The Modern Statesman: The Life & Career of Winston Churchill
Machiavelli proposed that power defines the quality of a statesman. However, modern concepts in politics assume that leaders work in service to the people, and it is counter-productive to base leadership on fear because it can become a selfish or neglecting tyranny rather than a method for promoting national well-being. Statesmen are required to have more qualities, and their effectiveness is determined through more complex analyses of their qualities and behavior. It is no longer adequate to rule by power alone. A leader requires positive traits that build trust among the population. Churchill is an example of a statesman who built his reputation through honesty and effective decision-making in his contribution to fight the Nazis.
Churchill had many good qualities that can be observed in his work. He was honest, dedicated, persistent, charismatic, motivational, and intelligent. Although Churchill displayed self-respect and confidence, he was never arrogant or stubborn. Churchill was capable of learning from his mistakes, and it is possible to notice that he had made mistakes during his early career. However, those mistakes also allowed him to learn from experience and become one of the three most influential people who shaped European history after World War II. Although Churchill undoubtedly had some negative traits, such as lacking malice, avoiding grudges, or blame shifting, Johnson concludes that his negative traits were only irritating rather than serious threats to his political career.1
Churchill was capable of learning from his mistakes, and that is possibly his greatest quality. Unlike Johnson’s viewpoint that Churchill’s inability to shift blame is a negative trait, Churchill has proven that honesty earns more trust than avoiding responsibility. Churchill was infamous for two disasters in the early 20th century, namely the disaster at Gallipoli and the attempt to prevent the Russian Revolution.3 However, Churchill’s ability to learn from mistakes allowed him to display undisputable leadership skills during World War II. For example, Churchill was always original and expressed his viewpoints persuasively through proficient use of words.4 His charismatic influence allowed him to form and shape alliances during World War II. Churchill’s most significant act of persuasion was when he persuaded Franklin Roosevelt to prioritize defeating Germany over defeating Japan.5
Unfortunately, Johnson’s work does not adequately assess Churchill’s qualities because the author is partial and devoted to promoting and maintaining Churchill’s positive reputation. Although there is nothing wrong with having a positive perspective, it is obvious that Johnson assesses only Churchill’s qualities while neglecting or aggressively defending Churchill’s flaws and errors. For example, Churchill himself admitted that supporting the gold standard was a mistake because it contributed to the Great Depression.7 Despite his confession, Johnson defends Churchill’s position by claiming that the gold standard possessed certain qualities, so Churchill was correct.8 However, Churchill obviously missed a broad view and the impact of its negative aspects, and he clearly admitted his wrong position on that matter.
Furthermore, Johnson interferes with Churchill’s personal life to depict him as a perfect human being. According to Johnson, Churchill was never interested in any woman besides his wife, and he smoked only cigars, so he never inhaled the smoke.9 It is obvious that Johnson’s admiration is completely directed to Churchill because he fails to observe him objectively as a human being. For example, when Churchill smoked cigars, he filled the air around him with smoke. The only solution to prevent inhaling was to stop breathing, so Johnson’s argument is absurd.
Above all qualities and attributes, Churchill was a human being. It is reasonable to expect that he possessed negative traits and that his decisions were not always perfect. On the other hand, it is not possible to judge him by observing only negative personality traits and negative outcomes during his career. As any human being, Churchill consisted of positive and negative traits. The main reason for his success was that he was able to focus on bringing out his positive traits and producing mainly positive outcomes during his career while minimizing negative traits and outcomes.
References
Johnson, Paul. Churchill. New York, NY: Penguin Group USA, 2009.
