Over the last five days I saw lots of information about the war and its effect on Londoners and Britain as a whole. One thing I noticed was how much emphasis was placed on Churchill and his participation in the war, especially in the Churchill War Rooms. I wondered how Churchill as a historical figure really helped the war effort for the British people, and if the outcome could have been the same if he had not assumed office. I thought about what if Chamberlain had managed to stay in charge, would the same things have happened, or would the UK have suffered even worse? Churchill at the time of war breaking out was a political character that had a long history in both politics and the military. He was responsible for the failures at Gallipoli in World War I, and for several unpopular decisions in politics post World War I. Despite these failures he was also liked for his oratory skills and for his anti-appeasement advocation.
When war broke out he was placed as the Head of the Admiralty once again, and soon became the head of state. I believe that Churchill’s many life experiences allowed him to excel as both a statesman and a military leader. His patriotism and oratory skills allowed him to stoke the flames of resistance in the British people, keeping their morale up and allowing for the British people to go on even while facing overwhelming odds. From my experiences in the museums Churchill was much more involved and a much more personable leader than Chamberlain. He was a no nonsense type, and I think that played a large part in his success as a leader. The Bulldog was the best man for the job and everyone knew it, even if they hadn’t seen eye to eye with him in the past.