Nation’s ‘moral compass’ resets in Trump era

Polarization creates a vacuum in leadership

What is happening to my country? If you’ve asked this question, you are likely not alone.

As America has grown more diverse, more secular and more polarized, its moral compass has become harder to tune to a true north, with no particular voice emerging as a moral authority. Fifty years ago, the nation faced a tumultuous period, yet millions of eyes still turned toward identifiable leaders:

❚ The presidency had not yet been shaken by Watergate.

❚ Martin Luther King Jr. was the most recognizable civil rights leader.

❚ Walter Cronkite was the voice of news.

❚ More than 65% of Americans said religion was “very important” in their trusted own lives (Gallup).

❚ 62% said they trusted the government all or most of the time (Pew Research Center).

Now:

❚ 63% of voters say President Trump does not provide moral leadership (Quinnipiac University poll).

❚ Movements such as Black Lives Matter and the women’s marches make a point of democratized, not singular leadership.

❚ News comes not from an authorita-

ANALYSIS

tive few but from hundreds of sources with varying standards and reputations

❚ 51% say religion is “very important” in their lives.

❚ Only 18% trust the government all or most of the time, and roughly half of Democrats and Republicans alike say the other party makes them “afraid” (Pew Research Center).

Some experts say these trends have created a moral vacuum.

“Society used to be more unified in the people they saw as moral leaders,” said Barbara Perry, a presidential historian at the University of Virginia.

“Look at the legend that grew up around (George) Washington: ‘I cannot tell a lie.’ And then carry that on to Abraham Lincoln: ‘Honest Abe,’ ” Perry said.

That doesn’t mean all presidents upheld high personal moral standards. Grover Cleveland had a child with a woman he was accused of raping; likewise, Thomas Jefferson fathered children with his slave, Sally Hemings.

The public largely was in the dark about John F. Kennedy’s womanizing while he was in office, but if he behaved that way today, one can only imagine the tweets and late-night jabs akin to Bill Clinton, Monica Lewinsky and the blue dress.

And those are just the sexual scan- dals. Trust in the government plummeted during the Watergate scandal.

“I think it’s almost inevitable where we are now,” Perry said. “We have become more skeptical and cynical about authority generally and about presidents specifically.”

With the 2016 election, Perry said, Trump removed “a moral standard for becoming president.”

During his campaign, Trump faced accusations of sexual misconduct and of not paying his workers. He said in January 2016, “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters.”

“With Donald Trump, I think we have just crossed the Rubicon, because ... his very platform of running was ‘all presidents lie, all politicians lie,’ ” Perry said.

Research shows we want people who do good things to also be good people. But moral character and moral effectiveness do not always align, said David Pizarro, a Cornell University professor who studies moral reasoning.

“We’re good at evaluating persons and we’re very bad at evaluating the overall consequences of a moral leader, or any kind of leader, because that takes time and data,” Pizarro said.

And the ability to take time, to evaluate and to apply logic can be difficult in the social media age.

“I think it’s not so much that humans have changed, as much as it is that the world has changed and technology has changed,” Pizarro said. “I think the crisis really is that we have so much access to character and character cues.”