December 25, 2004
SETTING THE BAR TOO LOW:
Statesmen for these times (Martin Gilbert, December 26, 2004, The Observer)
People often ask how history will remember our generation of leaders in comparison with Winston Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Many comment that today's leaders look small compared with the giants of the past. This is, I believe, a misconception.In their day, both Churchill and Roosevelt were frequently criticised, often savagely, by their countrymen, including legislators who had little knowledge of the behind-the-scenes reality of the war.
The passage of time both elevates and reduces reputations. Today there is a cult of Churchill, particularly in the United States, but also far greater scholarly criticism, which regards him, increasingly, as a flawed war leader. The same is true of Roosevelt: his recent biographers are constantly revealing - to their satisfaction, at least - feet of clay.
Although it can easily be argued that George W Bush and Tony Blair face a far lesser challenge than Roosevelt and Churchill did - that the war on terror is not a third world war - they may well, with the passage of time and the opening of the archives, join the ranks of Roosevelt and Churchill. Their societies are too divided today to deliver a calm judgment, and many of their achievements may be in the future: when Iraq has a stable democracy, with al-Qaeda neutralised, and when Israel and the Palestinian Authority are independent democracies, living side by side in constructive economic cooperation.
If they can move this latter aim, to which Bush and Blair pledged themselves on 12 November, it will be a leadership achievement of historic proportions.
Roosevelt and Churchill are tragic figures, because they left Communism in place to disfigure the remainder of the 20th Century. As Iraq and Palestine head towards elections and reform engulfs even Egypt and Saudi Arabia it seems fair to ask whether any such cancerous "-ism" will remain by the time Tony Blair and George Bush are done. Posted by Orrin Judd at December 25, 2004 10:10 PM
Mr. Judd;
Oh, I'm sure we'll think of something. Environmentalism, perhaps?
Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at December 25, 2004 11:19 PMLiberalism will remain, and they will have consolidated it.
Posted by: Paul Cella at December 25, 2004 11:25 PMoj,
And of course we can always thank FDR for not only extending the "depression" but worsening it.
Mike
It's past time FDR's agenda be made public. He not only left the Soviets in place, he actively abetted them and his actions led directly to the murder of tens of millions of people and enslaved generations of others.
Few recall that FDR only wanted to enter the war after Germany turned on Russia. Before that mind bogglingly stupid move by Hitlet, FDR was content to watch as all of Europe was gobbled up with the end result Russia overpowering Germany leading to the noble experiment's conquest of Europe and the rest of the world.
What Churchill thought of FDR hasn't been made pubic, or if it has, I haven't read of it. I don't think he was a fan of the left.
Posted by: erp at December 26, 2004 9:11 AMPasul:
Which is their genius. The Far Right imagines it can remove liberalism from the world, as Marxists imagine removing poverty.
Posted by: oj at December 26, 2004 9:16 AMLiberalism has a death wish. It will remove itself from the world eventually -- but it take alot of things we love with it.
If, instead, we repent of it, and return to the path of truth and sanity, those things might be saved.
Posted by: Paul Cella at December 26, 2004 10:46 PMPeople have a death wish. A politics that ignores human nature will never win in the long run, as with the Far Right and its imagining that it can remove the safety net entirely.
Posted by: oj at December 27, 2004 8:09 AM