‘Unlocking Us’: Analyzing the US election and its aftermath

Sarah Chace
{"title":"‘Unlocking Us’: Analyzing the US election and its aftermath","authors":"Sarah Chace","doi":"10.1177/17427150211003002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The American presidential election of 2020 ended in the early hours of Thursday 7 January 2021, when the US Congress counted and certified the ballots of the Electoral College in the aftermath of a violent, Trump-supporting mob breaching the US Capitol. The spectacle of this assault may be analyzed for years to come, yet it is immediately clear that it was the result of authoritarian impulses on the part of the defeated president. Critical Leadership Studies has concerned itself with the ‘problematization’ of leadership theory, often examining distributions of power both within society and within the discipline itself. This article takes its title from Brené Brown’s podcast, ‘Unlocking Us’, torqueing it in an effort to understand these events and their causes as a group dynamic that manifested between Trump and his supporters. I also make the argument that the anxiety fomented and falsely contained by Trump has its deeper origins in what Kuhn labeled ‘paradigm shifts’. To deconstruct the kind of leadership that took place in the run-up to and the aftermath of the 2020 election—darkly charismatic, authoritarian, and cultish—I employ three lenses of analysis: paradigm shifts as progenitors of crisis; ‘basic assumption’ patterns of work avoidance in groups; and ‘holding environments’ as the imposition of salutary boundaries that foster growth. In combination, these three lenses offer an interpretation of recent events in America that enhances the dialectical approach proposed by Critical Leadership Theory.","PeriodicalId":92094,"journal":{"name":"Leadership (London)","volume":"22 1","pages":"365 - 375"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Leadership (London)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17427150211003002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The American presidential election of 2020 ended in the early hours of Thursday 7 January 2021, when the US Congress counted and certified the ballots of the Electoral College in the aftermath of a violent, Trump-supporting mob breaching the US Capitol. The spectacle of this assault may be analyzed for years to come, yet it is immediately clear that it was the result of authoritarian impulses on the part of the defeated president. Critical Leadership Studies has concerned itself with the ‘problematization’ of leadership theory, often examining distributions of power both within society and within the discipline itself. This article takes its title from Brené Brown’s podcast, ‘Unlocking Us’, torqueing it in an effort to understand these events and their causes as a group dynamic that manifested between Trump and his supporters. I also make the argument that the anxiety fomented and falsely contained by Trump has its deeper origins in what Kuhn labeled ‘paradigm shifts’. To deconstruct the kind of leadership that took place in the run-up to and the aftermath of the 2020 election—darkly charismatic, authoritarian, and cultish—I employ three lenses of analysis: paradigm shifts as progenitors of crisis; ‘basic assumption’ patterns of work avoidance in groups; and ‘holding environments’ as the imposition of salutary boundaries that foster growth. In combination, these three lenses offer an interpretation of recent events in America that enhances the dialectical approach proposed by Critical Leadership Theory.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“解锁我们”:分析美国大选及其后果
2020年美国总统大选于2021年1月7日星期四凌晨结束,当时美国国会清点并确认了选举人团的选票,此前一群支持特朗普的暴民袭击了美国国会大厦。这次袭击的场面可能会在未来几年里被分析,但很明显,这是被击败的总统独裁冲动的结果。批判性领导力研究关注的是领导力理论的“问题化”,经常检查社会内部和学科本身的权力分配。这篇文章的标题来自bren Brown的播客“解锁我们”,试图将这些事件及其原因理解为特朗普和他的支持者之间表现出来的群体动态。我还认为,特朗普煽动和错误遏制的焦虑,其更深层次的根源在于库恩所说的“范式转移”。为了解构在2020年大选之前和之后发生的那种领导——黑暗魅力、威权主义和邪教——我采用了三种分析视角:作为危机先兆的范式转变;群体回避工作的“基本假设”模式;“保持环境”是对促进增长的有益边界的强加。结合起来,这三个镜头提供了对美国近期事件的解释,增强了批判性领导理论提出的辩证方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Examining employee willingness to execute shared leadership: The role of leadership behaviour, gender, age, and context Leading like lions: The model junior officer in the Great War and a critique of present-day mainstream leadership models Imagining aesthetic leadership Letter to Putin Leadership and systems change. The 21st International Studying Leadership Conference 31st July 2023. Call for proposals
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1