Estimated read time: 1-2 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
Historians and true journalists recognize that presenting something within the context of a limited view, small data points and disconnected dots rarely lead to meaningful perspectives. The Washington Post “perspective” piece from David Mason actually proves that. Drawing hardened lines between Brigham Young and President Trump, Mason writes, “He (President Trump) isn’t the first leader to use faith as a justification for authority. Years ago, so too did Brigham Young, an American who took on the role of a divinely-led prophet. How Young wielded power shows us just how dangerous such authority can be.”
Mason went on with weakly woven strands in a decidedly derogatory portrait of “dangerous leaders.” Of course, no leader is perfect and every leader, including Young and Trump, can be criticized for their mistakes — things said or unsaid, things done and left undone taken along with the results of their leadership. A more complete history of such leaders — political, religious or business, with a perspective of the long view, including a little backstory perspective, is always more meaningful.
[To read the full story go to Deseret.com](<http://www.ksl.com/ad_logger/ad_logger.php?location=https://www.deseret.com/opinion/2019/10/2/20896112/what-a-washington-post-op-ed-writer-got-wrong-about-brigham-young&sponsor=What a Washington Post op-ed writer got wrong about Brigham Young>).
