When ‘because I said so’ isn’t enough

I think most of us have been there at some point in our youth. A parent, teacher, or other authority figure asks us to do something. We push back, wanting to understand why, and the answer comes, straight and to the point: “Because I said so.”

My mom taught piano lessons when I was young, so I learned to play—at least at a rudimentary level—because she said so. I got out of bed early after coming home late the night before because I needed to “pay the piper,” and because she said so. I stayed in Boy Scouts until I earned the rank of Eagle, not because I enjoyed it, but because she said so.

Those situations were hard to accept at the time. Looking back, I wish I had taken the piano lessons more seriously and learned earlier the value of accepting the consequences of my choices.

“Because I said so” works with a child. A child has much to learn and needs guidance. At that stage in life, I needed to learn by doing, and understanding the “why” often wasn’t necessary. There are times in adulthood, however, especially for those in positions of authority, when an explanation is required.

I learned, not soon enough, in my career as a manager that when people understood my thinking, and when I was open to hearing theirs, we had a more productive workplace. Understanding the big picture and what we’re trying to accomplish goes a long way toward building a strong, connected team.

Articulating the “why” is often the hardest part. Too often, it feels like I’m not even sure why we’re taking a particular course. But if I don’t know, how can anyone else? In those moments, I need to be better about stepping back and figuring it out.

That dynamic is playing out in front of us right now in decisions coming from the White House related to Iran. Regardless of your personal politics, how you feel about President Trump, other world leaders, or what the Constitution allows or doesn’t allow, shouldn’t we at least understand why our military is dropping bombs on another country?

The leaders of Iran were evil. They were torturing their own people. They may or may not have continued developing destructive weapons systems. They may or may not have posed an immediate threat to the United States. The list goes on.

But shouldn’t we be able to expect our nation’s leaders to clearly articulate why we are bombing people?

Let’s be clear: we may target leaders, but there is always collateral damage. Innocent people are in the path of those weapons—people who did nothing beyond having the misfortune of being born in Iran. And our military heroes are putting their lives on the line.

We have a right to know the objective. Is it regime change? Destroying weapons systems? Preventing future weapons development? Supporting Israel? Something else entirely—maybe even something as cynical as wagging the dog? If leaders can’t tell us the goal, that may tell us as much as any explanation could.

When these questions are asked, the answers seem to shift. The president says one thing, then another. The secretary of defense offers something different. The press secretary criticizes the media for asking and reframes the narrative entirely.

This feels like one of those times when “Because I said so” isn’t enough.