Is Inauguration Ceremony Symbolism at Risk?

It happens every four years. Though we largely take it for granted, the regular occurrence of the U.S. presidential inauguration ceremony serves as a reliable indicator of our devotion to democratic elections and the orderly and peaceful transfer of power. Just as importantly, it also serves as an example for the rest of the world. However, with a president who so freely talks about rejecting the upcoming presidential election results (unless they go his way), we should all be concerned this great American tradition is not as inevitable as we once thought. As we proceed toward Inauguration Day on January 20, 2021, I am struck by the possible fragility of our commitment to the U.S. election process, as well as the attendant presidential inauguration ceremony and the symbolism it projects to the world.

During my last year serving in the U.S. Marine Corps, I received a temporary assignment away from my permanent duty station at Headquarters Marine Corps in Arlington, Virginia. Upon being told the temporary assignment was with the Presidential Inauguration Committee, I momentarily rejoiced. It was September of 1996 — an election year — and incumbent President Bill Clinton was running against Republican challenger Senator Bob Dole. Working for the Presidential Inauguration Committee definitely sounded special and exciting, and I looked forward to being part of such an elite organization. At the very least, I assumed this temporary assignment would be a welcome relief from the routine bureaucratic duties associated with my regular staff officer job.

I quickly learned the new assignment was actually with the Armed Forces Inaugural Committee, the military component responsible for supporting the privately-run Presidential Inaugural Committee. This meant planning and logistically supporting many of the military aspects of the inauguration ceremonies and festivities. This joint military task force turned out to be quite a large organization — made up of hundreds of personnel from all branches of the military. In reality, not very elite at all. And the job turned out to be very similar to my old one. As the days led to Inauguration Day on January 20, 1997, I found myself back in bureaucratic-mode; my duties often involved routinely preparing a set of slides for briefings given to the numerous government and private sector VIP’s visiting the committee headquarters. As I sat in on the briefings, I grew accustomed to hearing the standard spiel; how the military’s participation in the presidential inauguration symbolically represented the nation’s orderly and peaceful transfer of power every four years; how unlike what happened in other countries, our military did not take part in violent coups designed to install the next new leader but rather maintained allegiance to the Constitution; and, how the U.S. therefore served as a shining beacon of constitutional rule for the rest of the world.

The briefings to visiting VIP’s became so frequent I sometimes wondered if the entire rationale for having an Armed Forces Inaugural Committee was to talk about the Armed Forces Inaugural Committee (the organization is now known as Joint Task Force National Capitol Region). But a funny thing happened over time. The more I heard the standard spiel, the more proud I became about playing a role in the presidential inauguration — albeit an extremely small one. Knowing how important the entire hoopla associated with the inauguration ceremonies and festivities was to the rest of the world gave some meaning to my job. When Inauguration Day came and went, and my duties with the committee ended, I felt good about the entire experience precisely because I could derive a degree of meaning from it.

I was no stranger to this type of mental practice. There were times in my military career when the work became difficult, disagreeable, or just plain boring, and my enthusiasm level dipped. On those occasions, I drew mental sustenance from knowing my efforts contributed to something much larger than myself — to an institution with a significant purpose and proud tradition. For a civilian, such a simple mental practice might appear like clutching the slimmest of overhanging branches to prevent being swept down a raging river, but purpose and tradition provide deep, strong roots for most Marines.

My service with the presidential inauguration effort remained fresh in my mind when in 1998 our country played a crucial role in the Good Friday Agreement that ended the Troubles, the long political conflict in Northern Ireland. Our leadership in the peace process came as no surprise to me. After all, the U.S. enjoyed a reputation as the shining beacon of constitutional rule.

At the time, I didn’t foresee the possibility of any event or person ever tarnishing that long-held reputation. It seems, unfortunately, that times have significantly changed. With the next presidential inauguration ceremony just a few months away, I now cringe when our current president speaks about refusing to accept the results of the November election. According to Donald Trump, a defeat can only come about if the election is rigged — with mail-in ballots to blame.

There is a price to pay for such language. By his constant bad-mouthing of these ballots and the casting of doubt on our electoral system, he is setting up the country for a constitutional crisis. As absurd as his “rigged” claim may be, Trump appears confident he can successfully push (without any proof) the narrative of a corrupt election process, and thus enable his so-called uninterrupted “continuation” in office. He is eager to rally his more angry supporters to protest any unfavorable election results, and thus negate the will of the people. He sees chaos as his ally. In effect, Trump seems ready to trash the powerful pillars of institutional purpose and tradition in favor of his own personal ambitions. I am not sure what any presidential inauguration ceremony would look like or represent under these circumstances.

I hope all Americans recognize the absurdity and immorality of this Trumpian strategy before it’s too late. We’ve long taken our expectation of a peaceful and orderly transfer of power for granted, but I fear the deep, strong roots of constitutional rule might be much more fragile than we think. As incredible as it might sound, this country may soon discover that one individual with the slimmest notion of national purpose and tradition can poison these roots, leaving our country vulnerable as it gets swept down a raging river, headed toward a dangerous abyss.