Comments on: “Unswerving Moral Decency”: Churchill Remembered by Simon Schama

By: Prof. Michael Gdalevich

Prof. Michael Gdalevich — Wed, 15 Jan 2025 13:01:52 +0000

This is very eloquent and true. However, omitting such factors as WSC’s enormous talent (the man was a major genius) and his tremendous luck, kind makes the whole discussion less relevant> - Schama was commenting on aspects of Churchill’s leadership, not his talent or luck, though I agree. Clement Attlee said: “He was, of course, above all, a supremely fortunate mortal.... History set him the job that he was the ideal man to do. I cannot think of anybody in this country who has been favored in this way so much, and, into the bargain, at the most dramatic moment in his country's history. In this, Winston was superbly lucky. And perhaps the most warming thing about him was that he never ceased to say so.” —RML

By: gilbert michaud

gilbert michaud — Mon, 26 Mar 2018 17:54:19 +0000

Could we admit though that Hitler was ambivalent about invading Britain. he was a bit intimidated by the British.
–
Ambivalent yes; Hitler was looking east. Intimidated, maybe not. He thought he could do anything after the fall of France in June 1940. —RML

By: Richard K Munro

Richard K Munro — Sun, 25 Mar 2018 20:22:57 +0000

It is a terrible vice to fall into debt and even more terrible to utter falsehoods and calumnies about good and honorable people. Yes, he "was not wartless—but his warts were as Schama says, "imperfections on the face of virtue. Churchill emerges as a generous man, even to a fault." He was brave, humane and courageous, and valued the lives of individual citizens and soldiers. He wept for their sacrifices and losses. He knew each death was a personal loss to loved ones and to the nation. How utterly unlike Hitler, Stalin or Mao! He made mistakes because he took reasonable chances. But on the whole, he was a positive influence in the history of liberty and civilization. Those who attack him with falsehoods calumnies civilization, liberty and the truth. They can only be apologists for aome totalitarian temptation.