|
|
|
|
Isabella Mistry Mrs. Verenkoff English 2H, Period 5 17 November 2011
Burning Bridges: The Downfall of the Pragmatist
History is plagued with an extensive record of corrupt rulers who committed atrocious crimes and were solely concerned with their selfish desires. This despicable behavior contributes to the decline of their country, and can result in an unethical leader’s ultimate ruination. Niccolo Machiavelli’s political theory of pragmatism, where the “ends justify the means”, has inspired many of these immoral autocrats. Sir Thomas More summarizes the consequences of Machiavellian ruling in Robert Bolt’s A Man for All Seasons: “When statesmen forsake their own private conscience for the sake of their public duties…they lead their country by a short route to chaos”(13). Sir Thomas More correctly asserts that without a moral compass, leaders will turn to corruption and throw their country into a downward spiral. Thomas Cromwell, Maximilien Robespierre, and Nicolae Ceausescu epitomize the repercussions of pragmatic politics. Thomas Cromwell, as depicted in Robert Bolt’s A Man for All Seasons, is not afraid to use underhanded measures to achieve what he desires. He bribes Sir Thomas More’s steward, Matthew, to relay information regarding Sir Thomas More’s opinion on the controversial topic of King Henry VIII’s divorce (23). Cromwell also enlists the support of Richard Rich, an acquaintance of Sir Thomas More, by offering him a job, to incriminate the former chancellor. Together, Cromwell and Rich first attempt to falsely prove that Sir Thomas More had illegally accepted bribes during his time as a judge (58). Since his original plan had failed, Cromwell then decides to imprison More without a valid charge in hopes that he will succumb to the pressure of a criminal investigation and will either validate Parliament’s Act of Succession and Supremacy or implicate himself. Sir Thomas More’s moral convictions prove too strong for Cromwell to break. Sir Thomas More affirms his beliefs to his incriminators: “I will not take the oath. I will not tell you why I will not”(76). Cromwell twists the neutral words of Sir Thomas More in More’s trial and claims that “[More’s] silence [is] not silence at all but…denial”(88). Acting as Cromwell’s puppet, Rich commits perjury and states that Sir Thomas More admits to challenging Parliament’s power to declare the monarch as head of the Anglican Church, which ensures More’s sentence of high treason (90). Cromwell’s pragmatic political maneuvers cause the death of a beloved countryman and lead to unrest in England. Thomas Cromwell’s unethical actions triggered religious turmoil in England. Since Cromwell spearheaded the campaign for the execution of one of the most esteemed men in England, he created an idealistic martyr that opposed the newly founded Anglican Church. The passing of the Act of Succession and Supremacy also could not erase the deeply engrained Catholic tendencies that the majority of English citizens still harbored (Durant 561). Violence erupted in the English states, especially Ireland, and More was hoisted as a martyr to contradict all of Cromwell’s actions (Durant 565). Rebel armies formed at the sites of old monasteries, which were pillaged as a result of the Act of Succession, and some dissidents even advocated Cromwell’s removal from the king’s council (Durant 565). Cromwell could not control the rebellious north, and eventually lost the king’s favor, resulting in Cromwell’s execution (Durant 575). These conflicts divided the British Isles indefinitely and were still evident in the Irish succession and civil war in the 1920s. Cromwell’s greed and ambition drove his corrupt actions, and their consequences echoed throughout England long after his term as a statesman concluded. Thomas Cromwell’s cruelty pales in comparison to Maximilien Robespierre’s. Robespierre took advantage of the chaos that ensued after the fall of the long-standing monarchy in France. This egocentric, “democratic” ruler craftily rose through the ranks of the National Convention, and shortly after King Louis XVI’s execution, he was appointed to the Committee of Public Safety (McLetchie). This appointment afforded him new powers to exercise his personal agenda of transforming France into a virtuous state (Palmer 377). While this objective may seem noble, Robespierre was willing to do anything to achieve his goal, and his single-minded and conceited character contributed to its dire consequences. While Thomas Cromwell led one man to the executioner’s block, Robespierre proceeded to lead thousands of innocent people to the guillotine. Robespierre instituted the bloody Reign of Terror in 1793 to confront his fears of a counterrevolution, and to eliminate anyone who acted against his regime (Palmer 377). He even denounced his former supporters, and condemned the democratic institutions that were the original instigators of the revolution (Palmer 379). In total 40,000 people lost their lives, and an astounding seventy percent were of the ignorant peasant class, that had supported the revolution from its start (Palmer 378). Faulty revolutionary courts decided those inhumane verdicts, and small accusations became death sentences (Palmer 377-78). France descended into chaos and the population’s fear could not be contained. Unscrupulous people, like Robespierre, used allegations of treason to eliminate people for either personal or political reasons, and there was also a widespread distrust in the “democratic” government. This lack of faith increased during the dechristianzation period ushered in by the Committee of Public Safety, and permanent damage was inflicted upon devout Catholics, further alienating the general population from the ruling class (Palmer 379-80). Robespierre himself perished in the conclusion of the Reign of Terror, after the country was fed up with his cruel reign and radical ideals, and the weak government that followed continued to fail the poverty-inflicted lower classes (Palmer 381, 384). The French people still possessed wariness of so-called “republican” governments, and this resentment resulted in their acceptance of an absolute leader, Napoleon, only five years after Robespierre’s fall. Robespierre singlehandedly destroyed the civil rights gained in the French Revolution, and his immoral and pragmatic methods led France on a path to cruelty and chaos. Unfortunately, the pragmatic style of leadership did not die with Cromwell and Robespierre. During the late twentieth century, communist ruler Nicolae Ceausescu came to power in Romania. In 1965, amidst the turmoil of the former leader’s, Gheorghiu-Dej’s, death, Ceausescu emerged as the new ruler (“Nicolae”). To fortify his power, he changed the country’s name to the Socialist Republic of Romania, and eventually appointed himself president of the State Council (“Nicolae”). Ceausescu implemented many new government policies, including the 1966 Decree, which banned abortion and contraceptives to foster population growth, and the July Theses, which promoted the ideals of the Party using tactics modeled after North Korea’s communist government (“Nicolae”). Ceausescu also became heavily reliant on western funding to expand economic development, and the thirteen billion dollars he borrowed eventually devastated Romania’s economy (“Nicolae”). Ceausescu’s pragmatic rise to power and radical laws drove his country into shambles. In the true communist fashion, Ceausescu’s government dictated every aspect of its citizens’ lives. The July Theses imposed stringent censorship, and culture was propagated to brainwash the masses into believing Ceausescu’s words, including falsified harvest and economic statistics (“Nicolae”). The toll of the massive loans on the peasants was astounding. The government ordered them to surrender their livelihood of food crops to pay off its growing debts, and starvation became commonplace among peasant families (“Nicolae”). The 1966 Decree, however, had the largest negative impact on Romania. Having children was highly encouraged by the government, but they did not provide adequate medicinal care for pregnant women or new babies. Desperate women, who could not afford to have a child, either paid for illegal abortions, which had high fatality rates, or attempted it themselves (Breslau). An estimated sixty percent of all pregnancies in Ceausescu’s Romania ended in either abortion or miscarriage, but doctors fabricated the statistics to keep their jobs (Breslau). Others abandoned their unwanted burdens, and they were placed in horrendous state orphanages (McGeown). The children were regularly abused, given inedible food, denied medical attention, and sometimes even drugged (McGeown). Cighid, the most famous orphanage, suffered from a fifty percent death rate in its worst year (McGeown). Violent uprisings occurred in late 1989, and Ceausescu and his wife were tried and executed on December 25, 1989 (“Nicolae”). Ceausescu left a bloody trail in his wake by causing thousands of deaths and greatly decreasing the standard of life in Romania. These awful consequences were directly caused by Ceausescu’s crazed political goals, and the Romanian people greatly suffered for his ambition. His pragmatic methods and inhumane policies led to long term and dire consequences for Romania, its people, and its economy. Thomas Cromwell, Maximilien Robespierre, and Nicolae Ceausescu led their respective countries in severe downward spirals as a result of their pragmatic politics. The human lives they sacrificed to power their objectives were wasted, and ultimately contributed to each ruler’s, and his country’s, downfall. Pragmatism not only ravaged England, France, and Romania, but numerous other countries, and today it is still considered a legitimate form of government by many. Some disregard idealists, such as Sir Thomas More and Mahatma Gandhi, as unrealistic, when in reality they were the mavericks of positive change in the world. Moral conviction is the mark of a singularly strong person, and Robert Bolt stresses this quality of Sir Thomas More in his play, A Man for All Seasons. Pragmatism destroys and kills anything in its path, and its eventual consequences outweigh the leader’s lofty ideals and discreditable methods. Sir Thomas More understood this significant assertion, and he paid the ultimate price for these beliefs. History often repeats itself, but hopefully the legacy of idealists like Sir Thomas More will trump those of atrocious pragmatic rulers.
Works Citied Bolt, Robert. A Man for All Seasons. New York: Random House, 1962. Print. Breslau, Karen. “Overplanned Parenthood: Ceausescu's Cruel Law.” Www.ceausescu.org - the Leading Infosource on the Web about Ceausescu and His Era! np. 22 Jan. 1990. Web. 15 Nov. 2011. Durant, Will. The Story of Civilization, Volume VI: The Reformation. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1957. Print. McGeown, Kate. “Life in Ceausescu’s Institutions.” BBC News. British Broadcasting Corporation. 12 July 2005. Web. 15 Nov. 2011 McLetchie, Scott. “Maximilien Robespierre, Master of the Terror.” Loyola University New Orleans. np. nd. Web. 13 Nov. 2011. “Nicolae Ceaușescu.” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 10 Nov. 2011. Web. 14 Nov. 2011. Palmer, R.R., et al. A History of the Modern World: Tenth Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 2007. Print.
|
|
