Stephen F. Knott lecturing on the de-evolution of the American Presidency at Hofstra University. // Photo Courtesy of Jacob Lewis
Stephen F. Knott, a professor of national security affairs at the United States Naval War College, appeared at an event at the Guthart Cultural Center Theater Monday, Sept. 20, to discuss his latest book, “The Lost Soul of the American Presidency: The Decline into Demagoguery and the Prospects for Renewal.”
In attendance were several political science professors and students. Knott began his discussion by stating that the decline of the role of the U.S. president is not solely due to the election of Donald Trump.
“In my view, the American presidency has lost its way,” Knott said. “It has lost the respect it once held and that predates Trump.”
Knott said that presidents such as George Washington, John Quincy Adams and Abraham Lincoln upheld the ideals of an American presidency because they feared what he calls the “rule of the majority.”
“They had this healthy fear of the tyranny of the majority, which I think we have unfortunately lost,” Knott said.
Knott then shifted the conversation to Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Andrew Johnson and Donald Trump, whom he classified as “demagogues.” In other words, “political figures who [were] playing on people’s fears, playing on people’s emotions, on their passions [and] to some extent, playing on the worst in us in order to win an election,” Knott said.
Knott further explained why demagogues pose a threat to the American presidency.
“Over-the-top thinking that one election [or] one individual has the power to change any problem or deal with any crisis confronting the world, I think, has contributed to the collapse in confidence in the American government when it fails to deliver,” Knott said. “When you heighten expectations so high and then you cannot deliver, there’s been a steady erosion of the American public’s confidence not only in the presidency, but in the federal government.”
Knott concluded his presentation by asserting that if the American presidency returned to a constitutional presidency such as those under Washington, Hamilton or Adams, then the presidency would be “well served.”
“They designed a presidency of sober expectations. One that did not pander to or manipulate public opinion,” Knott said. “One that was opposed to the notion that it was the president’s job to provide some sort of vision to take us into the promised land and, perhaps most importantly, this was an office that was less likely to implement the majority will at the expense of political, racial and economic minorities.”
Students at the event enjoyed Knott’s presentation and even agreed with his point of view.
“I found his take really interesting, and I agreed with a lot of his points of view,” said Priya Niehaus, a sophomore journalism major. “I really enjoyed it, personally.”
Vincent Lospinuso, a junior journalism major, attended the event as part of a political science class.
“I didn’t think I would agree with him,” said Lospinuso. “I think he gave a really, really convincing argument.”
Lospinuso added that he can apply Knott’s points about the role of the American presidency to what he has observed from past elections. “I find that we put so much energy into thinking that these people that we’re going to vote for … that they’re going to fix everything in charge,” he said. “This leads to an immense amount of distrust in the federal government.”