Peter Crum

Professor Schofield

Research Paper

December 7, 2010

 

 

Against the Grain

            In Great Britain at the open of 1940 there was threat looming to the east.  Poland and Czechoslovakia had already been overrun, France would be next.  The threat to every free man, woman, and child was Hitler’s tyrannical rise to power, supported by the Nazi war machine.  This was a turning point in history, though as is often the case, few recognized the significance that their decisions would have on the future.  Throughout history the greatest errors in civilization have been a result of shortsightedness.  The current political climate is no different; as national security is debated, those in positions of authority disregard the lessons of history.  The philosopher George Santayana said, “Those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it” (qtd. in Drea 203).   Complacency is a cancer in today’s society, just as it was in 1940 Great Britain.

 Only twenty years had passed since the closing of World War I, the war to end all wars.  Day in and day out the war affected their lives.  It had taken four long years to beat back Germany’s thirst for domination.  The years that had passed since the close of that war had not been easy.  The campaign against evil had been expensive (Levy 8).  Great Britain’s infrastructure and military capability had been severely depleted.  The debt accrued during the war weighed upon the citizens in the form of increased taxation.  It was clear to all that taking a stand against tyranny had come at great cost.  The leaders of Great Britain had been similarly influenced by the Great War; official policy reflected their weariness (Levy 85).  Today, the fight against terrorism is taking place primarily on foreign soil.  It is almost ten years since the attacks of 9/11, and the memories for many are fading.  Political resolve is also waning, as many elected officials question America’s role in the ongoing conflicts.  Like the people of Great Britain in 1940, Americans are detached from the world outside.  Threats of terrorism and ruthless dictators are viewed as distant concerns.  Yet the enemies of the free world grow stronger, steadily advancing every day.

            Winston Churchill arrived at the moment of Britain’s greatest need.  He was the product of English aristocracy, who had made a name for himself with a string of successes and failures. Having received a military education, Churchill served his country during the Great War.  During that conflict he was responsible for the embarrassing failure at Gallipoli, which caused some to question his ability to lead (Artis).  Despite his checkered service record, he defiantly ascended the political ranks in the years following the war.  The author Allen Brooke suggests that Churchill was a visionary, consistently foreseeing danger.  Churchill honestly believed that he could lead his country through dark times (Brooke 316).  In the years leading up to 1940, Churchill had attracted attention by making public proclamations, cautioning of Germany’s armed resurrection (Williamson 28). No one wanted to hear Churchill’s rhetoric of doom.   The war with Germany had already been fought and finished.  Great Britain, quite literally an island, was sheltered from the horrors of the outside world.  Yet oppressive dictators and lunatic tyrants do not come to power secretively.  No, they establish themselves in full view of the whole world, daring any and all to interfere.  This pattern holds true today, as evidenced by the saber rattling of Iran and North Korea.  Terrorist organizations, bent on obliterating freedom, continue to thrive.  These threats are on the other side of the world, making it all too easy for Americans to ignore the inevitable.  There came a time in Great Britain when it was impossible to avoid the truth in Churchill’s warnings.  Unfortunately, in America, knowing the truth and doing what is right do not always go hand in hand. 

            As Hitler swept across Europe, the people of Great Britain had decided to support a policy of appeasement.  This is the political position which aimed to address grievances against Hitler through negotiations.  After all, there were those who believed that Germany had every right to regain its sovereignty.  Initially Germany had only occupied countries with large German populations; to many in Britain this move seemed reasonable.  There are others who supported appeasement because they understood that financially the British could not afford another war.  To them this was not a question of principles, rather the logical conclusion that a conflict with anyone on any scale was a bridge too far.  Still others within Great Britain felt as though Hitler could be reasoned with.  Surely with the United States as an ally, Hitler would not dare attack Britain itself.  Churchill’s reply to this was, “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last” (qtd. in Treisman).  America is guilty of this approach; in some cases the crocodile is becoming morbidly obese.  In recent years, U.S. leaders have adopted a policy of appeasement when dealing with the greatest and most eminent threats.  Even worse, some deny that a threat exists.  Winston Churchill believed that the primary weakness in a free society was the citizens’ tendency to become passive (Lyons 11).  Fortunately, in May of 1940, Churchill became Prime Minister, just as war reached Great Britain’s doorstep.  He may be best remembered for turning back the tide of Nazi Germany, yet perhaps his greatest achievement was convincing his own people that it must be done.

            Churchill saw the policy of appeasement as nothing less than surrender.  Yet he knew that he could not succeed alone, he must persuade others to join the fight.  Author Allen Brooke claims, “Churchill’s genius, and it was nothing less, lay in grasping the importance of symbolic speech and action” (Brooke 314).  Churchill was a great orator, and well known for his candor.  He approached the British citizens directly, painting the situation clearly in black and white.  “If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves” (Churchill qtd. in Petrie).    The United States today is fully capable of continuing Churchill’s defense of freedom.  There is little doubt that overall, U.S. citizens desire to strengthen this country’s foundations and support its allies.  Regrettably, when those in positions of leadership obscure the truth, the common man is easily led astray.  To the benefit of the world, Churchill stirred the hearts and minds of his fellow countrymen.  Against the protests of the appeasers, Great Britain stood its ground against the Nazi onslaught.

            “We shall not fail. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender” (Churchill qtd. in Estorick).  Churchill clearly defined the objective as triumph over tyranny.  He unabashedly described his enemy as evil, and his own cause as good.  In describing Hitler’s book of propaganda, Mein Kampf, Churchill wrote, “Here was the new Koran of faith and war: turgid, verbose, shapeless, but pregnant with its message” (Churchill 55).   Churchill firmly believed that he and his country were on the side of good.  He recognized that World War II was not only a fight for survival, it was also a moral battle.  American resolve has been undermined over the years.  Progressive philosophy and self-deprecating leaders have weakened America’s commitment to freedom.  Churchill cherished freedom as a gift, which he saw as his responsibility to preserve.

            Only months after Churchill took office, Paris was about to fall under Nazi occupation.  Churchill knew that French resources would undoubtedly be absorbed into Hitler’s war machine.  Of great concern was the inevitability of Nazi control over the French naval fleet.  Churchill concluded that the French must relinquish their navy to Britain because the alternative would be unacceptable.  The French would not surrender control; consequently Churchill ordered the British navy to use force to accomplish the objective.  As a result, a French destroyer and three battleships were destroyed or severely damaged and “nearly 1,300 French sailors died in the attack” (Williamson 33). Churchill’s mantra to the French was clear; "Under no conditions would we contemplate any course except fighting to the finish" (qtd. in Williamson 31).  This was a far cry from the policy of appeasement that held sway just months before “I have no hesitation in ranging myself with those who view the past history of the world mainly as the tale of exceptional human beings, whose thoughts, actions, qualities, virtues, triumphs, weaknesses and crimes have dominated the fortunes of the race” (Churchill qtd. in Lyons 11).  Churchill understood that Hitler represented something far more sinister than merely a shift in power.  If the Nazi successes of Eastern Europe were continued across the English Channel it will be only a matter of time before democracy and freedom would be distant memories.  Over time the name of the threat may change, but attacks against the free world continue.  American leaders must make difficult choices, sometimes in opposition to popular opinion.

            On May 8th, 1945, five years after taking office, Churchill announced that Germany had been defeated.  In a radio address he said, “We may allow ourselves a brief period of rejoicing; but let us not forget for a moment the toil and efforts that lie ahead. Japan, with all her treachery and greed, remains unsubdued. The injury she has inflicted on Great Britain, the United States, and other countries, and her detestable cruelties, call for justice and retribution. We must now devote all our strength and resources to the completion of our task, both at home and abroad” (qtd. in “End”).  It had taken the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in December of 1941 to finally push America into the fight.  Churchill was proven right, with the military might of the U.S., the Allies were eventually able to overcome Germany.  Even as the threat against Great Britain was extinguished, Churchill fully understood the need to fight to the finish against Japan.  His continued campaign against tyranny demonstrated that Churchill was determined to protect freedom.  In the days after September 11, 2001 the people of the United States were unified, demanding that justice be served upon those responsible for the attacks.  As the years passed, the determination of this country’s leadership has faded.  Nearsightedness is an epidemic amongst politicians, who worry about public perception instead of preserving freedom.  The lesson to be learned from Churchill is that taking a stand against oppression must be a lifelong commitment.

            It is reasonable to conclude that Churchill would fully support the current War on Terror.  The attacks on British and U.S. soil along with the threats from foreign enemies would lead Churchill to advocate direct and decisive action.  He would lament that so many free men are willing to cower before an outside threat, when they should be confronting it head-on.  Churchill would not abandon the campaign in Afghanistan, or ignore the threat of Iran. “Never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never-in nothing, great or small, large or petty - never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.” (Churchill qtd. in “Never”).  Churchill recognized that threats to freedom have come before and without a doubt will rise again.  The fight to maintain liberty must be a tireless one.  As in post-World War I Britain the policy of appeasement has been all too tempting.  There are those in this country who have adopted this concept religiously, ignoring the lessons of history.  Even worse, there are those who have come to despise the principles upon which our country was founded, namely the idea that we are endowed with certain unalienable rights.  “In blacked-out London, when submarines were sinking merchant ships without warning every day, Londoners argued that the Germans had been much sinned against by Britain and that official British stories of atrocities must be discounted” (Estorick 465). Thankfully, Churchill saw the weakness in this argument and was undeterred in his commitment against tyranny.  In the eyes of Winston Churchill, surrendering to our enemies is worse than defeat.   Churchill’s advice is timeless; "The farther back you can look, the farther for-ward you are likely to see" (qtd. in Tyler).  It would be wise to remember Winston Churchill, for his decisions have already withstood the test of time.

 

 

 

Works Cited

Artis, Wayne. Personal interview. 19 Oct. 2010.

Brooke, Allen. "More than the Sum of His Parts: The Enigma of Winston Churchill." Rev. of        Churchill: A Biography, by Roy Jenkins. Hudson Review 55.2 (2002): 312-17. Google   Scholar. Web. 19 Oct. 2010.

Churchill, Winston S. The Gathering Storm. Boston: Houhgton, 1948. Print.

Drea, Edward J. "Military Library." Rev. of Managing U.S.-Soviet Rivalry: Problems of Crisis      Prevention, by Alexander L. George. Military Affairs 47.4 (1983): 203. Jstor. Web. 5         Dec. 2010.

"End of the War in Europe." The Curchill Center and Museum. Ed. John D. Olson. N.p., n.d.       google. Web. 5 Dec. 2010.

Estorick, Eric. "Morale in Contemporary England." The American Journal of Sociology 47.3 (       1941): 462-71. Jstor. Web. 21 Nov. 2010.

Levy, James P. Appeasement and Rearmament: Britain1936-1939. Lanham, MD: Rowman,          2006. 159-67. Google Scholar. Web. 30 Oct. 2010

Lyons, Justin D. "Winston Churchill and the Rhetorical Challenges of Democratic             Statesmanship." Perspectives on Political Science 35.1 (2006): 4-13. Acedemic Search          Complete. Web. 19 Oct. 2010.

"Never Give In: October 29, 1941 Harrow School." The Churchill Centre and Museum. N.p.,        n.d. Google. Web. 21 Nov. 2010.

Petrie, John. John Petrie’s Collection of Winston Churchill Quotes. N.p., 2003. Google. Web. 20   Nov. 2010.

Treisman, Daniel. "Rational Appeasement." International Orginazation 58.2 (2004): 345-73.          Jstor. Web. 21 Nov. 2010.

Tyler, Pamela. Rev. of Charles W. Chesnutt and the Progressive Movement, by Ernestine W.         Pickens. The Journal of Southern History 62.1 (1996): 173-74. Jstor. Web. 21 Nov. 2010.

Williamson, Murray. "Churchill Takes Charge." Military History 25.1 (2008): 26-33. History          Reference Center. Web. 9 Oct. 2010.