Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Bullying, Leadership, and the Presidency of the United States

The 1965 bullying incident at Michigan's elite Cranbrook School that came to light this week has kicked off a series of conversations about bullying and about the extent to which we should hold our nation's leaders accountable for past behavior.

Print Friendly

Inter Press Service

The 1965 bullying incident at Michigan's elite Cranbrook School that came to light this week has kicked off a series of conversations about bullying and about the extent to which we should hold our nation's leaders accountable for past behaviour.

But even after Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's "If I offended" apology, his comment about not remembering the incident, in which classmates say he was the ringleader, troubled many people. His remark hinted at a dangerous indifference to personal freedom and human rights that we do not like to hear from our nation's leaders, even in their teenage years.

But in the midst of this story is a broader point about the role of leadership and individual action in promoting or discouraging environments like the one described in the Washington Post. The stories shared by the Cranbrook Class of 1965 included perpetrators, bystanders and victims of bullying, but no sign of a defender — the only sort of person with the moral courage to stand up against their peers for a greater good.  

These are the people who make human rights victories possible and they represent the greatest opportunity for true leadership that most students face during these formative years.

Because, every time a student hears a sexist joke or a racial slur, every time she hears the words "faggot" or "slut" or "fatso" or "retard", she must make a decision. Will I be a perpetrator, a victim, a bystander or a human rights defender? And each time she makes that decision on which role she will play, she is exercising a muscle.

Like any muscle, the more she uses it, the stronger it becomes. And its strength defines who she is in her school, her family, her neighbourhood, and most importantly, who she sees when she looks in the mirror.

In the RFK Center's Speak Truth to Power programme, we are working with schools across the United States and in countries like Italy, Cambodia and Sweden to turn every student into a defender. We spread this message through the life stories of human rights activists like Elie Weisel, Vaclav Havel and the Dalai Lama who risked everything to fight for a more just and equal future.

For too long, we've allowed ourselves to equate targeted bullying with innocent teasing, or dismissed it as pranks and ignored the torment and long-term impact that an incident like this has on young people. These impacts are felt hardest by the victims, but you need only read the accounts of remorse from the men who helped attack John Lauber as boys, or those who merely watched it happen, to realise that when no one stands up to play the role of a defender, all those involved suffer a wound.

The fact is, human rights victories are rarely won by powerful governments or well-armed militaries. More often than not, these battles are led by individuals and small groups of people determined to overcome wrong. Think King, Gandhi, Mandela.

It's a lesson with big implications for our world, but it's also the very essence of the leadership and compassion we all hope our children learn in school. Unfortunately for the students at the Cranbrook School in the mid-1960s, there was no such leader.

But we hope that today, resources like our Speak Truth to Power curriculum and the power of the anti-bullying movement will mean that 50 years from now, a presidential candidate will be telling us about the times they defended human rights in school, and how that itself shaped their path to leadership.

Kerry Kennedy is the President of the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice and Human Rights.

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

The Foreign Policy Initiative, founded in 2009 by a host of neoconservative figures, was a leading advocate for a militaristic and Israel-centric U.S. foreign policies.


Billionaire investor Paul Singer is the founder and CEO of the Elliott Management Corporation and an important funder of neoconservative causes.


Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) is known for his hawkish views on foreign policy and close ties to prominent neoconservatives.


Ron Dermer is the Israeli ambassador to the United States and a close confidante of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.


Blackwater Worldwide founder Erik Prince is notorious for his efforts to expand the use of private military contractors in conflict zones.


U.S. Defense Secretary James “Mad Dog” Mattis is a retired U.S Marine Corps general and combat veteran who served as commander of U.S. Central Command during 2010-2013 before being removed by the Obama administration reportedly because of differences over Iran policy.


Mark Dubowitz, an oft-quoted Iran hawk, is the executive director of the neoconservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly

The time has come for a new set of partnerships to be contemplated between the United States and Middle East states – including Iran – and between regimes and their peoples, based on a bold and inclusive social contract.


Print Friendly

Erik Prince is back. He’s not only pitching colonial capitalism in DC. He’s huckstering ex-SF-led armies of sepoys to wrest Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya and perhaps, if he is ever able to influence likeminded hawks in the Trump administration, even Iran back from the infidels.


Print Friendly

Encouraged by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s statement late last month that Washington favors “peaceful” regime change in Iran, neoconservatives appear to be trying to influence the internal debate by arguing that this is Trump’s opportunity to be Ronald Reagan.


Print Friendly

When asked about “confidence in the U.S. president to do the right thing in world affairs,” 22 percent of those surveyed as part of a recent Pew Research Center global poll expressed confidence in Donald Trump and 74 percent expressed no confidence.


Print Friendly

A much-awaited new State Department volume covering the period 1951 to 1954 does not reveal much new about the actual overthrow of Mohammad Mossadeq but it does provide a vast amount of information on US involvement in Iran.


Print Friendly

As debate continues around the Trump administration’s arms sales and defense spending, am new book suggests several ways to improve security and reduce corruption, for instance by increasing transparency on defense strategies, including “how expenditures on systems and programs align with the threats to national security.”


Print Friendly

Lobelog We walked in a single file. Not because it was tactically sound. It wasn’t — at least according to standard infantry doctrine. Patrolling southern Afghanistan in column formation limited maneuverability, made it difficult to mass fire, and exposed us to enfilading machine-gun bursts. Still, in 2011, in the Pashmul District of Kandahar Province, single…


RightWeb
share