Below The Beltway

I believe in the free speech that liberals used to believe in, the economic freedom that conservatives used to believe in, and the personal freedom that America used to believe in.

[powered by WordPress.]

The President, The Pope, And The Prime Minister

by @ 9:53 am on July 15, 2007.

There is a theory in history called the Great Man Theory, which seeks to explain the events of history principally by looking at the impact of pivotal men and women who played a role in world events. On it’s most simplistic level, the theory does make some sense. It’s hard to imagine the American Revolution happening the way it did without the role played by men like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, or even King George III. It’s equally hard to imagine World War II and all that has happened since without taking into account the individual decisions and personalities of Roosevelt, Churchill, Hitler, and Stalin.

The academic left, though, has generally rejected the Great Man Theory and looks to economic, technological, and other factors to explain history. To them, the role of the individual in history is insignificant compared to the role that these “forces” play. What they forget, of course, is that economics, technology, and culture are all created by individuals. So arguing that “forces” rule history and that individual’s are irrelevant is inherently irrational.

In reading The President, The Pope, And The Prime Minister, it’s easy to see where John O’Sullivan comes down in this debate. He clearly believes that individuals play a vital role in history, and considering the three individuals he profiles — Ronald Reagan, Pope John Paul II, and Margaret Thatcher — it’s hard to argue with him.

The hyopthesis of O’Sullivan’s book is fairly straightforward. Three individuals who, in the years just before they came to power, were believed to be outside of the mainstream of 1970s era thinking worked together, sometimes at cross purposes and often not consciously, to change the world by putting in place forces that led to the downfall of the Soviet Empire and the remaking of the world.

As O’Sullivan makes clear, the spark was lit in October 1978 when the Catholic Church did the unthinkable by electing a non-Italian Pope for the first time in over 450 years. And not only a non-Italian, put a man who came from behind the Iron Curtain and who had spent much of his career as a priest and bishop resisting tyranny, first from the Nazis and then from the Communists. His election set off a firestorm in Poland that led directly to the formation of Solidarity and its preservation through nearly a decade of martial law.

O’Sullivan also pays considerable attention to former President Reagan, his dealings with the Soviet Union, and, most interestingly, his view of the role of nuclear weapons in the Cold War. Though it was not generally known at the time, and goes against what was being said about Reagan by his critics and even some of his supporters, it has become fairly clear in the years since he left office from the release of private writings that Reagan despised nuclear weapons and pursued a policy that had as its conscious goal their eventual elimination. While some might consider this attitude naive (after all, you can’t put the nuclear genie back in the bottle), it sheds a new light on his approach to negotiations with the Soviets and the SDI program. Reagan knew that the Soviets could not compete with America technologically, and that they would never give up their nuclear arsenal willingly. So, he essentially played a waiting game until the “correlation of forces”, to borrow a Marxist phrase, were such that that Soviets had no choice but to make a deal in a last ditch effort to save first their empire, and then their very existence.

Reagan told John Paul about his views on nuclear weapons, the Soviets, and the future of Europe early on. And the Holy Father clearly supported these views, as evidenced by the fact that while Catholic Bishops in the United States often spoke out against U.S. foreign policy in the 1980s (sometimes to the consternation of the Vatican), the Holy See rarely did.

O’Sullivan’s perspective on Thatcher, and her relationships with Reagan, the Pope, and the Soviets are interesting especially given his connections to the British Conservative Party. What is clear, though, is that even Thatcher herself, clearly one of Reagan’s closest friends in world politics, had no idea just how idealistic he was.

This book isn’t ground breaking academic research, but it offers an interesting perspective on the life, times, and historical impact on three people who clearly changed the world for the better.

Related Posts

Comments are closed.

[powered by WordPress.]