This has been one of my biggest pet peeves over the years (the use of 110%, 120%, 1000%, etc. as a way of expressing effort and/or commitment) and I feel the need to exorcise it now. We have all heard it said countless times and in countless ways. And I am here to tell you it makes no sense at all and is a bad habit that we should all work hard to break immediately.
100% is a CEILING, you cannot exceed 100% of something like effort or commitment however hard you try. Any attempt to do so diminishes the mathematical definition of 100%. It means, “entirely and completely.” There is no delta above “entirely and completely.” Sorry to be the badly needed voice of reason. But what about the athlete who talks about giving 110% or the politician stating that she is 120% behind some cause? It is, more than anything, simply blatantly lazy language. Rather than go into the specifics of how said athlete plans to give it his all or the hypothetical politician getting into the details of why a particular cause is worthy of her full support, both can simply toss out the “100% plus something” cliché’ and clumsily attest to their respective earnestness in the particular undertaking. OK, I’m going to go beyond the classification of “lazy” and also toss in “stupid.”
A perfect analogy would be a cup of coffee. You don’t go to your local coffee place and order 120% of your order. You could decide to order a medium instead of a small, or perhaps you could even opt for a large. Each would be 100% of what they are, again 100% is a ceiling rather than a loose association with totality. Moreover, you don’t offer someone 120% of a pen and tell them this is a special kind of pen. You don’t buy a shirt with the request that the shirt be 110% of a shirt. You simply buy the shirt knowing that it is a shirt (the 100% is assumed). If you wanted to cut the sleeves off later I suppose you could have 75% of a shirt. However, and this is a big however, the shirt can never be added to and worn without looking a little silly. Few people would add a second neck hole just for kicks. And, sorry, the 100% limit rule would still apply. Putting in an extra neck hole doesn’t make it 120% of a shirt.
I can sense what some of you might be thinking. Lighten up TC, it is just an expression which denotes ultimate effort or total commitment. People have been using the “100% plus something” expression for a long time now and it is no big deal. It is a part of the global cultural norm now so let it go. I wish that I could, but you see, it is such a glaring example of the very opposite principle that it purports to champion, total effort. It in fact demeans total effort, lazily (as mentioned), by feeling the need to add something to something which already signifies COMPLETE effort and or support (i.e., 100% effort or support). So, would I die on that logical/ semantic hill? Yes, I would.
While we are at it, there is another numerical phenomenon that deserves attention in this space, the number one trillion. This number gets tossed around these days (mostly by politicians) as though it is a large yet seriously intentioned number when it comes to a proposed governmental spending that they are 120% committed to (sorry couldn’t resist). I am here to tell you that the number one trillion is anything but graspable and understandable by our finite human brains. As a matter of fact, this number comes as close to a definition of infinite as any number that I somewhat commonly hear.
What do you mean, a trillion is obviously a number? Yes it is. And, as mentioned, a very big number indeed that has no business being bantered about so casually. The final calculations differ slightly, yet ONE TRILLIONS SECONDS = roughly 31,710 years (PLEASE READ THIS TWICE). So next time you hear a politician talk about the need for a 2.6 trillion-dollar spending bill (or whatever the insane amount might be—- Build Back Better comes to mind), be a little smarter and push back on the almost routine need to spend that kind of money when our country has a current national debt of over 31 trillion dollars. Taxes anyone? Saddling future generations with insurmountable debt? The government can print more money, we the people cannot (without ending up in prison).
I would suggest that once we become lazy in our language and way of expressing thoughts we also become lazy in our way of understanding the complex (be it a number or a concept). Said another way, I am completely opposed to the initiation of profligate governmental spending programs based on the fact our current national debt cannot support it. If I were a fifth grader you might even say, I’m 110% against it. See, that was easy once you take the time to give it some thought rather than drown in the sea of soundbite logic and shortcut analysis.
As a last aside, being that we just celebrated Thanksgiving, I thought it would be interesting to include Abraham Lincoln’s proclamation that formally established a day of thanksgiving for all of the states in the midst of the Civil War, just in case you may feel that we (2022 people) are vastly superior in terms of intelligence to the people of the 1860’s. The above argument would suggest otherwise.
Also consider the fact that this proclamation was written for all people to read or hear, and that God receives a prominent place in the convincing, yet humble rhetoric. Read the beautifully crafted words and compare them to the “eloquence” of what we get today. If you still feel that we aren’t a little lazy and simplistic with our language (and our ability to tackle complex concepts) , there probably isn’t anything I could say to convince you even if I had a trillion seconds to do so.
Washington, D.C. October 3, 1863
By the President of the United States of America.
A Proclamation.
The year that is drawing towards its close, has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever-watchful providence of Almighty God. In the midst of a civil war of unequalled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign States to invite and to provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere except in the theatre of military conflict; while that theatre has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union. Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defense, have not arrested the plough, the shuttle, or the ship; the axe has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well of iron and coal as of the precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased, notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege, and the battlefield; and the country, rejoicing in the consciousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of freedom. No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently, and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and one voice by the whole American People. I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next, as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens. And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to His tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty Hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquility and Union.
In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the United States to be affixed.
Done at the City of Washington, this Third day of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and of the Independence of the United States the Eighty-eighth.
By the President: Abraham Lincoln
William H. Seward, Secretary of State
“Within each person, the person you are today and the person you are capable of becoming tomorrow. Most people work at less than 50% and are satisfied by doing just enough to get by. Those who aspire to greatness are those who use 100% of what God has given us.”
I am an ardent proponent of knowing one’s History. You are most likely familiar with the cliches that come with this statement. Learn from History or you will be doomed to repeat it. Hard to know where you are going if you don’t know where you have been. Man learns from History that man doesn’t learn from History.I could go on and on and I would further suggest that even the most resistant or merely agnostic among us as to the value of History would agree that our past is intricately tied to our present, and our present most likely has a lot to say about what our future will look like, even if that future is a future without us being a part of it. The world looks very different to a “twenty something” than it does to an “eighty something.” On that we can all agree. A big part of being young is feeling immortal and self-important and a big part of being older is realizing the folly of such thinking. Yet, the juxtaposition of those two outlooks have been with us for a long time and will, most likely, remain with us indefinitely.
One of the most amazing parts about being middle-aged is that I have a perspective on life that I could have gained in no other way than surviving for nearly sixty years. I have seen TRENDS and FRIENDS come and go. I have seen “new normal” become “what were we thinking” and I have seen and experienced the Forever Friendships and Forever Relationships become dust in the wastebin of time and space. This isn’t unusual, it is all a part of life as a human being on planet earth. Moreover, if something is exceedingly enjoyable in your life right now or if something is excessively painful, know that it will change (perhaps for the better, perhaps for the worse). In other words, treat great success and great failure as the imposters that they truly are, as was once uttered by the poet / writer Rudyard Kipling in his epic poem If. If (no pun intended) you have not read the poem, take a moment and do so now, you will not regret it. If— by Rudyard Kipling | Poetry Foundation
By now you are probably wondering why I am weaving a knowledge of History and its benefits with inexorable profound change that is such a challenging and perplexing part of life. Bear with me, I will most likely, be sharing something (perplexing) with you which you did not know. Also, there are useful lessons here to help one navigate this crazy world that we all share in the latter part of 2022 and beyond.
We have all seen the grainy black and white film of England under attack in the early years of World War II, absorbing the full force of Adolf’s Hitler’s Luftwaffe air raids (over London in particular) before and shortly after America entered the war after the bombing of Pearl Harbor by the Empire of Japan on December 7th, 1941. And, we all remember that they had a peculiar, yet commanding (Prime Minister) by the name of Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill who would emerge from the rubble and destruction (literally and figuratively) spitting fiery oratory that all but assured victory in the midst of a situation which, truth be told, was somewhat hopeless.* Words carry great power and Prime Minister Churchill knew how to wield them like Rembrandt knew how to wield a paintbrush and create beautiful images. Churchill understood the situation was dire and yet optimism pervades his words. We know the end of the story (the good guys win), but to those in harm’s way in the early 40’s of the last century, it is not difficult to imagine the abject fear and uncertainty that many Brits must have felt.
“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, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.”
Winston Churchill had seen the lowest lows and the highest highs long before the hardships and ultimate glory he would experience as Prime Minister of England during WWII. Ever wonder how he got to that precise moment, equipped with a poise, and resolve that was seemingly preternatural? Me too.
Born in 1874 of an aristocratic American mother and British father, Churchill joined the British Army at the tender age of 21 and would come to know war rather intimately. You might even go so far as to say he was weaned on war.** The British Empire was the most powerful country in the world during the time of Churchill’s youth (latter part of the 19th century) and it was also a time of great imperialistic ventures around the globe as the great world powers looked to gain territories in an effort to gain power, control natural resources, and subjugate / uplift (depending on your perspective and year of birth) what were deemed as lesser people. Churchill and his generation believed the undeveloped world was a place to be carved up and improved by the influence of superior people who would ultimately improve the future for both the subjugators and subjugated. Through the lens of today such activity is looked upon as both racist and brutal; it was both at times, and yet it was the prevailing attitude of the day. To think otherwise would have been quite unusual. Opposition was scant at the time and many of the people employing the strategy genuinely thought they were making the world a better place by their actions. Many do not see it that way today but remember that the present will be viewed by future generations with the same unforgiving microscope. And there is much to glean about the present that may in fact seem incredulous by people of the future. Time will tell. Churchill was in places such as Cuba, India, and South Africa. He served as a soldier who saw real life and death combat and was once a prisoner of war and even made a daring escape. He also worked as a reporter and wrote detailed books recounting his experiences. He experienced more in these early years than most of us experience in a lifetime. This trend would continue unabated during the course of his life.
Ultimately Churchill would turn to politics (like his father and grandfather before him). Here too, he experienced a whirlwind of change and serendipitous occurrences. Though the British Parliamentary System is far different than our own, and it is quite difficult to view that system objectively through an apples-to-apples comparison to our own Representative Republic, similarities are common enough however, to make some informed observations. Churchill started out as a bit of a Liberal in his way of thinking and even championed such diverse ideologies as an opposition to woman’s suffrage and support for secular, nondenominational education. He rose through the ranks of the English political system and held a wide variety of posts and positions. Churchill was certainly not afraid to take on unpopular positions throughout his long political career. For example, during his time as member of The House of Commons in 1903, he opposed the economic protectionism of the Conservative Party with whom he was beginning to align. He considered himself a free-market champion and opposed economic manipulation by the government which would engineer rather than guide. Also, in 1904 he OPPOSED a bill that would limit Jewish immigration into Britain. He even opposed some big increases in military spending which he saw as unnecessary and frivolous at the time. He was a proponent of prison reform at a time when the term “prisoner rights” was an oxymoron. Suffice it to say that while Churchill was an increasingly political creature, he was also quite free spirited and open to the vagaries of a given situation and its dynamics as a determinant of opinion and personal stance. His famous quote on the path of “liberal” and “conservative” in one’s life serves as a great example of the complexity of the man.
“If you are not a Liberal when you are young, you have no heart, and if you are not a Conservative when old, you have no brain.” (Probably not the first person to say this but it has come to be associated to Churchill)
Churchill’s first big political moment of truth came when he was First Lord of the Admiralty in the early days of World War I. As a man of war and a man of independent thought and action, this appointment promised all the necessary ingredients for a man of his resume to succeed and flourish. Sometimes life has alternative, more humbling plans, and this was the case for Churchill as the infamous Gallipoli Campaign Gallipoli Campaign | Summary, Map, Casualties, Significance, & Facts | Britannica turned out to be a complete failure, and Churchill as its architect, unsurprisingly took the blame. And this for me, is where the Churchill story becomes exceedingly interesting as his character seems to shine brightly in a time of great adversity. Great historical figures seem to share in this tendency; a person of greatness often has to fall / fail (sometimes numerous times) before the depth of their ultimate greatness can truly unfold. The stuff of legends so to speak. George Washington comes to mind as an American example of this characteristic.
Churchill “resigns” from his post and rather than accept a lesser post that would land him far from harm’s way, he chooses to go to the front lines as an Army officer on the bloody Western Front. It is said that he narrowly escaped death when a large piece of shrapnel fell near him while he was commanding a unit. Take a moment and imagine an England facing Hitler without Winston Churchill. Hard to imagine yet, I would suggest that surrender as was the case with France, would have been a distinct possibility.
Back in the House of Commons after his wartime experience, Churchill became a champion for the average soldier and called for common-sense reforms such as the need for steel helmets. Gallipoli would continue to shadow him however and inhibit, at least somewhat, his quest to recapture his previous upward trajectory. His next assignment as the Minister of Munitions (1917) helped him to gain an even greater understanding of the art of war and the lethal weapons that warring nations had at their disposal. He quickly developed a reputation as a bit of a problem solver. He was instrumental in increasing munition output, an invaluable attribute in time of war.
Churchill would continue along this path toward resurrecting his reputation. It is quite remarkable to read of the plethora of political appointments Churchill experienced along the way. Shortly after WWI, he became Secretary of State for War and Air and one of his main jobs was to demobilize the British Army though he was adamant about retaining a large peacetime force to counter the threat of the Soviet Union and future war in general. This seems reasonable in light of what we know was yet to come; however, many in power felt differently at the time. He also spoke out against implementing draconian measures against the newly defeated Germany. He was one of the few to do so as Germany was loathed by most for their leading role in the recent conflict. These very measures have been attributed by scholars as the primary reason that an Adolf Hitler was able to rise to prominence. Churchill seemed to have a sixth sense about these types of things. In 1921 Churchill became Secretary of State for the Colonies. Remember, England had numerous colonies around the globe, particularly the Mideast. During his roughly twelve months at this post, both his mother and his young daughter Marigold died. Churchill was devasted by this and it was something that stayed with him for the rest of his life. It may have slowed him down a bit temporarily, but it certainly did not inhibit his ability to take on new challenges in the turbulent years to come. Churchill once described success as “stumbling from failure to failure with no loss of enthusiasm.”
Churchill would actually find himself out of politics for a time as his party lost in the elections of November 1922 shortly after the birth of his fifth and last child Mary, and an unexpected surgery for appendicitis. In a classic Churchillian response, he would later write, that he was “without an office, without a seat, without a party, and without an appendix.” At that point he spent a little time painting and writing; he was very accomplished at both. He finished the first volume of his autobiographical history of the war, entitled, The World Crisis. Over the next ten years he would finish the massive undertaking / project. Little did he know that an even greater world crisis loomed on the horizon. Perhaps he did at least sense that it was possible.
Over the next several years, Churchill served as Chancellor of the Exchequer and continued to work for Conservative ideals and as a proponent of free market capitalism versus a growing rise of socialistic viewpoints that were beginning to take root in Europe in the post WWI years. Important to remember that the early 30’ became a period of great economic decline. The Great Depression in America 1929-1939 was not an America exclusive calamity; the whole world experienced dire economic times and for Europe, still recovering from the ravages of The Great War, the suffering was commensurately worse. Free market economies and their efficacy were being openly questioned by many. The NAZI party which gave rise to Adolf Hitler was a telling example (an acronym for the National SOCIALIST German Worker’s Party). An increasingly recalcitrant Germany, emerging from the ashes of WWI defeat began to insulate and reinvent itself (which included a huge military buildup) in response to worldwide Depression and the aforementioned tough economic sanctions / restrictions placed on them by the WWI victors. These conditions would ultimately usher in the next great chapter in the Winston Churchill story. This is the prelude that not many people understand to the degree that perhaps they should. Hitler was initially not viewed as the villain that many people now assume when they think of him. Consider the fact that Time Magazine named Adolf Hitler “Man of the Year” in 1938 and that the freshman class at Princeton University chose Hitler as “the greatest living person” in their annual poll in November of 1939. Albert Einstein (a professor at Princeton) finished second and Neville Chamberlin third. Hitler was seen by many as a man of great charisma and foresight. Churchill, once again, had the right instincts from the beginning with respect to Hitler’s rise to power in Germany.
When Prime Minister Neville Chamberlin (our third-place finisher in the Princeton poll) signed the Munich Agreement with Germany in late September of 1938, which essentially allowed them to invade Czechoslovakia unchecked and annex the country, Churchill, an experienced soldier, and a man with a great sense of political acumen and courage, stepped forward and called the pact “a total and unmitigated defeat.” *** Flash forward to September of 1939 and England would declare war on Germany and the former Time Magazine “Man of The Year” Adolf Hitler (yes I am poking fun at the irony). Churchill who was concurrently named First Lord of the Admiralty (again), had been engaged in a campaign of anti-appeasement with German aggression for a couple years while Hitler had been steadily ramping up his bellicose intentions towards his European neighbors WHILE reawakening German pride and singing the praises of a supposed pure Ayrian race of superior lineage. Obviously relations between Chamberlin and Churchill had to have been strained yet both men knew that the times required cooperation rather than personal contention. Chamberlin would ultimately be viewed as a weak man (and quite frankly a bit of a joke) and Churchill a true lion of his times (and quite frankly a larger-than-life icon). History has a funny way of separating the wheat from the chaff——- once the narratives have been written. Churchill’s move was the largely unpopular, risky one at the time, while Chamberlin was seen as a great negotiator initially. There are times when security at any cost trumps liberty at a very defined cost. Fools’ gold that manages to shine brightly in the moment. But only in the moment…
Luckily for England and the world, Chamberlin’s star was falling, and Churchill’s was rising. Chamberlin would be forced to resign by circumstance (Munich Agreement) and some of the logistics of the early part of the war (German aggression). Churchill was the obvious choice for Prime Minister (1940); he later related that he felt a great sense of relief and contentment knowing that his entire life had prepared him for this profound moment in time. We can see this is undeniably true and yet, “watch what you wish for because you just might get it” as the old saying warns. For England, things would need to get worse before they could begin to get better. I feel fairly certain that Churchill realized this and proceeded accordingly. He grasped clearly that people in his country needed to see him as Warrior in Chief and they also needed to feel united in a cause that was greater than themselves, no small task. Interestingly, the war could have been essentially lost before it even really began if not for the truly miraculous evacuation of nearly 350,000 British soldiers from the beaches and harbor of Dunkirk in the North of France (late May / early June 1940) after they had essentially been surrounded by the German Army. Dunkirk evacuation – Wikipedia This was an evacuation that was greatly aided by British civilians! Churchill called it “a miracle of deliverance” but went on to warn that “we must be very careful to not assign to this deliverance the attributes of a victory. Wars are not won by evacuations.” He was in charge, the people knew it, and they also knew that he wasn’t ever going to sugarcoat the reality of their plight. The following excerpt from his famous “Blood, Toil, Sweat, and Tears” speech captures it perfectly.
“I would say to the House… that I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. You ask, what is our policy? I will say: it is to wage war, by sea, land, and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us; to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: it is victory, victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory, however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.” Gives me chills every time I read it. ****
The Allied Forces would go on to soundly defeat the Axis Forces in what is quite easily the most important event in modern world history. Had the loose coalition of Germany, Japan, and Italy won that war, the world would be a very different place in 2022. Many have tried to imagine it, I prefer to not spend too much time worrying about it as it is far more enjoyable to feel pride and admiration for the sacrifices of so many which are appreciated by fewer and fewer as the years progress. It was an epic time that produced legendary leaders. None greater than Winston Churchill. What more could the guy have done? Rhetorical question of course, yet the aftermath of the war would prove to be challenging and baffling for Churchill as the political / social winds continued to blow across the bow of the fickle nature of human thought and behavior in the years following the great victory.
It is important to take a step back and remember that much of Europe was decimated by the calamity that was WWII. We tend to forget this because our soil was never invaded and was never a battleground with the exception of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in late 1941. Also, remember that America suffered virtually no civilian casualties while in Europe (and Asia for that matter) there were far more civilian than military losses. This kind of an experience has a way of marinading with the population for a long time and even markedly colors the way they view the immediate future, after having been indoctrinated into the “life is cheap” mindset. Research Starters: Worldwide Deaths in World War II | The National WWII Museum | New Orleans (nationalww2museum.org) England lost 450,700 in The War of which 383,600 were combatants. Conversely, the United States lost 418,500 of which 416,800 were combatants. Suffice it to say England’s experience in the war was a great deal different that our own. If you really want to blow your mind as to the horrors of that war, take a look at some of the casualty totals associated with Russia, China, and Germany (note the civilian losses). As Union General William Tecumseh Sherman once quipped during the American Civil War, “War is all hell.” I think he may have actually underappreciated its awfulness.
Churchill masterfully guided his country through a terrible war at a high cost, true evil was defeated, and he came out the other end as an icon of his time and a man that we all laud in much the same way which we revere George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. End of story… NOT SO FAST. What most people do not realize, and something that has fascinated me from the first time I heard it, is that Churchill and his party would be defeated in the election of 1945, ending Churchill’s tenure as Prime Minister. How is that even possible you might ask. Well, the answer is complicated and not completely understandable 77 years after it happened.
It seems that Churchill came to be labeled (after the war) as the perfect person to lead England through a time of war and perhaps not the best person to lead England through a time of peace. This determination is a bit nuanced, yet in some ways it is crystal clear. The Labour Party which was vying with Churchill’s Conservative Party in the election of 1945 understood that people have very short memories when it comes to political expediency. Europe and England wanted the kinds of things that people usually desire when they have experienced something tragic, traumatic, and life altering. It can become very easy to trade freedom for security and selfless nationalistic determination for individual self-interest. Churchill and his party were talking about making the tough decisions with respect to postwar economic realities while the Labour Party was offering ideas such as “cradle to grave” health care and nebulous “worker’s rights” promises. After years of sacrifice, both emotional and economic, a call for additional restraint was certainly a tough sell. Churchill, though obviously wildly popular, was a reminder of a painful though recent past, while the opposing party had fresh, exciting new ideas for the future. When platitudinal change is in the air, the past can carry an aroma that is stale and unappealing. This seems to be the setting which created an environment whereby a man of Churchill’s stature and accomplishments could become expendable. Nothing short of remarkable to my way of thinking.
And yet, isn’t it also true that we can see this phenomenon in our own lives and times as well. The phrase “what have you done for me lately” captures the fleeting nature of adoration and appreciation. Whom among us hasn’t lost touch with a good friend who was once a very important part of our life? Someone that you went to war with (at least figuratively, but perhaps literally). Whom among us can’t look back on a romantic relationship that had all the markings of a life-long bond that ended, and perhaps painfully. Have you ever looked back on older pictures of celebrities who were on top of the world, only to realize that the world barely thinks of that person now? They might be dead, they might be old, or they may have experienced only fleeting fame. What about that person in your life who did something incredibly kind and or generous for you, which you rarely even think about now. Either you take them for granted or you have moved on to different circumstances in your life. I could go on and on; suffice it to say that we all have our “mini post WWII Churchill stories” to tell. It is a human thing to be fickle and often self-serving with our affections, bonds, loyalties, and gratitude.
Churchill, it can be argued, saved a country and in so doing, may have saved the world. Even this did not guarantee further gratitude as expressed with another term as Prime Minister. He was BELOVED but he wasn’t irreplaceable. We can learn a great deal from this however. History would suggest that glory can be fleeting and the pedestals of yesterday can easily become the paved over fields of today. Especially, when personal wants and perceived needs supersede. The people wanted what they wanted (freebies), when they wanted it (now), and the intoxication of those immediate desires, allowed them to see Churchill as they wanted to see him rather than how they should have seen him had they dissected the situation with logic rather than emotion. At least this is how I see it. Obviously there are many alternative viewpoints I would presume. Churchill, unsurprisingly, hung around and held to his point of view as a leader of the opposition (minority party) and fittingly was reelected Prime Minister in 1951. ***** Churchill died on January 24th, 1965, on the seventieth anniversary of his father’s death. A giant among 20th century historical figures who will always carry that interesting and perplexing footnote about being booted from power in 1945, after his destiny defining, herculean role in WWII.
Do not boast about tomorrow, for you do not know what a day may bring.
Proverbs 27:1
TMC
11/22/22 (birthday of my grandmother Lina- the driving force behind my love of History) Written in her memory.
Recent Comments