I know, I know: Wade Boggs said it was Pitt the Elder, while Barney insisted it was Lord Palmerston (The Simpsons, “Homer at the Bat”).
I have to disagree - I’d vote for Winston Churchill. He gave courage to Great Britain when all seemed lost during the darkest days of World War II, forged a strong and effective wartime partnership with FDR, warned of the longterm risk of nuclear weapons, and was the first honorary U.S. citizen (courtesy of JFK). He was a cavalry officer, reporter, Boer POW and escapee, MP, painter, amateur bricklayer, and a Nobel Prize-winning author. An amazing man, a witty and inspirational orator, and a great leader.
Geez, way to take all the fun out of the thread for those of us who couldn’t name more than 6 or 7 PMs.
But from my limited knowledge, I sure can’t argue against Churchill. He did a fine job of actually running the country during a crisis, and a BRILLIANT job of LEADING it. It’s like if you took the best qualities of Reagan and Clinton (including ones that they may not actually have, but that their respective supporters perceive them as having), put them in the same person, and had him lead the country during a huge national crisis.
I have to agree to - a great orator and clearly inspirational leader, a highly competent politician, and an intelligent, witty man. It’s not often you get all of those qualities in one person.
I agree. While his Renaissance Man characteristics don’t add to his résumé as PM, I think it’s important to look at his Cabinet service from 1907-22, 1924-29, and 1939-40. Probably half of what constitutes British people’s interface with government today is directly the product of his work. He was also the only man looking for practical ways to break the WWI attrition stalemate, the inspirer of the tank and dozens of other weapons, etc. One nitpick: he was the second honorary U.S. citizen (Lafayette was first; Raoul Wallenberg was the only other one ever named.)
The only man in the same ballpark would have to be Walpole, who created the office in the first place, and made it the de facto rulership of the U.K. The Pitts, Pam, Dizzy and the G.O.M., all are important, but a tier below Walpole and WSC.
*A non-U.S. citizen of exceptional merit may be declared an Honorary Citizen of the United States by the President pursuant to an Act of Congress. As of August 6, 2002, six people have had this honor bestowed upon them:
Winston Churchill, British Prime Minister during World War II (awarded 1963)
Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu (Mother Teresa), Albanian nun and human rights advocate (1996)
Posthumously Awarded:
William Callowhill Penn, 18th century co-founder and governor of the US state of Pennsylvania (1984)
Hannah Callowhill Penn, second wife of William Callowhill Penn and administrator of Pennsylvania (1984)
Marquis de la Fayette, French supporter of the American Revolution (2002)
Raoul Wallenberg, Swedish diplomat and Holocaust hero (1981)
Honorary citizenship is not to be confused with permanent residency bestowed by a private bill. Private bills are, on rare occasions, used to provide relief to individuals, often in immigration cases, and are also passed by both houses of Congress and signed into law by the President.*
So Churchill was first, as I wrote (although I agree that Lafayette deserved it far sooner), and there have been five others.
Interestingly, when I was growing up (well before Churchill’s death; he’d only recently retired as P.M.), I was taught that the country had only extended honorary citizenship once, to Lafayette. I of course have no cite to prove anything, but based on that memory, I’d have to say that I’m a trifle suspicious of the 2002 date in Wikipedia. The Penns certainly deserved it. With no disrespect to Herr Wallenburg and Mother Teresa, I was always under the impression that the criteria involved being nationals of another country who provided extraordinary service to the U.S. as a country, hence the specialness of Lafayette and Churchill. Wallenburg and M.T. were exemplary “world citizens,” but hardly of special importance to the U.S. as opposed to any other civilized nation.
I’d add Margaret Thatcher and the Duke of Wellington to the fray.
Wellington was the preeminent international statesman of his day, and just about ran Europe.
Margaret Thatcher was the first female prime minister, she successfully defended the Falklands, turned Britain from the sick man of Europe into the economic powerhouse that we are today, stopped the socialist rot, was instrumental in the fall of the Soviet empire … Her methods though, caused a lot of people to lose their jobs, and this was compounded by the stupidity of the union leaders like Scargill leading their members into striking themselves into oblivion.
Another vote for Maggie. She stands head and shoulders above the eight who’ve held the office in my lifetime. Quartz, could you explain what you mean by ‘her methods caused a lot of people to lose their jobs’?
Sure. She did much to curtail the power of the unions, including ending secondary picketting; she freed up the economy, ending currency exchange controls and reducing taxes; and she cut subsidies to uneconomic industries. All these caused firms which were riding on others’ money to go bust, enabled firms to trim excess jobs with less fear of crippling strikes, and enabling well-run companies to keep more of their income, better allowing them to grow. The unions, many controlled by hard-line socialists like Arthur Scargill, striked their way into oblivion, causing more firms to go bust. As these took effect, unemployment rocketted and many women joined the labour force.