Margaret Hermann's Explaining Foreign Policy Behaviour Using the Personal Characteristics of Political Leaders

I am a person who is independent. I don’t rely on anyone but myself to achieve my goals. I let my own motivation push me to where I want to be in life. I love to be active in any way I can. For example, I was a three-sport athlete throughout high school. Most of my time is spend either mountain biking, hiking or playing sports. Another characteristic of myself would have to be awkward. This comes from the way I perceive life, lacking the social

Being the president of the United States is one of the most prestigious and difficult jobs. The fate of millions of people rests in their hands. The president is the leader of their country. A good leader can bring prosperity wile a bad leader could bring death to a nation. James David Barbers article, “The Presidential Character: Predicting Performance in the White House” addresses types of leadership and how the president’s personality can affect their success in office. The premise of Barber's argument in The Presidential Character is that he believes presidential personalities fall into four categories and combinations of activity, passivity, positivity, and negativity and those personality combinations can be indicative of presidential performance.

First, whether they were positive or negative, and second whether they were active or passive. The first category assesses how presidents regarded themselves in accordance with the trials in office. For example, in this category Barber observed the way they embrace the job. The second category measures their enthusiasm of wanting to accomplish big things or retreat into a reactive governing mode. As a result, these two presidential classifications produced four categories of presidents. First, we have the Active-Positive. Second, we have the Active-Negative. Third, we have the Passive-Positive. Lastly, we have the Passive-Negative. The Active-Positive presidents are those with big national ambitions and are self-confident, flexible, optimistic, and joyful. The Active-Negative presidents are those compulsive people with low self-esteem, seekers of power as a means of self-actualization, and sometimes overly aggressive. The Passive-Positive presidents are those who react to events rather than initiating them. They want to be loved and are thus ingratiating-and easily manipulated. Lastly, the Passive-Negative presidents are those that are withdrawn from people with low self-esteem, avoid conflicts, and take no joy on the uses of power. (James

Richard Nixon was an effective Autocratic leader because of the way he handled the Vietnam War crisis, the SALT 1 talks with the Soviets, and off course the Watergate scandal. The events that made Richard Nixon the man as well as the politician are from an early age he and his family suffered many life hardening events from an early age he lost two of his brothers to Tuberculosis, as well as this strong desire to be the best at everything he did whether it was in normal life and his school life as well as his adult life in the military and in politics. In his Political life there are more prime examples of Richard Nixon’s more autocratic side he showed this side more on the international scene then he did on the domestic scene with his manipulation as well as his circumnavigation of Congress with his increased involvement in Vietnam and his major deal making with the SALT treaty with the Soviets where he Manipulated the Soviet hand to get a more favorable deal for the United States. The Purpose of this paper is two fold is to explore autocratic leadership style and traits as well as show his strengths and weaknesses and explore the ethical dilemmas that plagued him.

The quality of a leader is reflected in the standards they set for themselves (Kroc). The United States president role in foreign policy is very important. Foreign policy has always been a job part of all presidencies that deserves the president’s full attention as well as part of American History. Many believe George W. Bush made America look horrible with his term of being our leader; however one reason was how he dealt with foreign policy. Our recent president Barrack Obama did two terms and people thought he was not a good leader, but his foreign policy benefited the country in some ways. Each has main characteristics that separate them from each other which I will be bringing about. By comparing the two presidents’ foreign policy will

The purpose of this paper is to explain the strengths and weaknesses of Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler with regards to their respective leadership styles and their interaction with their subordinates. I will analyze each leader’s qualities and then compare them to one another as I close out this document. This paper will rely extensively on knowledge gained through reading of two sources of documentation. The first document from Seweryn Bialer called “Stalin and His Generals” and the second document is from Albert Speer and his memoir “Inside the Third Reich”. I will first focus on Adolf Hitler by utilizing Albert Speer’s, “Inside the Third Reich” and then change the focus to Joseph Stalin by referencing Seweryn Bialer’s piece, “Stalin and His Generals” and then give my thoughts as I compare the two leaders for the conclusion of the paper.

In the United States, a knowledgeable and reliable president should bring a country into economic development and give citizens truth. It is easy to see how a president affects foreign policy. The President has the highest power to decide how to manage, control, and to solve problems. The president and Congress play important roles in running the country regarding foreign policy making. Foreign policy is very significant because it provides peace between countries without going to war. In order to develop the nation’s economy and increase job opportunities, effective foreign policies help to acquire more investments from foreign investors, and it also affects the world’s economy; therefore, foreign

To ‘investigate this question we will first discuss, in a theoretical section, the terms “authoritarian personality” and “authoritarianism”, then have a look at the evolution in methods to measure them, with different scales and studies. Secondly, we will discuss the difference between personality and behavior. Then

Multiple Characters throughout this book have provided sound reasons for the problems that we faced even today, with foreign policy. I have identified three characters who represent the good, the bad, and the ugly of foreign policy. The first character "the good,"

Foreign policy in big government nations is based on the considering of national security, geopolitics, government administrative and bureaucratic infighting, and defense of allied nations. Foreign policy in a free nation is based on personal values, personal beliefs, personal self-interest, peaceful settlement of disputes, and a significant degree of insularity and isolation from the big government nations of the

Today I am going to discuss about certain political leaders from our current history and describe their behaviors with the purpose to analyze their mind frame. With the help of my sources, I want to hypothesize certain psychological disorders that these individuals may possess with factual evidence as to why I labeled them with each particular disorder. I am going to talk about former president Barak Obama, First Lady Michelle Obama, president-elect Donald Trump, and Melania Trump.

This essay will answer the question: Is it possible to profile leaders from a distance? By examine different concepts and methods that psychological profilers use to develop psychological assessment profiles of political leaders that they do not have access to, either because the person is dead or not available or cannot be interviewed by a profiler; this is considered profiling from a distance. It will examine how these profiles are developed with each method and the purpose for being able to profile political leaders from a distance. This essay will also examine the problems with each of the methods used to construct a profile and conclude that it is not possible to develop a completely accurate profile from a distance.

In politics, individuals often play a tremendous role both in a domestic and foreign policy of states. Numerous examples of this can be found from historical events. For example, Adolf Hitler is the most notable individual who simply changed the entire world history. Hitler was able to change Germany’s goal and actions with his unique desire to conquer the world. It was a clear example of how one person’s idea could spread throughout the world and even change the history. However, this notion of individual’s significant influence can be challenging to come into reality due to the fact that individuals must show unusually strong ambition or an idea to have significant impacts. Additionally, Byman and Pollock have argued that if power is concentrated in the leader, then it is likely to see individual’s influence in state’s behavior (Byman, Pollock, 2001). From this argument, I could further argue that particularly in the system of dictatorship similar to the regime in North Korea, individuals could matter significantly. Likewise, in DPRK, their leader Kim Jong-Un is the most powerful man as it is seen in figure 2. If this argument is plausible, the reason why North Korean invests excessively in the military and the nuclear weapon is because of their leader’s personal goal and aspiration. In order to prove this hypothesis presented above, I will use Byman and Pollock’s pieces’ evidence that proved individuals matter in politics.

The S Style personalities are warm, supportive, and nurturing; of the four styles, they are the most people-oriented. Their strengths are excellent listeners, devoted friends, reliable, have follow-through, and are loyal employees. S Styles do not like interpersonal conflict, are oversensitive, slow to begin action, and are poor at setting goals. The analysis goes on to state that they are also risk-averse, which means that they do not like change and would rather endure unpleasant environments than risk change.

That the personality of a manager is a critical variable in their effectiveness is supported by the case study, aspects of Hitler’s personality being characteristically consistent, starting as empty lectures as a young drifter, and being concretised when head of state. Whether his personality was a critical variable in his effectiveness, or whether he happened to have a series of preoccupations that articulated a zeitgeist in post war Germany unfortunately remains a conundrum.