Johnson

Mom and Churchill

07 May
by John, posted in leadership, Liberty, Life, Review   |  No Comments

Over the course of the last few months or so I finished three books on Sir Winston Churchill:

  1. Churchill by Paul Johnson published in 2009;
  2. Franklin and Winston by Jon Meacham published in 2003; and
  3. Citizens of London:  The Americans Who Stood With Britain In Its Darkest, Finest Hour by Lynne Olson published in 2009.

 

From the time I was a small boy and began to understand Mom’s survival in the bombings during the London blitz of 1940 I was interested in Churchill.  Those bombings killed my grandmother and my aunt and buried Mom in the rubble with their corpses overnight.  As Churchill said at a function on the night my grandmother and aunt died, the people of London were now in the frontline.

Around the age of ten or eleven I found in my grandfather’s bookshelves a book on Churchill that included a 45 rpm disc of some of Churchill’s wartime speeches.  It was the first time I heard the high pitched squeaky lisp uttering “we shall fight on the beaches … we shall never surrender!” or “let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves, that if the British Empire and its Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will still say, This was their finest hour.”  Even as a pre-teen I felt my heart rate rising.

But what I noticed immediately was the reaction of the adults.  Not just the reaction of the Brits and former Brits, but of the Americans in the room as well.  All conversation stopped, chins rose, and eyes stared straight ahead.  They were all of them on both sides of the Atlantic remembering the dark days of Hitler’s triumph in 1940 over all of Western Europe.  Remembering a time where the United States would not fight, when the British had few weapons and not enough men to defend Britain, and the entire future of mankind rested on the portly old aristocrat and his command of the English language.

Johnson’s Churchill is for me another baffling product of a historian with too much ideology and not enough data.  Johnson knew Churchill when Johnson was a young man, but the personal anecdotes lose their force when you realize Johnson is not going to address major facts about Churchill.  The example that leaped out from the book was Churchill’s marriage to Clementine.

Every historian I have ever read has described the Churchill marriage as a major or THE major strength of Churchill’s life.  But adultery was common in the aristocratic families of  Britain from Victorian times and throughout Churchill’s life.  Many historians suggest that Clementine had an affair in the 1930s during one of her periodic vacations without her family.  Whether that or rumors of Churchill’s own affair on the Riveria are accurate is beside the point.  If you are going to discuss the Churchill marriage as a historian, you at least have to argue against the adultery allegations.  Johnson simply ignores the issue because in his Churchillian ideology it is unnecessary.  One wonders what else of the historical record he finds unnecessary.

Jon Meacham’s Franklin and Winston adds to Churchillian lore in focusing on the relationship between FDR and Churchill and how that relationship dictated and reflected the course of the war.  When FDR chose to ignore Churchill at conferences with Stalin in order to convince the Soviets that the United States and Britain were not aligned against the Soviets, Churchill was personally hurt.  But more importantly, it reflected the decline of the British Empire even when it was right.  As Churchill had predicted,  Stalin broke his promises soon after the Tehran conference.

Lynn Olson’s Citizens of London:  The Americans Who Stood With Britain In Its Darkest, Finest Hour is the best book of the three for Americans.  It focuses on the Americans who  at FDR’s direction left the safety of American shores for the bombing in England.  Averill Harriman and George Winant both arrived in London at the height of the Blitz with the express tasks of determining whether Britain could survive, what America could do to assist short of declaring war, and making sure American munitions arrived in Britain.

It is a remarkable book that moves quickly through the highest policy debates and Harriman’s affair with Churchill’s daughter-in-law, the indomitable courtesan Pamela Churchill, and Winant’s affair with Churchill’s daughter, Sarah.    As in Meacham’s earlier work, Olson’s contribution is to explain the personal impact of the Americans not only on the lives of the British leaders and their families, but the average British citizen.  When Ambassador Winant arrived in England he stated at the airport that there was nowhere else he would rather be than England.  Nowhere else he would rather be than under Hitler’s bombs.  The next day his words were proclaimed across all the major papers in Britain.

And it was the same throughout the war.  Whether it was Harriman or Winant or the other Americans, they brought not only weapons and food but the emotional support to fight on.  Mom remembers her first American as a tall man in uniform who gave her first chocolate in years.

What Meacham’s and Olson’s books add to the record is the absolute importance of leadership at all levels in dangerous times.  French leadership in 1940 was weak and its armed forces suffered from that lack.  But British and American leadership at all levels provided the strength and trust necessary for victory.  And the numerous personal foibles of the principals under the enormous stress of war were never allowed to effect the war effort.

It was a time where ordinary people were heroes.  As Eric Severeid said:  ”In years to come, men will speak of this war and say, ‘I was a soldier,’ ‘I was a sailor,’ or ‘I was a pilot.’ Others will say with equal pride, ‘I was a citizen of London.’”  Both Meacham’s and Olson’s book place you in the middle of a battle where women and children earned that title.

 

Is Perry a Texan or Yosemite Sam?

31 Aug
by John, posted in Uncategorized   |  5 Comments

     From 1965 until 1980 I grew up in Dallas, more specifically in University Park.  It is one of two small independent cities sitting on top of slight rise in the the Texas limestone now crowned with the George W. Bush library and its annex, SMU.  Traditionally white and a mixture of middle and upper class Texans University Park shared an independent school district with even more affluent Highland Park.  The Park Cities, as the two are often called, are now very affluent and the middle class has spread out into Preston Hollow and other nearby north Dallas areas where former President George W. Bush now lives. 
            I still like going back to the Park Cities to see my parents and a few friends.  I usually find an excuse to visit some rural town for barbecue and perhaps some crazy bit of history – the kind Rick Perry is likely to relish.  The combination of great Tex-Mex, barbecue, and a brashness about life from dirt farmer to wealthy oil and gas man is the essence of what makes it a fun place to visit.
             Texas is an incredibly diverse place from coast to swamp to hill country to rich farmland to dry farming to mountains and places in West Texas that resemble the moon.  A road trip across Texas home to Boulder or south from Dallas to Austin, San Antonio, or Houston reveals almost every sort of rural vista and history.  But the unifying Texas ideal is of a self-made man that earned everything through work, wealth, and influence.  If you can work your way through life, you do not need a public hand out or even a hand up.  The hard way is the best way.
            The organizers of my recent thirtieth high school reunion used Facebook to evangelize the event.  Facebook really is the ideal social tool for the girls of the hot summer pool days of 1980.  And what is amazing to me is how much charity activity women of my era in Texas devote to private charties either as philanthropists, fund-raisers, organizers, and volunteers.  A huge amount of the work is focused on specific local charities for the poor, animal shelters, and other targeted charities.  This is no anonymous corporate drive for the United Way where you write a check, but hands on changing conditions one person/one cause at a time.  Private charity versus a government handout is a core value in the Texas ideal.
            But there are an enormous variety of politicians behind these bigger than life Texan businessmen and philanthropists.  Where does Mr. Perry fit into this picture?  Clearly, he is not a Bush of either flavor.  Whether you cringe or soar at the sound of a Texas twang, you could never confuse the halting delivery of a Bush for the perfectly timed Perry.  In fact his career was made from gobbling up Texas politicians of the patrician streak.  He may never have defeated a Bush, but he embarrassed Senator Hutchinson who is a north Dallas Episcopalian member of the Republican establishment.
            Perry for me harkens back to a prior generation of Texas politician straight to Lyndon Johnson.  Like Perry, LBJ’s beginnings were humble and Johnson had to work his way through college and into rural Texas politics before winning election to the House of Representatives.  During World War II LBJ served in the Navy honorably just as Perry served in the Air Force.  After their service both of these men spent virtually their entire adult careers in government as politicians.  While Perry is a genuine Texas conservative, he did start out as a Texas conservative Democrat making his way over to the Republican Party.  Like Johnson, Perry was able to change loyalties in pursuit of political ambition.  Can you imagine any Bush changing party or ever being a Democrat?
            Johnson was profane and crude.  At least in many circles calling the Federal Reserve Chairman potentially traitorous if he follows a monetary policy independent of politicians is crude.  Johnson had a history as a hard campaigner (the daisy ad against Goldwater).  Perry has done what it takes to not only beat his opponents but to dismantle them within the tagline of each election. And despite these records their opponents perennially underestimated them as hicks.
            Johnson was a notorious dealmaker and powerbroker of a kind no Bush would ever emulate.  He knew which districts needed what favor or held what dark secret and he used that information both as a legislator and executive.  He believed in the patronage system.  Whatever it took legally or at least arguably for the next election. Over the last decade Perry has followed LBJ’s example and built a substantial patronage following throughout Texas government. And as far as we know Perry engineered all of it legally in a very old school Texas sort of way.
             Perry differs from my Texas experience – hard work, private enterprise, success, brash celebration of success, charity, and power – the Bush version.  In the Park Cities version I grew up in, politics was a slightly dirty business that successful Texas businessmen or women entered at the end of their career to clean up the mess in gubr-ment.  Governor Clements began the Republican revolution in Texas from this path.  The other older version is the permanent government power broker whose career success is a reflection of his mastery of the campaign, populism, and all his political skills.
            Perry on his record has never had a non-government job, except for five years nearly thirty years ago when he worked on his father’s farm.  He has a quick turn of phrase and a strong political instinct.  But he does not have the background as an oilman, a banker, a trader, or small businessman.  All his success is in government and in particular in elections.  That is not the Bush background, but the LBJ model. 
            It is a mistake to characterize anyone from Texas as Yosemite Sam. And it is a bigger mistake to underestimate perhaps the most ruthlessly ambitious politician Texas has produced since Lyndon Baines Johnson.  Once you strip away the political art, you see a genuine small government conservative with typical heart felt evangelical positions, no foreign policy experience, virtually no private enterprise experience, outside the embrace of the Republican establishment but talking to it.
            Perry is a Texan, but a very different kind of one from the Bush family tradition of public service.  LBJ’s tradition is one of consummate ambition for power. Perry is not going to stutter and step backwards out of politeness from intemperate questions.  He is going to give the questioner what LBJ’s victims called the Johnson treatment – focus on the questioner like a laser, physically appear to overpower his opponent, recite his facts, throw out whatever gasoline he can, then set off the fire with a closing line.  And his political opponents had better master the art of not standing around with a dumbfounded Chardonnay face of surprise.