“The [Russian] defense minister might not be the only man of reason in the entire cabinet. But if there were others who believed their leader was foolish for playing a game of nuclear chicken with an American president who had never fought a war nor ever served in the military yet prided himself in being ‘unpredictable,’ they were keeping their counsel to themselves. Only Petrovsky had demonstrated the courage to speak his mind. The last cabinet member who had tried to do so was the army chief of staff, and he had been arrested and banished to the outer reaches of the empire.”[1] (Joel Rosenberg, The Kremlin Conspiracy)

Where leadership allows no criticism, authoritarianism soon follows. Without pushback, the people perish. This was never truer than in the twentieth century. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Mobutu, Amin, Khomeini—the list can go on and on. Why have we never seen this kind of cult of personality terror in the United States? It all goes back to the First Amendment and our freedom of speech. Our presidents have always had the benefit of a free press, an open cabinet, a team of advisers, and the voice of a nation to speak into their ears. It is the right and the responsibility of the citizens of the United States to affirm their leaders when they do well and to challenge them when they don’t.

In today’s internet culture, we have unprecedented access to our political leaders and those who are close to said leaders. Through social media, we are only 140 characters away from telling our president that we think he is right or imploring him to reconsider a decision. Unfortunately, there are tens of thousands whose only joy in life seems to be in abusing that access. The trolls of Twitter salivate for opportunities to turn the great to gross, the tragic to trash, and the beautiful to base. The anonymity of social media allows people’s inner demons to step outside and get a little fresh air.

Yet that is the price we must pay for our wonderful freedom of speech. Thankfully, I don’t suffer too much from the troll army. However, I get a fair share of criticism over the internet. When I do receive it, I welcome it. Winston Churchill once said, “Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.” My approach to criticism is to weigh the words. If there is validity in any part of what is said, then I seek to grow from it. If the words or the writer are lacking in substance, then I simply disregard it.

Recently, I’ve received some of what I believe to be well-intentioned disapproval of my criticism of President Trump’s decision to pull out of Syria. My critics have not expressed disapproval over my analysis of his determined course, but rather in my decision to share that analysis. The gist is that I should loudly proclaim when I agree with the president but remain silent when I disagree. I don’t think that makes for a healthy dialogue, a healthy country, or a healthy president.

I understand completely where these critics are coming from. We live in such a fractured society that any criticism of our president may be perceived as ammunition for the “other side”. They believe it may also be the final straw that breaks the camel’s back for those who are wavering over supporting Donald Trump or not. While I hope people listen to and respect my books, newsletters, and updates, I doubt there are many out there who are anxiously waiting to hear what Joel Rosenberg says before they decide to stick with Trump or abandon him.

Recently, Franklin Graham tweeted, “Pulling our troops out of Syria too quickly has the potential to put many in danger. I understand that President Trump has to make very tough decisions that impact the lives of people abroad & here at home. It’s important that we continue to pray for him & his administration.”[2] In this message, Graham expresses his concern for the president’s decision, affirms the difficulty of his job, and encourages the church to pray for him. This is a perfect example of what the Christian’s attitude toward leadership should be. Criticize when necessary, but do so with a heart of love and a true desire to help. And make sure that all our words spoken to authorities are birthed out of a lifestyle of continual prayer and an openness to the leading of the Holy Spirit.

-Joel

---

[1] Rosenberg, Joel C. THE KREMLIN CONSPIRACY. Tyndale House Publishers, 2018.

[2] Graham, Franklin. Twitter, 27 Dec. 2018, twitter.com/franklin_graham/status/1078112615002443776?s=21.