Fair Process

Most people accept the decisions of courts. The reason is that there is legitimacy in the process. In the criminal justice world this is known as procedural justice. The same idea exists in the study of management.

“Fair Process research has shown that people care not only about outcomes, but also about the process that produces these outcomes.”

This statement from an INSEAD Business School research paper summarizes an obvious truth that alluded the Naming Commission. These credentialed and accomplished Americans did not consider “fair process” when they prepared their findings in a glossy three-part report.

The U.S. Congress established the commission with a bipartisan vote to override a presidential veto. The commission was to identify assets named for Confederates who volunteered to serve the Confederate States of America. They were also to provide renaming recommendations.

This commission was the 21st century’s version of “the best and the brightest” and proceeded to ignore Congress. Instead, they compiled an ahistorical diatribe of anti-Southern bigotry. Admittedly, I did not like the idea of changing the names of forts. I thought some forts being named after Confederates was a testament to the strength of our republic. Presented differently, I could have supported some changes to honor more recent heroes or patriots.

The process as executed has made that impossible for me now. The commission ignored their remit and used dishonorable tactics. They insulted tens of millions of Americans. Bipartisan is now meaningless to many.

You don’t have to be all that bright or steeped in history to understand the potential consequences. Nothing ever good comes from a class of people feeling unrepresented. The results of the appearance of a lack of a fair process in Germany after WWI are well known. Legitimacy is being questioned in Brazil today. Some principles should not be ignored. Politics is all fun and games, until it isn’t.