[March 21, 2017] I’ve witnessed plenty of public feuds during my time; the results were often unexpected and distasteful. The most renowned and historic public feud in America (over 200 years ago) was the long and bitter rivalry between politicians Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton. It played out famously and culminated in a pistol duel between the two men, resulting in the death of Hamilton.1
Public feuds seldom turn out well. As we used to say in the military, “never wrestle with pigs; you both get dirty and the pig likes it.” George Bernard Shaw wrote that long ago but his advice originates from ancient times and continues to endure throughout the ages. His words are interpreted several ways; one being that it never pays to argue with anyone in public (especially another senior leader) otherwise you’ll be tarnished in the process, regardless of the facts or how right you might be.
There are many well-known feuds that involved senior leaders that deserve mentioning.2 It is not unusual that the outcome of such feuds have had a significant impact on nations. For example, the public feud between Joseph Stalin and Leon Trotsky – a very bitter struggle over the way the socialist revolution should be conducted3 – resulted in Stalin’s rise to power and his subsequent decisions that led to the deaths of tens of millions of his countrymen.
A recent example is the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upholding a lower court’s decision to block President Trump’s Executive Order on immigration. It started a public feud inside the court itself. Five judges on the Court publically recorded their disagreement with last month’s ruling made by three of their colleagues.4 They say the Court’s three judges misread and misapplied legal doctrine in their decision. How this plays out in the days ahead will be interesting to watch; publically, of course.
There are two important quest ions that go to the heart of the issue of public disputes. First, we may ask the proverbial question, “so what?” And second, what is the downside to a public feud? The answer to the first question must begin with the recognition that the ‘so what’ will involve a deeply important and controversial issue; otherwise different sides of it would not be played out so publically in the first place. So it will be important to address and resolve.
The answer to the second question regarding the downside of a public feud is that the merits of the issue are likely to be overlooked and emotion to be substituted for valuable debate. Furthermore, strong leader judgments can prematurely influence, sometimes wrongly, public opinion and political policy on a controversial issue. And, those involved (innocently or not) will be tainted from the negative fallout regardless of which side they were on.
Leaders should consider alternative means to debate and disagree on issues of great importance. Respect, integrity, logic, and establishing the facts in the arguments are keys to effectively resolving controversial issues. Public disagreements over ethical, political, or social issues can rarely solved when emotion substitutes for logic on any subject.
[Don’t forget to “Like” the Leader Maker at our Facebook Page.]
——————–
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burr%E2%80%93Hamilton_duel
- Some of these are: Lyndon B. Johnson vs. Robert F. Kennedy, J. Edgar Hoover vs. Martin Luther King, Jr., Queen Elizabeth I vs. Mary, Queen of Scots. See footnote 3 below for more.
- http://www.toptenz.net/top-ten-famous-feuds-and-vendettas.php
- http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/justices-on-9th-circuit-feuding-over-travel-ban-ruling-report/ar-BByln9n?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp