice flow, as it were, to the narration in support of his thesis, that one can indeed finish such a lengthy book, and one of such intensity, without flinging one's hands up in despair at the sheer volume of the material. I am really impressed!

Hubris and the Presidency: The Abuse of Power by Johnson and Nixon is an intriguing and well-balanced book about the modern American presidency.

The central thesis of Hubris is that excessive pride and self-confidence (what the Ancient Greeks called "hubris") intoxicates American presidents and eventually is the cause of their eventual downfall and self-destruction.

There are thirteen concepts that comprise hubris in Curtis's schema ranging from delegation and confrontation to paranoia, isolation and "immolation" (being consumed by the flames of political ambition and misdeeds.) Curtis devotes a chapter on each concept to both Johnson and Nixon. What results from this parallel, back-to-back presentation is a careful and examination of the characters and foilables of each man and how thier egos, inflexibility and faulty decisions consumed them.

Secondly, what emerges from the book is an interesting blend of history, psychology and political analysis, written in a lively story-telling style that appeals both to the scholarly, as well as the general reader. There are a lot of interesting facts about the Office of the President that are both revealing and illustrative of how the ever-increasing costs, complexity and power of the Office contribute to hubris. Patterns of presidential behavior, which at the time seemed unreasonable, with hindsight, fit the hubris model.

Finally, one clear conclusion of Hubris is how complicated the modern American presidency has become. It is no longer the stuff of great national myths. Instead, it has become a window for showcasing national character flaws and to pillory any individual who holds the office and dares to damage the American mystique.

I started this book with much anticipation and for the first couple of hundred pages or so it did not disappoint. The discussion of and facts concerning the interaction of Johnson and Nixon with the people around them was extremely interesting, and revealed much about their "hubris" (i.e. how each of them treated their families and associates was very interesting). Then... well the author began an ethics lesson with painfully long discussions at the beginning of each chapter regarding the various levels of hubris without really, in my opinion, applying them clearly to Johnson or Nixon. In second half of the book, he continually referenced to their respective actions regarding Vietnam and Watergate (in Nixon's case), as examples of hubris. Clearly Johnson and Nixon displayed hubris in how each acted during and in response to such events and clearly such events were huge during that time, but how often can you reference to the same events as examples of hubris. In addition, I'd be surprised if the author missed any historical quote regarding hubris, even remotely, from any recognizable historical figure.. there were, it seemed, hundreds of quotes, which slowed me down considerably. Finally, there were some glaring incorrect statments in the book such as, for example, toward the end there is a passage about a possible Nixon impeachment trial in the Senate before Chief Justice Rehnquist!!!!! Warren Burger would have presided.

Again, not bad, but too long and bogged down with repetition, ethical sermonizing and needless and endless quotes.

I started this book with much anticipation and for the first couple of hundred pages or so it did not disappoint. The discussion of and facts concerning the interaction of Johnson and Nixon with the people around them was extremely interesting, and revealed much about their "hubris" (i.e. how each of them treated their families and associates was very interesting). Then... well the author began an ethics lesson with painfully long discussions at the beginning of each chapter regarding the various levels of hubris without really, in my opinion, applying them clearly to Johnson or Nixon. In second half of the book, he continually referenced to their respective actions regarding Vietnam and Watergate (in Nixon's case), as examples of hubris. Clearly Johnson and Nixon displayed hubris in how each acted during and in response to such events and clearly such events were huge during that time, but how often can you reference to the same events as examples of hubris. In addition, I'd be surprised if the author missed any historical quote regarding hubris, even remotely, from any recognizable historical figure.. there were, it seemed, hundreds of quotes, which slowed me down considerably. Finally, there were some glaring incorrect statments in the book such as, for example, toward the end there is a passage about a possible Nixon impeachment trial in the Senate before Chief Justice Rehnquist!!!!! Warren Burger would have presided.

Again, not bad, but too long and bogged down with repetition, ethical sermonizing and needless and endless quotes.