The Steady Course

In turbulent, dangerous times he [John Adams] had held to a remarkably steady course. He had shown that a strong defense and a desire for peace were not mutually exclusive, but compatible and greatly in the national interest. The new navy was an outstanding achievement...In his four years as President, there had been no scandal or corruption...he had managed nonetheless to cope with a divided country and a divided party, and in the end achieved a rare level of statesmanship. To his everlasting credit, at the risk of his career, reputation, and his hold on the presidency, he chose to not go to war, when that would have been highly popular and politically advantageous in the short run.

David McCullough, John Adams (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001), 566.

A steady course. Perhaps the most remarkable thing about Adams was his ability to maintain that steady course despite the odds against it. In an era of strong leaders each trying to have their pull and control - Adams continued the path he believed to be right. It cost him friendships, position, and leadership clout in the young United States. However, in the end that commitment to hold steady proved to be the most honorable course of action.

I think this is the most difficult choice we must make as people. We must choose to hold strong to a path and not sway to the right or left. Often when faced with difficulty or opportunity, the tendency is move off one's position. In a desire to not seem stubborn, we often cave in on the values and beliefs we hold to be critical. In reality our problem is that of weakness. Whether a desire to please others or a push for more influence or even the want to stay in power - we sacrifice our honor by losing course. We may gain temporarily in this, but in the end have we lost our souls when we allow ourselves off the path? What sacrifices are not worth it to hold to the steady course? In other words, what temporary benefits are you willing to accept at the cost of your beliefs & honor? Adams sacrificed himself & his standing but in the end his virtue, integrity, and beliefs remained intact.

Extravagant (Un)popularity

"As Adams himself observed, he was President by three votes. Yet he appears to have taken it in stride. 'I am not ashamed,' he told Nabby, who had written to express her concern. 'If the way to do good to my country were to render myself popular, I could easily do it. But extravagant popularity is not the road to public advantage.'"
David McCullough, John Adams (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001), 471.

Outside of his personal integrity & honesty, if there is one admirable trait that seems to stick out in the life of John Adams its his ability to make decisions, lead, and preside in the positions he laid claim to without the incessant need to be popular or appease people. His Presidency would be marked by a fierce and ugly battle between the Federalists and Republicans often with Adams taking personal shots on both sides. Yet, in the midst of this turnmoil he did a remarkable job at remaining true to his own personal (if somewhat stubborn) beliefs instead of catering to one side. He might not have been the most popular but his tenacity to not be bought remains praiseworthy to this day.

What decisions do we fail to make because we do not adhere to the Adams Principle of not being prey to popularity? Another way of looking at it is - do we truly see popularity as a sign that the public is at an advantage? What might prove most popular with people could easily be the things that are to their greatest disadvantage. The truth in it all is that we must constantly seek to make the right decisions no matter how unpopular that might make us. Fame might win elections - but it certainly doesn't guarantee quality leadership.

Disobedience

In effect, the Americans had signed a separate peace with the British. They had acted in direct violation of both the French-American alliance and their specific instructions from Congress to abide by the advice of the French foreign minister. To Adams there was no conflict in what they had done. The decision to break with the orders from Congress, and thus break faith with the French, had been clear-cut, the only honorable course. Congress had left them no choice. Congress had "prostituted" its own honor by surrendering its sovereignty to the French Foreign Minister. "It is glory to have broken such infamous orders," Adams wrote in his diary. "Infamous I say, for so they will be to all posterity."

David McCullough, John Adams (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001), 283.

John Adams was a stubborn man. So stubborn to his own beliefs, liberty, and focus on America that he would not play lacquey to a group of men with their own agenda. He was certainly vilified for his stance(s) and history has not always remembered him in the fondest of light. However, I am continously impressed as I read about the account of his dealings with the French during the American Revolution. The French (along with Ben Franklin) wanted independence as long as it was convenient for them. Therefore, all of their "help" was given or held back based completely on their own selfish desires. Adams had the guts to stand up against that - and held his ground even in the face of being disapproved & ridiculed.

Sometimes disobedience is the the absolute right move to make. The difficulty becomes deciding when one must obey & when one must forge their own path. In choosing to disregard orders, a person will put themselves in the line of fire & have to explain their actions. Even in doing so, a person can face punishment and the smearing of their character. However, time has a way of bringing honor to one's choice if it was made correctly. Congress was weak - Adams was right. His stubborn patriotism may not have been popular with everyone, but it was what his country needed. What decisions are you being asked to make today that you believe are wrong? The key is being able to defend your actions. Disobedience will always cost you - and you must be able to give an answer for the choices that you make. Be careful in choosing to disobey - because the cost is high if you are in the wrong.

All the Difference

...When Billy Tudor was admitted to the bar three years later, Adams took the time to write to Tudor's wealthy father to praise the young man for his clear head and honest heart, but also to prod the father into giving his son some help getting started in his practice. Adams had seen too often the ill effect of fathers who ignored their sons when a little help could have made all the difference.

David McCullough, John Adams (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001), 63.

As I transition from studying Thomas Edison to studying John Adams, one of the first traits that pops out to me is the relationship both men had with their families. Edison always seemed too busy for his family, whereas Adams seemed dedicated and infatuated with his. Edison's family had to trust & assume he loved them - Adams' family knew he did. Both of them were involved in time consuming professions (invention/business v. law/politics) and both had to travel. Yet it seemed that Edison was more concerned with how many hours he worked while Adams took the time to write letters and connect with his family. Both men were seen as a success in their lives - yet already I feel more compassion & connection with Adams.

"A little help could have made all the difference." Kids need their dad. Wives need their husband. Families need the leadership of a man. At some point, I must judge a person's contribution not on how much they poured themselves into their work & industry - but how much they cared for those most dependent upon them. As I jump into McCullough's excellent piece on Adams, I am constantly refreshed by a man who loved what he did less than he loved his family. In the end, character matters as much as contribution; and a large part of the evaluation of character comes in the context one's family life.