National Leaders


Figure 1.--

As part of our history discussions, we thought it would be helpful to create a section on nationl leaders. For most of history this meant hereditary monarchial leasers with rare exceptions such as Greeks and Romans. As a result we have an extensive royalty section. Of course monarchial systems are not purely hereditart as there are palace coups and civil wars which replaced one dynasty with another, but for the most part the vast majority od sucessions were done on an hereditary basis, justifed by divine right. We are most familiar with European monrchies, but this in fact was a system adopted throughout the world and over the vast span of human history. The reason for this was it was one way to stabalize seccession and avoid war and disorder when a monarch died. In modern times non-monarchial systems have become more common with elections determning leaders. The first modern democracy was the United States. The root of American democracy of course was Britain, although at the ime of the american Revolution, very few Britons could vote. The orld's latgest democracy is India which despite this toyed with the Soviet Union after independnce. Interestingly while democracyis surely the greatest achievement of India, many Indians do not want to admit the British roots. Gradually elections began to be held in more andmore coutries. Unfortunately many elctions are elections in name over and are mere sunterfuges and controoled. This has varied, but was quite common in the post-World War II decoloization of the Third World. The idea of elections, however, are so poweful that even dictators at least pretended to have elections. The arc of history is for real elections to becomne more common around the world, although there are still many coutries, including important countries that do not hold real elections suh as China and Russia.

Royalty

As part of our history discussions, we thought it would be helpful to create a section on nationl leaders. For most of history this meant hereditary monarchial leasers with rare exceptions such as Greeks and Romans. As a result we have an extensive royalty section. Of course monarchial systems are not purely hereditart as there are palace coups and civil wars which replaced one dynasty with another, but for the most part the vast majority od sucessions were done on an hereditary basis, justifed by divine right. We are most familiar with European monarchies, but this in fact was a system adopted throughout the world and over the vast span of human history. The reason for this was it was one way to stabalize seccession and avoid war and disorder when a monarch died. We have also developed the roylty pages as part of our fashion section. Royaly has had a huge impact on fashion.

Non-monarchial Systems

In modern times non-monarchial systems have become more common with elections determning leaders. The first modern democracy was the United States. The root of American democracy of course was Britain, although at the ime of the american Revolution, very few Britons could vote. The orld's latgest democracy is India which despite this toyed with the Soviet Union after independnce. Interestingly while democracyis surely the greatest achievement of India, mny Ondians do not want to admit the British roots. Gradually elections began to be held in more andmore coutries. Unfortunately many elctions are elections in name over and are mere sunterfuges and controoled. This has varied, but was quite common in the post-World War II decoloization of the Third World. The idea of elections, however, are so poweful that even dictators at least pretended to have elections. The arc of history is for real elections to becomne more common around the world, although there are still many coutries, including important countries that do not hold real elections suh as China and Russia. We have only begun this sustem and only at this ime have worked on America and Britain.

America

The United States is the first modern country to begin electing its leaders. At first the franchise was very restricted, but very quickly it began to expnd to inclue all white males. The expansion to blacks and women took more time. At first, the Europeans controlled by monrchies were convinced that such a system would not work because the average person was not competent to chose his leaders. Democracy has proved not to be perfect, but it has produced leaders over time that has proven more effective than royalty. There of couurse have been effective monrch, but most have poven of no special talents and many hace been disasters. Democracies on the other hnbd have produced some of the great leaders of history. And American presidents have proven especially important in world history, especially during the 20th century. Our website has an important fashion section. The clothing worn by presidents as children and the clothing worn by their children are a good reflection of contemporary children's clothing. America of course has no royal family to help set fashion standards as was the case in Europe. The American president and his family have in part played this role. Thus a review of the American presidents provide glimpses on popular children's fashions of the day. In addition, the clothing of the presidents themselves provide additional glimpses. Very limited information is available on the childhood of many presidents, especially the childhood of presidents like Abraham Lincoln that grew up in modest circumstances.

Britain

The Prime Minister is the political leader of the United Kingdom. He is is the head of Government, but unlike the presidenyil system, not the head of state. In Britain the monarch is the hrad of state, a largely ceremonil role. In non monsrchial systems, a president plays this role. The prme ministerial office began with Robert Walpole (about 1721). This was shortly after Britain came into existance with the Act of Union with Scotland (1707). At the time it was not a very democratic office in that so few people could vote. And there wre still quite a number of 'Rotton Buroughs'. The question of Parliament's authority began with Magna Carta. And was finally settled with theEnglish Civil War abd Glorious Revolution. The office of prime minister came into being as the power of the House of Commons became increasingly importabt. In Walpole's time, however the monarchy still had considerable authority. Walople proved to be one of Britain's great prime ministers. Other important prime ministers were Pitt the Younger, Benjamin Disraeli, David Lloyd Heorge, Winston Churchill, and Margaret Thstcher. Although Lord North presided over the demise of the North americam empire, Pitts the Younger he;p inbed Britain in India and Disraeli greatly expanded it. Gladstone although not a empire builder, defended it and began the provess of extending self rule to the english seaking colonies while failing to do the same in Irelans, despite strenous efforts. David Lloys Gerorge lais the foundation for the welfare state nd played an importnt role in defearing the Germans. Winston Churchill took office at the just as the NZI storm broke over the West. Together with President Roosevelt they did nothing short of savihg Western civilzation. Clemnet Atlee expanded the wlfare sysem, but is socialist idelogy meant that he was naware of the need for a vital capitalist economy. Mrs Thatcher remibded Britons of the importance of market forces to British prosperity.as wll as ith President Reagan, winning the Cold War.







Navigate the Children in History Website:
[About Us]
[Introduction] [Biographies] [Chronology] [Climatology] [Clothing] [Disease and Health] [Economics] [Freedom] [Geography] [History] [Leaders] [Human Nature] [Ideology] [Law]
[Nationalism] [Presidents] [Religion] [Royalty] [Science] [Social Class]
[Bibliographies] [Contributions] [FAQs] [Glossaries] [Images] [Links] [Registration] [Tools]
[Children in History Home]