Churchill v. Mao

Nowadays, I am going to "spice things up" a bit. My posts will be about various different things, ranging from math to history to science. Today, I am writing about history and leadership, comparing and contrasting two famous leaders from the 20th century, Mao and Churchill. Here it goes: 

The very essence of leadership is that you have to have a vision. You can’t blow an uncertain trumpet. – Theodore M. Hesburgh

            November 30, 1874. December 26, 1893. These are the dates of births of two men who would go on to become two of the most influential and powerful world leaders, Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill and Mao Tse-Tung, respectively. One would go on to serve as prime minister twice for Great Britain and guide the nation through troublesome times and World War II. The other, a communist revolutionary, would go on to forge the People’s Republic of China (or the PRC). Though from two different sides of the globe and known for contrasting achievements, Churchill and Mao both fall into the category of leadership, demonstrating the breadth of the group. What cannot be seen at a cursory glace, are the similarities that emerge after closer inspection: passion, risk-taking, and charisma/inspiration – all vital to the formation and being a good leader. What they used these qualities for reflect the context of their leadership and their personal goals.

            The definition of charisma is “compelling attractiveness or charm that can inspire devotion in others”. Charisma is a necessary part of being a leader and enables one to capture the hearts of many and create a faithful group of followers.  These two leaders, Mao and Churchill both had charisma in their vast repertoire, however, Mao was in fact the one who instituted it more artfully and to his advantage. From a young age, Tse-tung demonstrated charisma, be it organizing student unions in his schooling days, editing newspapers, and organizing peasant associations in Hunan. Mao knew how to command a group and magnify himself. The main reason Mao was so able to command China nearly single-handedly came from his roots. He, the son of a poor peasant, was very near in origins to majority of the agricultural society, yet still very far with his “intense presence” and exemplary personality. This double image allowed Mao to keep the Chinese close, but not too close. Additionally, on another note, Tse-tung was able to boost his image through the things that cover this page: words. He had this innate ability for speech and writing that could capture even those staunchly against him, as well as incorporating Chinese metaphors that familiarizes his words in the eyes of commoners. This talent for speech translated into a book of Mao-isms or “The Little Red Book,” which would go on to be one of the most printed books in history, and an icon for many at the height of Mao’s power. Moreover, his fierce nationalism and pride in China succeeding garnered more followers. This charm and charisma was aided by propaganda posters deifying and idolizing Mao to an even greater extent. With all this magnetism, and allure, Mao was able to secure the support of many, in a variety of different situations – varying from recruits for his “Red Army” to getting support for his various plans, such as the famous, “Five Year Plan.” However, his charisma was even more evident with his death: the entire nation grieved.

            While Mao was the traditional example of charisma, Churchill was quite the opposite. Churchill actually had more of the inspirational charisma than the hardcore charisma. “No one was overawed by Churchill's physical presence in the way they were by Hitler's.” However, Churchill had this uncanny ability to inspire all, even during the darkest of times. This allowed Churchill to maintain order in Britain and boost the country’s morale during one of the toughest times of their history – World War II. The origin of this somewhat unusual and unique trait may come from Churchill’s personality, always motivated, positive, and enthused. Churchill’s inspiration can be seen from the beginning of World War II, when he would not bargain Adolf Hitler, or ever permit the feeling that Britain would ever lose the war. In accordance with this, Churchill’s biographer, Sir Martin Gilbert wrote, “It was Churchill’s own opposition to all forms of defeatism that marked out the first six months of his war premiership and established the nature and pattern of his war leadership.” Churchill was also able to channel his belief and positive attitude into the hearts and minds of many British during the bleak times of the Second World War. This unwavering resolve and confidence allowed the British to keep calm during the harshest of times. At the beginning of the war, Churchill said “The British people are like the sea. You can put the bucket in anywhere, and pull it up, and always find it salt.” Churchill inspired everyone, from the lowest on the food chain, to other leaders. He is often quoted during dark times and this seems to always lift spirits. Furthermore, Churchill’s optimism and grit is shown to the highest extent in a speech at the House of Commons on June 4, 1940, when he famously declared, 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 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.

Passion is a necessary component to any campaign for leadership, because if one does not believe in their goal, who will? Churchill and Mao both passionately pursued their goals, albeit different, to achieve the success they had previously envisioned. Without this passion, this self-belief, Churchill and Mao would not have been able to do anything in life. This passion allowed Churchill and Mao to finish anything they started as well as buoy innovation. For example, Mao’s passion came from his nationalistic pride and love for China. Tse-tung would essentially do and believed he could anything if it mean China succeeding. His simple words spelled out his self-belief, “As long as you are not afraid, you won't sink.” Mao never gave up on anything. This passion and perseverance within Mao allowed him to do a number of things, from overcoming Chiang Kai-shek, the leader of the anti-communists, to persuading the Chinese the need for the Great Leap Forward. This zealous attitude allowed Mao to create a communist China within a short span of around 30 years, even though it was far from the majority in 1921, when he created the Chinese Communist Party. Moreover, this trait allowed Tse-Tsung to come to power as Chairman of the People’s Republic of China, even though he was the son of a poor peasant. After gaining power, Mao enthusiastically came up with a number of reforms and innovations, such as land reforms and peasant co-operatives.

 Churchill had a similar type of passion, however, his source was “democratic freedom.” With fervor, Churchill worked hard to preserve this democracy, and like Tse-tung, would do anything to protect it. This drive allowed Churchill to be an excellent leader and prime minister. According to his private secretary, “The effects of Churchill’s zeal was [sic] felt immediately in Whitehall.  Government departments which under Neville Chamberlain had continued to work at much the same speed as in peacetime awoke to the realities of war.  A sense of urgency was created in the course of very few days and respectable civil servants were actually to be seen running along the corridors.  No delays were condoned; telephone switchboards quadrupled their efficiency; the Chiefs of Staff and the Joint Planning Staff were in almost constant session; regular office hours ceased to exist and weekends disappeared with them³.” Additionally, Churchill’s enthusiasm prompted innovation – in the form of the tank. During World War I, in order to create some change in “no-man’s land,” “Churchill suggested that a type of heavy tractor with robust treads be produced from which men could fire machine guns and throw grenades from behind armor plating.” This simple thought would lead to the creation of tanks. Another example of Churchill’s passion can be seen in his time as a soldier. He served on the frontlines in World War I, became a commander, and was an example for many other soldiers. The words of one Scotsman (under his command) sum up the confidence and enthusiasm Churchill contained, “I believe every man in the room [at a farewell lunch] felt Winston Churchill’s leaving us a real personal loss,” after Churchill left France in 1916.

Since leaders show the way, in the words of Robert Frost, sometimes they must take “the road less traveled” in order to fulfill a goal. Leaders must take risks in order to separate themselves from the pack and really take control To achieve greatness, Churchill and Mao took risks, some that paid off, and will be forever etched in history, and others that ended miserably that would much rather be forgotten. Mao, had his fair share of risks that went well and risks that did not go as well. For one, Mao’s entire life’s work was a risk. When the Chinese Communist Party was created, there were only twelve members. Mao, at the time, had no way of knowing how this bid for control of China would turn out. However, he tried it anyway and would eventually take over China and defeat the ruling party – the Kuomintang. Nowadays, the CPC has around 80 million members and Kuomintang has around 1 million. Obviously, his risk paid off. Another risk that ended positively for Mao was the first Five Year Plan, that was a economic success for the fledgling PRC. The industrial production increased at a rate of about 20% a year, while the income of the country increased at a rate of around 10% a year. The second Five Year Plan, on the other hand, was a disaster. The agricultural increase was only about 13% of what was projected, and 20 million peasants starved to death because all of the food was allocated to urban areas. Just like any other leader, Mao encountered some failures with his risks, but had to move past them and look to improve in the future.

Just like Mao, Churchill made some huge risks during his tenure as prime minister of Britain. He opposed Hitler and the easy way out – appeasement. Churchill did not want to bargain with Hitler, or in any way, shape, or form give him the advantage. Churchill hated the defeatist attitude. At that time, Churchill was in the minority, Chamberlain wanted to give Hitler what he wanted. Churchill acknowledged he was alone in his stance in 1948 and proceeded to document this opposition in Gathering Storm. “'History will judge us kindly', Churchill told Roosevelt and Stalin at the Tehran Conference in 1943; when asked how he could be so sure, he responded: 'because I shall write the history'. And so he did, in the six massive volumes of The Second World War. The first volume, The Gathering Storm, describes his opposition to the appeasement of Hitler during the 1930s.” This strategy paid off, as Hitler was eventually defeated. However, just like Mao, Churchill does not have a shining, perfect reputation when in came to risks. In fact, Churchill’s father’s career came to halt with a bad risk. Many a time, Churchill said he was done and finished, including in 1915 when he was booted out of government. However, Churchill “never gives up” and went back to his risk-taking ways with World War II. Quite simply, as one of his counterparts put it, “He takes huge risks.”

            Although entirely subjective, the majority say Churchill is good while Mao is bad. However, this is not necessarily the case as good v. bad is a very elementary way of categorizing and analyzing these two leaders. Regardless of most public opinions, Mao did change the fate and path of an entire nation. He created the building blocks to a current world superpower and changed the way the world looked at China forever. He buoyed its’ success and will be forever remembered. In addition, “Mao’s influence endured more than 40 years from the Long March of the 1930s, through the Red Army’s victory in 1949, until his death in 1976 at age 83. He remained chairman of the party till his death.” Churchill, on the other hand, is largely viewed in a positive light, as he protected and guided his country during World War II and believed in its sustainability – a “defender of democracy” in some people’s minds.

            All in all, leadership shows up in our lives more than we notice and is made up of so many facets. Leaders help shape the state of the world now and the future that we are moving towards. The power of leadership is its ability to influence people and events, but the danger of leadership is the very same thing. Churchill and Mao are shining examples that illustrate that with key characteristics, a position of leadership can be obtained, but what is done with that leadership, that responsibility, is very different. Current leaders such as President Obama, David Cameron, Angela Merkel, and Christine Lagarde, and even people like our teachers, coaches, and family members do a lot to influence us and others.  

Works Cited

"Churchill: Leader and Statesman." Winstonchurchill.org. The Churchill Centre and Museum at the Churchill War Rooms. Web. 7 Jan. 2012. <http://www.winstonchurchill.org/learn/biography/biography/churchill-leader-and-statesman>.

Hayward, Steven F. Churchill on Leadership: Executive Success in the Face of Adversity. New York, NY: Three Rivers, 1998. Print.

Leonsis, Zachary. "The Real Reasons for Mao’s Success." The Real Reasons Behind Mao’s Success. Potomac School. Web. 7 Jan. 2012. <http://intranet.potomacschool.org/facultysites/okoth/CHINA/Leonsis/WEBLeonsis.htm>.

"Mao Zedong." History Learning Site. Historylearningsite.co.uk, 2000-2011. Web. 13 Jan. 2012. <http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/mao_zedong.htm>.

Roberts, Andrew. "Secrets of Leadership: Hitler and Churchill." BBC - History. BBC, 17 Feb. 2011. Web. 7 Jan. 2012. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwtwo/hitler_churchill_01.shtml>.

Schram, Stuart R. "Mao Tse-Tung as a Charismatic Leader." Asian Survey 7.6 (1967): 383-88. JSTOR. University of California Press, 2000-2012. Web. 7 Jan. 2012. <http://0-www.jstor.org.library.lausys.georgetown.edu/stable/2642613?seq=1>.

Spence, Jonathan D. "Mao Zedong - TIME." TIME.com. Time Inc., 13 Apr. 1998. Web. 7 Jan. 2012. <http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,988161-1,00.html>.