Mass shootings equal tragedy, a lot of talk and not much else. So let me make a radical suggestion. Go upstream, go to the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Change it, don’t argue about what can be done to circumvent it. Too many politicians use the persistence of gun control as an issue, as a political tool to raise money and enhance their position with single-issue voters.

Everybody at some point thinks about transcendence. It is not possible to live and not wonder, is this all there is? This is a higher truth, not one science needs to engage or that pollsters need to survey. It is nature’s coding. But then who is behind nature?

Humanity has chosen to professionalize the answer. Untold numbers dig and study and write and preach but most begin with history spanning the Old and New Testaments. Since I write as a Christian, let me begin with the New.

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John wrote the Gospels; Luke, it is thought, wrote Acts and Paul wrote the most influential letters to the early followers of Jesus Christ. Paul was enormously influential in the development of the early church. While these writings were informed by history, they were also informed by a deep faith that Jesus was God’s son. Plus, two of the Gospel writers, Matthew and John, were Apostles who traveled with Jesus. Paul had been converted on the road to Damascus.

Two millennia later each generation searches for an answer to the enduring question, is there a second life for the most distinctive characteristic of my existence, my soul? We confront untold numbers of religions or quasi-religions, biblical interpretations, worship protocols and writings, each attesting to their informed wisdom. As both a believer and earthbound explorer, I recognize the conflicting tides of thought and asserted authority that confront our need for faith in an ultimate answer.

Mako Fujimura

Some years ago, while Chairing the Board of Directors of The Trinity Forum, I met Makoto or as he is known, Mako Fujimura. Mako is a much celebrated American artist. He combines what I think of as abstract expressionism with deeply felt natural influences. His work is also informed by traditional Japanese styles.

Mako cares deeply about our moment on earth and how this moment and our use of it can be an expression of God’s will and creativity. In his latest book, “Art+Faith: A Theology of Making” he writes about our creativity, and how “making”—an expression of our creativity—can give us deep insight into both what we believe and how we live. He understands intuitively that creation did not start and stop in biblical accounts.

Analyzing our way to a conclusion about whether God exists is hubristic. Mako suggests a more insightful and soulful approach: finding our way by being a co-creator.

Have you ever wondered where the impulse to make something originates? It’s source? Mako’s voice is informed, in part, by his art. But his deeper insight is expressed in pairing the Bible’s creation narrative with divine gifts we have received and our need to express ourselves.

He begins Chapter 5, Caring and Loving, the Work of Making:

“I hold three fresh eggs from my Plymouth Barred Rock chickens; the eggs are still warm in my hands. I want to make the best omelette possible….So I do some research and come up with YouTube videos of French master chef Jacques Pepin making omelettes. I watch this video over and over and follow the recipe precisely. But no matter how many times I watch the video or read the recipe, I find it difficult to make a simple omelette the way he does it so effortlessly.”

Humility is often a source of insight and drawing on his experience he writes, “Caring and loving are the fundamental elements of the act of making. We need to be connecting the revelation of God as the Creator in Genesis 1 with 1 John 4:8, “God is love.” Making connects knowing with our acts of love, and with the greater reality behind materials and the body.”

Mako, looking back, notes, “I understand now what I did not understand as a child: that every time I created and felt (a charge or energy), I was experiencing the Holy Spirit.”

I have the benefit of looking back over a long life. The world in which I was a boy was far from perfect, but it was certainly more emotionally balanced than today. And there were many more makers. Omelettes, yes, or at least meals prepared at home, not in distant kitchens scaled for mass production. And it was a time when people who wanted to meet customer needs didn’t have to look over their shoulder at big box stores or massive online sellers like Amazon. And those returning from distant battlefields, they wanted to make organizations that would help ensure a lasting peace.

But, my personal recollections are recalled with humility. The Parable of the Good Samaritan has been the font of creative outreach. Michelangelo’s inspiration did not start or stop at the Sistine Chapel. Across a broad sweep of divine gifts humans have created untold numbers of hospitals, educational institutions, research centers and on and on.

Mako is an artist who explores not just the inspirations and tools of art but as well the inspiration to create—its transcendent dimension. “Art+Faith: A Theology of Making” is Mako turning from fine arts to writing and opening up a world unlike any you have ever explored. This is an uncommon book, a timeless one.

Perhaps the deepest thread in Mako’s concept of co-creation is kintsugi. He converts this ancient Japanese art to our most personal need—healing. Kintsugi is an “art form of repairing broken tea ware by reassembling ceramic pieces, creates anew the valuable pottery, which now becomes more beautiful and more valuable than the original, unbroken vessel.”

In a sense Mako Fujimura’s book arrives when all of us are or should be reaching for the arts of healing. A shot or pill comes to our physical rescue, but we need so much more.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al recently published Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

In February of the Joe Biden presidency, cable news spent 1,836 minutes reviewing the President according to the Stanford Cable News Analyzer. In the first February of the Donald Trump presidency, the number was 4,669.

My concern isn’t so much the demand side, but the supply one. Throughout the Trump presidency journalists were horrified, fascinated, preoccupied and missing-in-action on many of the consequential policy issues facing America. We got The Trump Show, every day.

During Trump’s four years, a morning scan of news commentary on Real Clear Politics produced a binary result: anti and pro-Trump. There seemed to be no in-between. On policy, if it was anywhere near the White House, it was panned. Media that worked overtime to shame Fox News were parroting their approach.

I don’t think it is too severe to say that Trump co-opted journalism. Unlike Biden, he had an insatiable appetite to be the top of the news. He held more informal news conferences than former Presidents plus sat for interviews with commentators he must have known would be critical. Indeed, when he went into the hospital with Covid 19 he felt a need to start a parade alongside Walter Reed Hospital. And the journalists and commentators ate it up. Trump gave them Page 6 (New York Post celebrity gossip page) fodder every day.

I have not gone back to count the number of columns I wrote that related to Trump. I do know that from time-to-time I said, no more, only later to break my fleeting promise.

We are now in President Biden’s honeymoon period. A month ago much of the media was laudatory about the President’s intent to be bipartisan citing among other things his meeting for two hours with then GOP senators who were perceived to be willing to meet him halfway. Looking back that seems to have been a feint. Too bad.

And while I am throwing a bit of shade at those who cover the news I hope, probably against hope, that some attention is soon paid to fiscal integrity. I wrote a column a month ago; it was too detailed. It dealt with various deficits caused by runaway government spending and the value of the dollar. Now I’m just going to say that the opposite of fiscal integrity, yes I said integrity, is the weight given by both Donald Trump and apparently Joe Biden, to accumulating debt that will have to be paid by our children and grandchildren. This will not end well.

My guess is that much of today’s news consumption is Covid related. And that President Biden is given a pass because first he is not Trump and is consistent in his efforts at leading the country’s response. While the conclusions of public health experts should be scrutinized, they should not be politicized.

An inescapable Trump legacy is severe polarization. President Biden can help reverse the momentum. But he will have to go beyond being a decent human being.

Senator Joe Manchin, the keystone swing vote in the U S Senate, said that with modest compromises several Republicans would have joined in the Covid relief bill. If that is the case, it is unfortunate that President Biden did not insist in that outcome. There will not be a rebalancing of the emotional spectrum of politics without his leadership.

Final thought. Pope Francis, against advice, traveled to Iraq in a healing outreach. He is both older (by 6 years) than Biden and is, I would imagine, no less vulnerable and he went to the last place many thought he should go. Yes, I know he has been criticized for attracting crowds during a pandemic but risk-less leadership is not possible. I hope President Biden follows suit. Leave the White House. Travel to the hinterland. By all means, keep your mask on, but take it off before you speak. You are the leader of the USA.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al recently published Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

Nobody alive today has experienced a fiscal pandemic affecting the dollar’s value. There have been ups and downs in value, but because of our country’s overall strength, the dollar illnesses have been relatively short-lived. But now, on the eve of adding trillions to our national debt, it should be noted that as a percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) U.S. debt has risen from 65% in 2008 to now over 107%. We should also remind ourselves of the dollar’s value as a dynamic variable in our country’s financial health.

A tiny percentage of persons are monetarists and that certainly doesn’t include me. Most of us avoid the thicket of prevailing and countervailing theories and actions. Yet we all pay some attention to finance, since we must cope in a world of budgets and cash flow, starting with our own. Recently I have noted the emergence of cryptocurrencies. Is that supply and demand at work—too many dollars?

Analysts for several years have been looking over their shoulder at the Yuan, China’s currency. We know China’s economy is relatively strong and we know it has the assets to support large offerings of sovereign debt which one day will compete with our own. Plus, as of July, 2020, China held about $1.7 Trillion of U.S. debt. How dependent do we want to be on creditors with whom we compete in international markets?

It was said after 9/11/01 we weren’t prepared to protect ourselves because we couldn’t imagine the series of plane assaults that occurred. Even after the first plane hit the World Trade Center, on a clear day in September, many news commentators were assuming it was an accident. And when it comes to monetarist theory, it seems to me that those who are steeped in detail don’t have much imagination.

As I type, a legislative procedure known as Budget Reconciliation, is being threatened for the coronavirus relief bill (so-called). If this direction is taken, we will likely add a totally partisan expenditure of $1.9 trillion. In short, there is an active threat of a party-line vote on what should be a bi-partisan act. When bi-partisanship cannot be negotiated under pandemic relief circumstances, the imagination strains to know when it might work.

It wouldn’t hurt to stretch our imaginations. Here are some questions we should ask.

Is this the last pandemic until we have rebuilt our national balance sheet? And what does a healthy balance sheet actually look like?

Are there spending needs that cannot be anticipated that will have to be deferred or foregone because of the cost of borrowing? For example, infrastructure, green or not?

Will the huge gap in our nation’s balance sheet compromise us in our competition with China? Will the nation’s currency be degraded by fiscal profligacy?

It was said at the time (a couple of weeks ago) that President Biden’s meeting with ten Republican Senators who were hoping for a compromise was historic. He had been in the White House for days only and he was reaching out to the other side as he promised in the campaign. The meeting lasted two hours which seemed to foreshadow promise.

But on the other side of Pennsylvania Avenue there remained a hard-edged push behind the $1.9 trillion dollar package which also included a $15 minimum wage. In short, most Democrats in Congress were tactically keyed in to the insistence that an emergency should be used for a whole list of Party priorities. Sort of “damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead”.

This is, of course, not a partisan tactic; it is used by both Parties. But given our season of extreme division, perhaps early bi-partisan successes should be given a higher priority by the President—a rebirth of authentic Presidential leadership. If the relief package is driven through on a straight party-line vote many will believe that President Biden is following not leading. America needs a leader, especially now.

It will also be clear that the imagination of our elected officials is extreme in another dimension. In short, when adding a couple trillion more to our national debt does not result in real debate about the consequences we have been ill-served.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al recently published Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

The spotlight will not be soft, it will be blinding. And the evidence will be clear—captured in 21st Century reality—tweets, videos and speeches all captured digitally, which means forevermore. History, not another political poll, will weigh actions.

The official record will go well beyond the evidence. Arguments will be made and this will not be a Sunday morning edition of Meet The Press. The arguments will be about the Constitution and about thresholds of behavior. Not about fiscal probity or taxes or abortion. When, it will be asked, is it not impeachable for the certified loser in a Presidential election to ask supporters to march, not on Washington, but in revolt on a Constitutional procedure to certify an election in the Capitol?

The voters, the elite 100, United States Senators all, will function not so much as jurors but as reflections of who we and they are. This will be easy for Democrats—they will all scream guilty. It is the Republicans who will have to decide between the broad gauge of history or the narrow gauge of political passion.

I have been ambivalent about the second stage of impeachment because America has new leadership and they have much to do and need to be measured as their nominations, plans and actions unfold. But, now that up or down will be a reality, it is a good test for the 50 Senators that sit on the Republican side of the aisle.

They should ask, what is the Republican Party? Does it still reflect, at least in some respect, the values of its founder, Abraham Lincoln, or its notables Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan or just the frothy passions and tumult of a raucous four years?

Editors at The Federalist, translate the prevailing question to politics, characterizing a vote to convict as, for Republicans, an act of “political suicide”.

The Federalist is walking along a trench well traveled; its sides have become steep and it takes some real strength to even try a path less travelled. Everything, and I mean everything, in Washington gets translated into “is it good for Republicans or Democrats in the next election?”. What about using the Constitution and the moral values that informed it as the gauge in this historic moment?

So, we will all be watching. We will be living room jurors. Conviction or no is on the table. Will we weigh the evidence or have we prejudged it? Is there a line—a line on the other side of which conduct should be punished? If there is no line then why is there a provision for impeachment? What is the more repugnant in a Democracy, stealing money or attempting to steal an election? Make no mistake, this vote will be definitional for some time to come.

Lines, of course, are drawn by people who come to the definition with some prejudices. I can say without question that if Trump was a Democrat, the line drawn would not even be close on the Republican side. And if that is true and if this is a historic, not just another political vote, then we, citizens and Senators alike, should all be careful because the vote is not about the man (he is already out of office), but about the precedent.

When Senators explain their vote their words should be elevated above campaign rhetoric. Were various Democrats underhanded in associating Trump with a Russian collusion narrative? Yes, but that question is not before the Senate; the influence of the Russian collusion allegations was determined in the last election. The question before the United States Senate was precipitated by the assault on the Capitol and events implicating the President that led to that rebellion.

The penultimate poll on the impeachment of Donald J. Trump has been taken. On the Republican side, only ten Members in the House of Representatives found Trump’s actions impeachable. Most of the arguments against impeachment sounded like a continuation of the political campaign. Of course the Senate, with a lofty self-regard, believes one of its important tasks is to cool the passions of the House—to seek wisdom, not to rubber-stamp the other assembly. We’ll see.

The political campaign ended on November 3, 2020. Arguments, investigations, and court decisions followed concluding that President Biden won. So the question now is about inciting insurrection. All in favor?

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al recently published Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books.

Tone

Rancor can be thought to be good; as in free speech and opinion differences will inevitably lead to some rancor. But, as I watched Inaugural activities that began the President Biden and Vice-President Harris Administration, I was transported back to the two Inaugurals I attended. Both were upbeat, optimistic, and in various words and phrases called for unity.

There will be plenty of time for disagreement, hopefully the civil kind, but it is clear that President Biden considers civility as government content. In short, if every course change is a flashpoint, we all lose. This will be especially true as circumstances serve up the unexpected.

Poet Amanda Gorman, in her inaugural reading, beautifully summed up our aspirations; light was transcendent. America is at it’s best when light infuses our thoughts.

Shopkeepers

I penned Son of a Shopkeeper a month or so ago. Noting the difficulties faced by small businesses, I also noted how big businesses operate within a framework of tax advantage. They retain a variety of international experts to help them minimize taxes. Tax specialists guide them through the intricacies of reduction as they move manufacturing, sales, distribution and even headquarters to tax-advantaged locations.

President Biden is recommending a corporate tax increase going from 21% to 28%. Specific tax thresholds can get very complicated and are well beyond these several paragraphs. But, the burden of any corporate tax increase should not fall on the shopkeepers—rates and filing intricacies should be reduced and simplified.

Legislative Acts and Edicts

Aside from the swearing-in the big story was President Biden’s Executive Orders. The quantity and sweep of the orders underscored the failure of the Congress to make laws and the rapidly depreciating reality of Executive Orders. It’s like successive poker games with each pot won and then lost the next night. And, I will add, the conflicting swirl that the governed have to navigate undermines our foundations.

And, avoiding specifics for now, it seems to me that forces within the Biden coalition are urging him to roll back everything that happened in the previous four years. Remember, the last four years happened — they happened because President Trump was voted into office by voters who felt abused by the elite; an elite that often seems to want a perpetual easement on our lives. When significant change moves through elected Representatives — Congress — it is more likely to represent a broader range of living and thinking. We can vote out the Representatives we don’t like, but have little sway over the experts that write executive orders.

Confirmation Bias

Media trust is quite low. President Trump blasted the media almost every day. Fake News, he screamed. Toward the end he even turned on Fox News. And now we have news outlets whose business model turns on attracting conspiracy theorists and a range of grievance victims—move over pornographers.

I spent time at the Federal Communications Commission looking at allegations against media, but almost always the ultimate decision affirmed the Constitutional guarantee of free speech. A revered conservative jurist, Justice Scalia, even extended the freedom to flag burning, saying the act was speech.

In short, seeking legal restraint on speech is mostly a fool’s errand. A wise errand by consumers of news is to be curious — to go beyond the comfortable media that confirm our biases.

And when it comes to social media enforcing blanket bans on individuals or organizations, that too is self-defeating. The companies should, in the world of artificial intelligence, be able to red-flag and curate content that arguably falls outside of the acceptable principles. The principles should be clearly stated.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al recently published Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

New year predictions are often general and most unmeasurable. A technology prediction, for example, is advanced—it happens some years later. Prediction or musing?

So I will stick to 2021 and will avoid miraculous technologies and not opine on how the Pandemic will change America as we know it. Except to say—never discount the force of decades-long patterns of living.

Along with the Pandemic, politics was the big story of 2020. In an attempt to be re-elected, President Trump put his “social movement” on steroids and then abused his supporters with his manic need to command the spotlight. And yes, I said social movement.

Trump conceived, with Steve Bannon and others, a social movement orbiting around the notion of the “forgotten man” and “yesterday’s glory”and used a political party that was mired in yesterday’s dogma to gain power. Shrewd.

Social movements are often led by one person who is charismatic, idiosyncratic and sees means as just tools. Ethical boundaries are of no real importance. Movement heads don’t play well with others—except for servants. Ultimately, in America, social movements and political parties cannot co-exist as political parties must be comfortable with distribution of power. When Republican Governors and Secretaries of State and even his Vice-President exercised their rightful power Trump attacked. And then the Capitol, the symbol of institutional strength, was attacked. Absent Trump, there would have been no attack.

The Republican Party is now coming face-to-face one more time with the Trump social movement. Even though he is leaving office, so-called Party leaders cower and retreat. Liz Cheney, an unquestioned stalwart Republican who is in the Congressional leadership, finally had enough, voted for Impeachment and was rebuked by her lessers. To them the movement was first, not the Party.

Equally telling in the movement’s formation was the capitulation of significant elements of the evangelical movement. Trump found transcendence useful and seduced Franklin Graham, Eric Metaxas and other minor evangelical gods with the limelight. They entered some kind of contorting inner sanctum and came out full of personal glory and a pungent substance that is found in pastures. I believe that support will wane.

This strange fusion of institutions with Trump as savior will get sorted out, but on the political front it will probably take multiple election cycles and perhaps Trump’s death (social movements often are monarchical so maybe next up Don Jr. or Ivanka). But for now, the Republican Party’s largest stockholder is the Trump social movement. 

The real power in the body politic belongs to Centrists. The problem: where does the Centrist politician go if he/she wants to be elected President? Is there another Joe Biden on the horizon? At this moment the bases of both political parties are wrenched Left or Right. So my prediction is that “Gangs” of legislators will emerge and their members will be willing to forfeit the long odds of sleeping in the White House for actually making legislative history.

Centrists worked together to shape much of the virus package. They were known as the Gang of Eight and contained some able legislators led by Senators Joe Manchin and Mitt Romney.

But, and this is a very big “but”, polarization and entrenched interests are powerful foes. The Gangs, regardless of how big, will need President Biden to use the powers of the Presidency to persuade and when necessary, punish. President Biden’s opportunity will be to lead the shaping of legislation that will work as he can tell the Left that in an evenly divided Senate, its the only political formula that will work.

Trump’s four years set the table for Biden. He will take advantage of this fact. Biden’s critical mass of support is tired of MAGA parades and the poisoned tweet. Biden will use the tools of moderation. If he uses identity politics in an effort to divide and conquer, he will fail.

So where might he succeed? Job one: an effectual vaccination operation. Ultimately Trump’s erratic response to the challenge of managing a national response to a virus resulted in his defeat. Again, Trump set the table for Biden.

Joe Biden will get off to a good start. But, I predict trouble ahead in 2022. If Biden gains political good will in 2021, it will be very hard to maneuver around the Left of his Party who will want his popularity translated into a Woke Agenda. 

And the Republican Party? Turmoil will persist in 2021. Republicans, not the soon to be sworn in President, will be the biggest allies of the Woke—stridency on one side tends to enable stridency on the other. President Biden will need to keep a firm hand on the tiller.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al recently published Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

Trump, A Martyr?

Joseph Stalin popular? Yes, the respected Levada Center polled Russians aged 18 and above in 137 Russian towns and villages; the result: “51% respect, like or admire Stalin. If you are interested in how many millions of Russian deaths are attributed to Stalin, check out this Wikipedia entry.

Yes, I have gone to an extreme, to another country and to an even deeper strain of nationalism to put the events of 1/6/21 in context. History shows an almost unfathomable fusion of timing, circumstances, decisions, demographics and strong personalities that shape and sear personal memory. Stalin, you might recall, was given credit for defeating the Nazis in the standoff over Leningrad (now St. Petersburg) that began in the summer of 1941 and lasted for 900 days.

In the immediate aftermath of the assault on the Capitol after a rebellious speech by Donald Trump, critics searched the thesaurus for words and phrases to demonize him. The criticisms have been bi-partisan.

Even though his term expires in a few days, forced removal from office is said to be essential. It is also said that the Congress must pass a law to ban him from again holding office. If I were in the U.S. Senate, depending on the articles of impeachment, I would vote to convict. Having said that, I find a certain irony in the rhetorical aggression and a troubling prospect.

Impeachment and conviction are, to strain the comparison, somewhat like a grand jury proceeding. The jury hears evidence, then it chooses to indict or not and if indicted the defendant is given the privileges of the accused in a court of law. My guess is that Right, Left and Center there is agreement in this fair and sensible procedure. There is no way the anticipated impeachment proceedings can comply with that judicious order.

When it comes to barring Trump from running for office, for whose benefit? Republicans are going to have to resolve their internal cleavages and it must be remembered that Trump won just over 74 million votes (many of those votes reflected Right-of-Center preferences). They are going to have to reflect on Trump’s post-election behavior and the fact that he was complicit in the losses in Georgia. This is democracy at work; often it is messy. Recall Kamala Harris’s allegations against Joe Biden and his choice of her to be his running mate.

We should also recall the history of Watergate. President Richard Nixon was almost universally believed to have been complicit in multiple criminal acts. Nixon, of course, resigned (as Trump should) and Gerald Ford, the Vice-President who succeeded to the Presidency, pardoned Nixon. The media and much of the advocacy world was apoplectic. Yet historians now cite Ford’s actions as courageous and far-sighted. Looking back it is clear that the prosecution and trial of Richard Nixon would have placed him in the center ring of a circus with all eyes on that ring. The functions of government would have been sideshows.

And Trump is a performer in ways that Nixon was not; best that his performance is left to the golf course. Censure him and then leave to civil and/or criminal proceedings in courts of law to resolve any civil or criminal charges.

Political parties are profoundly weak. The Republican National Committee met in the aftermath of November’s loss and on the eve of Georgia’s election and re-elected Ronna Romney McDaniel, the Party’s Chair, unanimously.

The Democrat Party concluded its more consequential leadership search this last year. The passion was on the populist Left; had Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren faced off against Trump he would have won notwithstanding his toxic personality and erratic leadership.

It is my hope that President-elect Biden does as he promised, works to unite Americans. If he does he will look for balance—he will govern from the Center. And I want the world and certainly this nation to be fully informed about the directions of our new President. President Biden should not be overshadowed by our appetite for political circus.

As to the Republican Party—while it increased it’s House of Representatives strength in November, it must now contend with the blood-letting on and over 1/6/21. Will Trump’s populism command the future or will some return to basic principles shaped by Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan, but updated by 21st Century realities, prevail?

Since the Party hierarchy is powerless, the jockeying for the Presidential nomination, which has already begun, will ultimately define the future. The first two jockeys, Senators Cruz and Hawley, are not off to a promising start or if they are the Republican Party is in deep trouble.

There is no question that Trump put the principles of the Republican Party in play. He used race, the national checkbook and a wide range of free market interventions to breach what turned out to be walls of sandstone, not granite.

And what about the so-called Republican Establishment? There is no Establishment. The world has been disrupted. Technology has redefined communications and privacy. Technology and global supply chains have destroyed millions of jobs. Establishments to prevail in a democracy need some level of stability. Stability no longer exists.

While I could engage in gross speculation, I won’t. The Party is in play; momentum will swing wildly. I will, however, go back to history and would counsel today’s instant prosecutors, judges and juries to be careful. Trump martyrdom would ill-serve America.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al recently published Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

Donald J. Trump infamously noted, “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters, okay.” What happened yesterday is Trump turned the gun on himself — suicide on Fifth Avenue.

Allan Drury would have been amazed. As a high-schooler, I read Advice and Consent, a Washington drama, and was amazed by Drury’s imagination — he won the Pulitzer Prize for his novel. Yesterday’s events would have shocked Drury. 

As I scrolled Twitter last night, it became apparent that anger translated was preclusive — no combination of words and phrases written on the day after would suffice. So here is my 16 hours after-the-fact reflection.

Trump had, and perhaps still has, an immovable base. My guess: it has shrunk. But Trump’s seditious conduct has ripped apart the screen that reflected back what many of his followers projected — what they wanted to believe. Their support will be excoriated, but it was based on belief.

Millions of people are hardcore Republicans and Democrats. They are certain to grant the benefit of the doubt to their Party’s revolving door of pretenders and occasional real deals alike. Millions on the Republican side, for example, are Pro-Life — they will swallow extra hard before crossing that line to support a Pro-Choice candidate. I could go on and on with examples in both Party platforms.

But Trump was different. The Ex-Democrat turned Republican was an opportunist who sowed social distemper. We watched: he translated convictions strongly felt into fighting words. Trump insisted that his supporters join him in battle. And many on the Right seethed as the streets of Portland and Seattle devolved into summer combat and calls for defunding the police. And as the less concerned were confronted in the grocery store for not wearing a mask, little media criticism was aimed at the mask-less protests of the summer. Many Republicans saw this as confirming their distrust of what Trump and then they called the lame stream media.

Now 1/6/21 will be remembered along with 9/11/01, except this time it was Americans attacking Americans in our Citadel of Democracy. While polls have not been taken, it is almost certain that well over a majority of Americans would support the removal of the President from office. Better in my view that we understand Trump’s turned the gun on himself and move on. Vice President Pence should be particularly engaged and if necessary preemptive.

President-Elect Biden has artfully used the language of moderation and in less than two weeks will be President. Unwittingly, Trump has rearranged the White House stage set. It features a large round table — one that encourages everybody to take a seat without looking for name tags. There is no need to yell, each participant is only feet away. Indeed those who are inclined to yell should be elsewhere.

America faces very serious challenges. While the pandemic seems the worst, it is not. Finding the key to working together is America’s biggest challenge. Moderation its biggest need.

Soon to be President Biden seems especially gifted in the tones of moderation and we should all, and I mean all, hope he is the key to collaborative leadership.

Finally, the U.S. Senate is an expression of where America stands politically — 50/50. A numerical draw insists on a leader who will command the common ground. Joe Biden’s challenge is not to reconcile the Centrists and Progressives in his own Party, but to strive to lead Americans toward public policy solutions. And when I say Americans, I mean those who believe in America—“Out Of Many One”.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al recently published Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

“Ten Years After the Spring,” a commentary in The Economist, looked back — back over the ten years since the beginning of what came to be called the Arab Spring. The trigger was the self-immolation of a Tunisian street vendor after his fruit cart was confiscated because he wouldn’t pay extortion money to get a permit. His final words, “How do you expect me to make a living?” The final image: Muhammad Bouazizi in flames.

The author notes the region (not Tunisia) is less free today and concludes: “One lesson autocrats learned from the Arab Spring is that any flicker of dissent must be snuffed out fast, lest it spread.” Donald J. Trump’s business and political lives reflect the same lesson. I don’t know where he learned it, but what is apparent is that mere criticism provokes a harsh reaction.

And what is equally apparent is that a high percentage of Republican elected officials bow down. While political Parties are celebrated as being representative, much of today’s Party leadership is subservient and awaits instructions—from Donald J. Trump.

Perhaps the most topical about-face occurred when Georgia Republican Senators Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue reversed course within a week. They were against $2,000 stimulus checks and then after getting the new script from the President were for them. And then there are Party officials who heralded the election of more Republican Members of Congress, while subserviently challenging the integrity of the Presidential line on the same ballot because Trump told them to.

Senator Josh Hawley, who all but wears a blinking neon sign proclaiming his ambition, has decided to challenge the election of Joe Biden on the U.S. Senate floor. I guess he believes his subservience will serve his future ambition to be The Leader. Rarely has ambition been more oxymoronic.

If subservience to autocratic figures was not so serious, we could simply write it off as script writing for Saturday Night Live. But then the complications of today’s world converts the laughable into the lamentable or worse.

While many are toasting a better outlook for 2021, due to brilliance in the world’s pharmaceutical laboratories, I am not so sanguine. Responding to China, technological disruption, health care and climate change imperatives requires creativity, competitive thinking, and thoughtful advocacy. Subservience serves none of the above. Capitalism has produced national wealth because it serves the quick witted, not the prostrate.

Our votes and Party affiliations in a universe of tens of millions means that the vote or opinion of any one person has very little weight or influence. But here is one person, who proudly served in the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, who refuses to await instructions.

There is, at any given moment, debate about levels of government intrusion in our personal and collective lives. Often it distills down into arguments about various strains of capitalism and socialism. But, the most important division in the Republican Party today is structural. Is the Party an autocracy ruled by one man or one that is comfortable with competitive views and leaders? Choose, you still have a choice.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al recently published Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books.