Suchergebnisse

Intro -- Title Page -- Dedication -- Acknowledgments -- Preface to the Thirtieth Anniversary Edition -- Preface -- Introduction: The Current Impasse -- Chapter One: The Early American Model of Compassion -- Chapter Two: Turning Cities into Countryside -- Chapter Three: First Challenge to the Charity Consensus -- Chapter Four: The Social Darwinist Threat -- Chapter Five: Proving Social Darwinism Wrong -- Chapter Six: The Seven Marks of Compassion -- Chapter Seven: And Why Not Do More? -- Chapter Eight: Excitement of a New Century -- Chapter Nine: Selling New Deals in Old Wineskins -- Chapter Ten: Revolution-and Its Heartbreak -- Chapter Eleven: Questions of the 1970s and 1980s -- Chapter Twelve: Putting Compassion into Practice -- Chapter Thirteen: Applying History -- Notes -- Index -- Copyright.

What should we expect--and not expect--from the government in times of crisis? 'Big government didn't work,' says veteran journalist and political analyst Marvin Olasky. 'And it is clear that a new paradigm for responding to national crisis has emerged. Private and faith-based organizations have stepped in and politics will never be the same.'.

It is asserted that the major flaw of the modern US welfare state is not that it is extravagant, but that it is too stingy: it gives the needy bread & tells them to be content; it gives the rest of us the opportunity to be stingy & to salve our consciences even as we skimp on what many of the destitute need most -- love, time, & challenge. Through a historical review of charitable behavior, it is argued that poverty fighters a century ago were more compassionate -- in the literal meaning of "suffering with" -- than many are now. They opened their homes to deserted women & children, offered employment to nomadic men, &, most significantly, made moral demands on recipients of aid. They saw family, work, freedom, & faith as central to being, not as lifestyle options. Further, the crisis of the modern welfare state is not isolated to government: too many private charities dispense aid indiscriminately, ignoring the moral & spiritual needs of the poor. It is concluded that the government of a pluralistic society is inherently incapable of tending to these spiritual needs, so the more effective provision of social services will ultimately depend on their return to private, especially religious, institutions. Modified AA

"What makes a leader truly great? Is it simply a matter of management style or personality? Or does character matter and, if so, how much? Most Americans believe a president's private activities bear little relation to his public-policy decisions, yet we also believe that moral vision plays a role in strong leadership. Where does the truth lie? In the first modern systematic examination of the bond between morals and politics, Marvin Olasky examines the lives and careers of thirteen noted American leaders, including the great, the good, and the deeply flawed, from George Washington, Henry Clay, and Booker T. Washington to Woodrow Wilson, John F. Kennedy, and Bill Clinton. Olasky looks closely at the connections between religion, sexual practices, and political decisions, examining the repeated connections between private character and public action. He explains how so-called "compartmentalization" proved to be as impossible for Lincoln as for Woodrow Wilson. A man's character shows its stamp repeatedly during a career. In The American Leadership Tradition Olasky has many lessons to offer. For the cynical, he reminds us that it is not true that "they all do it," as the lives of Andrew Jackson and Grover Cleveland can attest. For the nostalgic, he reminds us that there have been principled men, like George Washington, alongside unprincipled ones, like Henry Clay, from the beginning. After reading this book it will be impossible to argue that John Kennedy's womanizing reflected a side of him that had absolutely nothing to do with his presidency, or that Abraham Lincoln's rectitude was unconnected with his greatness. Olasky shows that faithfulness in marriage may be no guarantee of faithfulness to the country, but faithlessness is a leading indicator of trouble. Leaders who break a large vow to one person find it easy to break relatively small vows to millions. He finishes with a chapter on Bill Clinton and what his recent controversies mean for 21st-century America, a question that may haunt American politics for a long time to come"--