The Grindstone

But with this change in condition comes inevitably adaptations to the change. What, unless biological science is a mass of errors, is the cause of human intelligence and vigour? Hardship and freedom: conditions under which the active, strong, and subtle survive and the weaker go to the wall; conditions that put a premium upon the loyal alliance of capable men, upon self-restraint, patience, and decision.

We are kept keen on the grindstone of pain and necessity, and, it seemed to me, that here was that hateful grindstone broken at last!

H.G. Wells, The Time Machine, (Public Domain Books, 2006), Kindle Locations (400-403) & (409-20).

The Victorian Era for the United Kingdom uniquely coincides with the Gilded Age of the United States. Both periods, for their respective countries, were marked by their increase in prosperity as well as technological advances making life "easier" in a lot of regards. Of course, rapid urbanization lead to pockets of high poverty and horrible slum conditions, but overall the period is well known for its descent into decadence for those at the "top" of society. It was during this era that H.G. Wells' masterpiece, The Time Machine, was written and published. Like many of the great 'classics' of English literature, The Time Machine combines solid writing, good story telling and intriguing social commentary into one nifty package. As a result, while reading it you not only are entertained but you get the real sense of life in that society.

I can recall seeing the 1960 film version of the The Time Machine when I was a kid, but until this week I had never read the novel. Needless to say, I was quite impressed with it and look forward to reading more H.G. Wells. Without going into the story line too deeply, the 'Time Traveler' is the protagonist who communicates the story throughout the book. He had built a time machine to travel through the fourth dimension which he explained was time. In traveling forward to the year 802,701 he comes in contact with an advanced age society of which most of the book discusses. In his first attempt at explaining one portion of that future society (the Eloi) he observes the laziness and lack of hard-work by the 'people'. It is from this observation he made the quotes as I posted above.

Hardship & freedom. Pain & necessity. I am blown away by Wells' keen observation of how critical these things are for humanity. In particular, the ideals of hardship & pain stand out as critical factors that are often overlooked. Much like the Victorian Era or Gilded Age, modern society has pushed the envelope of technology further and further while increasing the luxury and comforts for the high end social classes. Life has, in many ways, never been easier. And yet much like the Time Traveler's initial views of the Eloi, this should not immediately give us comfort. What is the cause of human intelligence and vigour? It is hardship. Pain. Self-restraint. Patience. Solid decision making. Doing things only out of necessity. The results of the 'active, strong, and subtle' pushing forward. And yet, it is hard to see these characteristics anymore. More and more they are thought of as archaic as modern conveniences and luxuries have made us loathe the difficult and embrace the easy. In many ways, the idea of effort has dissolved. This is especially seen in the younger generations which I am very much a part of.

So is all hope lost? That becomes the question. The picture we have seen and continue to see is certainly bleak. However, that being said, I still believe that anything is possible. Change will take time and the push-back on hard work will always exist. But human intelligence and vigour are needed as much today as they were in 1895. And if we believe in them still then we must fight forward with the very same weapons of hardship, pain, self-restraint, patience and solid decision making. The future is ours to make - what it will actually look like depends on the here and now.

Failure of Purpose

The first campaigning season was a great disappointment; the departure of Alcibiades left the venture in the hands of a leader who did not believe in its goals and who had no strategy of his own to achieve them. Plutarch described the situation as follows: "Nicias, though theoretically one of two colleagues, held sole power. He did not stop sitting about, sailing around, and thinking things over until the vigorous hope of his men had grown feeble and the astonishment and fear that the first sight of his forces had imposed on his enemy had faded away" (Nicias 14.4). Since he still dared not leave Sicily, Nicias and his men would now be compelled to face the main enemy at Syracuse without a clear plan of action.

Perhaps the oversight was more a failure of purpose than of judgment. Nicias, as we have seen, never wanted to attack Sicily, and forced to take part in the campaign, intended to pursue a minimal course that would avoid any serious engagement. He had probably refused to consider any step as serious as an attack on Syracuse until circumstances made it unavoidable and then found himself without the forces to carry it out.

Donald Kagan, The Peloponnesian War, (New York: Penguin Books, 2003), 274, 279.

Nicias, 470-413 B.C., was a politician/general/leader for Athens during the Peloponnesian War. He was known for his character and virtue, and by all accounts seemed to be a guy that the Athenians liked and admired. He was a watered-down version of the great Pericles, mostly being like him in that he did not desire war and conflict with Sparta. In fact, it was under his leadership that lead to a brief moment of potential peace in 421 B.C. between Athens and Sparta. The Athenians responded well to his leadership and had consistently placed him a position to make decisions. Despite a lack in military success, Nicias' endearment to the people kept him in power.

Unfortunately for Athens, a crisis came about on the island of Sicily in 415 B.C. As a result it pitted Athenian interests against those of Syracuse (allied with Sparta). The Athenians voted for bold action and war in Sicily, of which Nicias was strongly against. Despite his repeated attempts to avoid the conflict, Athens jumped into it with Nicias as the key leader. A variety of mistakes would follow ending not only with the defeat of the Athenians, but also with the death of Nicias. Athens was ill-prepared for battle lacking man-power, strategy, and even the drive to win. Nicias committed folly after folly ending with a decision to refuse withdrawal simply to protect his name. The Sicily was an absolute disaster for the Athenians and seemingly the end of the war.

Failure of purpose. That was the crime of Nicias in the Sicily campaign. His heart simply was not in the conflict. He did not believe in its aims or even necessarily its goals. He was just going through the motions while attempting to maintain his position and prestige. He could not plan, develop strategy or even make solid decisions in the moment. Without heart, he could not pour himself into the mission. I think we see this very issue in a lot of people today. On a regular basis we see people failing or at the very least failing the organization they are a part of because of a failure of purpose. Having character, a solid skill-set and even leadership ability do not matter without heart. It does not make a person a bad person - it simply means they are not in the right position for themselves. You have to believe in what you are doing if you have any hope of succeeding. Even if some form of success is seen, chances are likely the person is simply a hollow version of what they could be if they truly believed.

So the question becomes - are you like Nicias? Are you going through the motions hanging onto some position or place of leadership simply because you don't have the guts to step down and pursue that which you desire to do? Are you struggling to succeed not because of inability but lack of purpose? The end result for Nicias was death by execution. What will be your end result if you stay mired in the same place you are in now?

The Power of the Xymbouli

The xymboulos Pharax was obviously thinking ahead to consider the political ramifications of the battle. To destroy the aristocratic elite of Argos when most of the ordinary, democratic Argives had escaped would guarantee the continued alliance of Argos with the other democracies, but if the Argive elite returned home after the great defeat of the anti-Spartan policy, they could gain control of the city and bring it into a Spartan alliance, striking a death blow to the enemy coalition. The vengeful, inexperienced Agis, determined to recover his honor, could not foresee this in the heat of the battle, and the Spartans' decision to appoint advisers to him proved to be a well-considered idea.

Donald Kagan, The Peloponnesian War, (New York: Penguin Books, 2003), 240-241.

The Spartan King Agis II was a poor leader and awful strategist. His poor decision making, inexperience in leading during battle, and overall lack in inspiring confidence had left him in a precarious position of leadership. In addition, Sparta continued to lose prestige within their sphere of influence while Athens seemingly kept gaining. The situation was getting dire and any further loss by Sparta or Agis would seemingly cripple the Spartans and their hegemony within the Peloponnesian Alliance. Some form of success and victory was absolutely imperative. In 418 BC, in response to a situation in the Tegea/Mantinea area, Agis was given one final shot at proving himself in the Battle of Mantinea against the Argive Alliance.

History has a way of repeating itself as people tend to not change their habits, behaviors and ways of thinking. To say that Sparta was headed for doom under the ineffective leadership of Agis is not inappropriate. What made the Battle of Mantinea unique, however, was the decision made by the ephors (leaders who shared power with the Spartan kings - based upon election) that Agis had to be placed under supervision by advisers known as the xymbouloi. These 10 men were responsible for helping Agis make better decisions - specifically in the realm of military leadership. It seems that this would have been humiliating for a king and a tremendous check upon his power. Whatever the king's emotions must have been in regards to the decision, the ephors' decision held firm. So when the Spartan-lead alliance headed off from Tegea to Mantinea, the king was surrounded.

To avoid too much detail, the battle ended in Spartan victory. Multiple times within the execution of the battle Agis was saved by the decision making of the xymbouloi - including both prior to the battle beginning and after the battle was finished. In a nutshell, Agis (and Sparta!) were saved by not only the brilliant fighting ability of the elite Spartan warriors, but by the solid decision making of the men giving advice to the king. Although the battle did not guarantee anything for the future, it was absolutely critical to Sparta and would have a significant impact upon the Athenians and power of democracy within ancient Greece. Advice saved the day.

It is in these moments of history that I truly see the wisdom of Solomon come alive. As he wrote in Proverbs 11:14, "For lack of guidance a nation falls, but many advisers make victory sure." How easy it is to be like Agis and simply continue forward in my own stupidity and ways of thinking. Trapped in my own inabilities, I make the same mistakes repeatedly which then prevent my future success. Pride refuses to allow me to see those blind spots and I stumble forward into a wavering future. And yet the answer lies in front of me much like it did for Agis. Advisers. Do I have people in my life that are consistently checking my power and decision making? Am I humble enough to see the need for my own set of xymbouli - who could very well be the determining factor in how bright my future might be? They mattered to Agis and the Spartan empire as a whole - the question now becomes can I learn from that situation and apply it to my own life.

The Leadership of Pericles

The death of Pericles deprived Athens of a leader with unique qualities. He was a military man and strategist of stature, but even more a brilliant politician of the rarest talents. He could decide on a policy and persuade the Athenians to adopt and remain committed to it, to restrain them from overly ambitious undertakings, and to encourage them when they lost confidence. The restored Pericles might have had sufficient power to hold the Athenians to a consistent policy, as no other Athenian could have. In his last recorded speech Pericles enumerated the characteristics necessary in a statesman: "To know what must be done and to be able to explain it; to love one's country and to be incorruptible" (2.60.5). No one had these traits in greater measure than Pericles himself, and if he made errors, he of all Athenians was most likely to put them right. His countrymen would miss him sorely.

Donald Kagan, The Peloponnesian War, (New York: Penguin Books, 2003), 97-98.

The ancient world of Greece required its leaders to be both politicians and military strategists. If a man was to rise to the top he had to be able to effectively lead in both arenas. Decisions had to be constantly made and then explained in such a way that the people would either agree to them or at least give support based upon allegiance to their home. Pericles was an interesting leader that had a place of significant leadership in democratic Athens at the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War with the Spartan Alliance. Being a moderate, he developed a strategy based upon deterrence and defense which at best would have prevented war. The lack of offensive strategy was a stark contrast to the Greek ideal of honor and courage which required him to explain it in such a way that would receive support. Although his death would curtail him from effectively making a long term impact upon the war, his ideals and principles remain a shining example of leadership today.

In particular, I am smitten with the ideas Pericles enumerated in his final recorded speech. Simply knowing what must be done in a given situation or leadership moment distinguishes those with even a clue of how to lead. However, it is the next crucial step that helps illuminate those who want to lead from those who have the actual ability. As Pericles stated it, you have to be able to explain the why behind a leadership decision. It is not enough to simply recognize and choose the right decision - those who follow want to know why...especially in light of a potentially polemic issue. The explanation cannot be just a simply restating of the decision with an emphasis on it being right. Instead, it must help the follower understand, grasp its vision, and find a way to support it. Do not tell me you made a decision and I have to live with it. Help explain why it has to be this way and how it benefits me to be on board with it.

As if this is not enough, Pericles goes on to explain that loyalty and integrity are also critical. Loyalty is often an abused virtue by leaders. Whether it is mocking patriotism by extolling the need for American flag lapels or incessant demand that followers blindly accept that being dished out to them, loyalty is easily misunderstood. At the end of the day, I don't care about what you say in terms of loyalty, I want to see you bleed for that which you claim to lead. Do you so firmly believe in that which you lead that you consistently do what's best for it and not yourself??? Integrity, or being incorruptible as Pericles puts it, might be the hardest of all. How firm are you on morality? Can you be bought, swayed or simply mislead? What would it take for you to compromise on "right"? Or even better - how do your followers know you are not corruptible?

The reality is we lack leaders with the ideals that Pericles put forth. We desperately want them and often lionize those who embody them. But simply recognizing that which is critical to effective leadership helps us as we move forward in the search of those who can bring us to where we need to be.

IN HOC SIGNO VINCES

The Vision of the Cross - assistants of Raphael

Though it would only become apparent later, the battle of Milvian Bridge was a major turning point in history. By wielding the cross and sword, Constantine had done more than defeat a rival - he had fused the church and the state together. It would be both a blessing and a curse to both institutions, and neither the Christian church nor the Roman Empire would ever be the same again.

Lars Brownworth, Lost to the West, (New York: Three Rivers Press, 2009), 14.

What really happened the night Constantine prayed before his battle with Maxentius? What words did he say? What god did he pray to? Did the God of Christianity truly reveal Himself in the sign of a cross? Did Jesus actually encourage him to proceed behind the cross as a means of protection and, dare I say, guidance? Did God want Constantine in charge and did God really want church & state together? These are questions that swirl in my head as I think about that fateful event in history that would catapult Constantine to leader of the Eastern Roman Empire and, as Lars Brownworth pointed out, fuse the church and state together. The reality, as best as I can tell, is that Constantine simply saw the advantages of Christianity against paganism for the growth of his power and empire. Whether or not he ever truly understood the faith or believed in the death, burial & resurrection of Jesus is hard to tell or prove. But he understood the power and prestige he stood to gain and throughout the rest of his life he would exploit the church & state relationship.

Uniquely, I think we see that continued today within the United States. Much like the emperor of antiquity, leaders in the United States see the sign of the cross as a means to "conquer" the political, social and spiritual realms of power. The cross/church have become a base of power & foundation to build upon in order to accomplish the goals of the individual. Republicans, Democrats, and a variety of groups such as Focus on the Family truly believe in the power and authority they can receive through the use of the cross. Political leaders, megachurch pastors, social leaders, and even media powers use the cross as a method to gain access or publicity to their cause. I wonder if the idea of divine leadership has gotten lost, though, in the search for human authority. Conquering continues - but does so at the loss of anything resembling that of Jesus. Boasting of church allegiance, sacrificial giving, and good morality become tossed around like useless trivia. When one accomplishes their goal - an "honorary" call out to God is given as if divine favor truly rested upon their accomplishment. But what does it all mean?

In the end, it seems as if our boasts of in hoc signo vinces are much like Constantine's. We may or may not conquer our goals...but our focus, much like his, is simply upon our own glorification.

Great Book!

Education is one of the most valuable aspects of American society. It plays a critical role in the foundation of our country. There are not many people who would argue against the need and value of solid education. Despite this, though, there are many problems plaguing the education system with a variety of beliefs on how to fix them. Diane Ravitch has written a masterpiece on the problems and issues of today's American education system. She writes like a good historian and explores issues with a simple candor & straight-forward approach. For anyone interested in exploring the issues of the American school system as it stands today, I highly recommend getting your hands on this book. It was a very enjoyable read & one that has made its mark on my thinking & philosophy.

What is accountability?

One problem with test-based accountability, as currently defined and used, is that it removes all responsibility from students and their families for the students' academic performance. NCLB neglected to acknowledge that students share in the responsibility for their academic peformance and that they are not merely passive recipients of their teachers' influence. Nowhere in the federal accountability scheme are there measures or indicators of students' diligence, effort, and motivation. Do they attend school regularly? Do they do their homework? Do they pay attention in class? Are they motivated to succeed? These factors affect their school performance as much as or more than their teachers' skill.

Similarly, the authors of the law forgot that parents are primarily responsible for the children's behavior and attitudes. It is families that do or do not ensure that their children attend school regularly, that they are in good health, that they do their homework, and that they are encouraged to read and learn. But in the eyes of the law, the responsibility of the family disappears. Something is wrong with that. Something is fundamentally wrong with an accountability system that disregards the many factors that influence students' performance on an annual test - including the students' own efforts - except for what teachers do in the classroom for forty-five minutes or an hour a day.
Diane Ravitch, The Death and Life of the Great American School System, (New York: Basic Books, 2010), 162-163.

Only lazy people argue against accountability. Accountability is the single most important factor in a person's life. It is what makes a person work hard, do their best, accept responsibility, learn from mistakes, grow in knowledge/ability, and become a better overall person. It can be painful and at times the exact opposite of fun. However, in the right framework and with the right prodding, it can be the difference between mediocrity and excellence. All of that being said, accountability must be in place to help people and systems improve. The goal of it should not be for punishment but for profit. Excellence is not achieved by tearing people or systems to shreds over mistakes, errors or lack of top level talent.

The issue in education is that teachers are getting held to high standards based upon faulty logic and tests. The mistake the general public falls for is that high test scores equate to solid education. Of course the mistake teachers make is that accountability is evil and should be left outside the school. Both sides take stances on either side of the fence which encourages mistrust and a major lack of cooperation. As a result, education gets stalled and society as a whole does not benefit. In addition, students are left out of the picture as talking heads argue back and forth about who is responsible for the broken system. The primary goal of education must be the preparation of younger generations for leadership and contribution to society. What has to happen is the development of a system of accountability to ensure that primary goal.

So how do we get back to focusing on the right goal? The first step is developing the right way to hold teachers accountable. Stop worrying about test scores and what looks good "on paper". Both of those can have meaning, but they fail to tell us whether or not our students are actually getting well educated and developed as young men and women. What we need is solid evaluations of teachers with the goal of pushing educators towards maximizing their ability to impact students in their subject knowledge, responsibility level, and critical thinking. Next, we need to figure out a way to get parents back involved in the education field. I strongly believe that parents are the most important ingredient to academic success. Teachers, schools, and communities must push strongly for parent involvement in the classroom. If parents are not involved, they will be hard pressed to actually hold their own children responsible. Finally, students need to be held accountable for themselves. Educators need to be able to effectively challenge students for their lack of initiative, effort and focus. Students need to learn that taking responsibility for themselves and their learning process is the single most important lesson in academics.

It is only when all three of these groups in the academic process are held to a higher standard that education will start to thrive. As of right now, society is content with looking at test scores and punishing teachers and schools as the key to academic improvement. As a result, we continue to flounder about with no real achievement or goals being grasped.