The story of William Lyon Mackenzie King demonstrates how important historigraphy can be. As time has passed, and younger historians evaluate him, he is regarded in an increasingly positive light. At the same time, the publications of his diaries reveal his arguably bizarre relationships with his family (particularly his mother) from beyond the grave. How is his diary significant to our understanding of King? What, according to historians, made King so successful? What distinguished him from other politicians?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePerhaps his weirdness and idiosyncrasies helped him become a great politician. He may have gotten some divine intervention from his spiritual beliefs or maybe he was really just an effective leader. The article said that he was a master of detail and was so accurate and clear in everything he did. Because of his attention to detail, he was often able to "detect political clashes" and use his compromising skills to solve them. Maybe he also stood out as a politician because he spent so much time in office. Maybe his experience also shaped him into a "successful" politician.
ReplyDeleteThe diary allows us to learn about Kings's private life. King was so successful because his "shrewdness as a political leader". The reading also mentions that he was clear and accurate, knew how to handle problems, and he surrounded himself with good advisors. His weirdness and interest in spiritulism distinguished him from other politicians. His way of thinking was very different. For example, the reading says, "He saw the world as a battleground of Good and Evil".
ReplyDeleteWhat distinguished King from other politicians was his cabinet and the fact that he listened to them. His quirks and somewhat odd beliefs brought his censure, but it made people remember him. Although in person he was very plain and not a very good speaker his work speaks for him. He left Canada in much better shape than when he inherited it.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Mackenzie King was very peculiar, he wasn't only a bad Prime Minister. The text tells about his accurate and patien way of thinking out problems and mentions him as an „exemplary manager“ Of course, after his death, when his diaries were published and so the stories of his strange habits such as contacting dead people or his relationship to his mother, people must have believed he was incompetent. But as long as someone makes the right decisions, it is not important if he needs reassurance from his dead mother. There must have been a reason he was the longest Prime Minister in office.
ReplyDeletei think that King was such a good leader because he was a master of details and was in and out of office so much he understood what normal people are going through. Many politicians aren't aquatinted with normal people and their everyday lives, but King was. He was in and out of office so much that he would get glimpses of normal life and when in office he would be able to makes changes and fix normal peoples lives. The master of detail aspect is a very good thing to have because he needs to be able to make sure everything he does he means and is accurate so that the things he does can benefit the people he is governing.
ReplyDeleteKing differed from other politicians because he was willing to take other people's ideas into account when making a decision. Other politicians would just go with what they believed as completely disregard the thoughts of others. He was the kind of guy who took criticism well and formed his decisions off of it.
ReplyDeleteAs a result, Canada benefitted from his time as Prime Minister
King was just as his title suggests: Crazy like a Fox. He was "truly weird" thanks to diaries we have of his; it seems as if his private life rather than his public self is what captured people's attention. He was a"mediocre intellect, but exemplary manager"; "[He] was an excellent reporter of events and meetings: accurate and clear. The intelligent way he handled problems is almost overshadowed by the mass detail he mastered, and the long term stamina and patience with which he dealt with each issue."
ReplyDeleteWhat differed about the king was his ability to actually put the public into his actions. He understands people and will take their ideas into account when making decisions. He wanted the criticism. He believed that he was would be a better person if he understood what the citizens were thinking. And he's right. As a result he was overall a better politician. And Canada really benefitted from his being prime minister.
ReplyDeleteThe King obviously wasn't right in the head, but I believe is wrong to judge a politician based off his personal life. Politics is a job and a politician just try's to do his job. Of course people are going to look at your backstory, but we as people should judge these men based on their views and actions, rather than their relationships with their mothers or family life. The king was around in a much younger time, and I'm sure the people of his day didn't know as much as us, so I don't think it effected him as king.
ReplyDeleteTo me, King's diary entries are a window into the mindset of him when he was the Prime Minister. It is interesting to see how this job affected his psyche, and reading his diaries shows the state that King was in, which may justify his decisions to previous opponents of his policies. The diary entries help show how much of a secretive man King was, and he was able to hide this seemingly different man from the public's view. According to historians, he understood how the people were feeling, which led to his success.
ReplyDeleteAs long as the King stays effective and organized, he is highly capable to take charge of the Canada. The unique characters really made him stands out to me, he was able to account citizens ideas, had a good handle of criticism and he has got fine effective policies but not too aggressive which is really mature. Speaking of all his "weird special habits, no matter communication with his dead mother or what so ever, I think I do not have the right to say anything about anyone's personal life, cause every one gots his own fetish in one way or another.
ReplyDeleteThere is a strong likely hood that Kings attributes of being outlandish could have helped in his legacy of being a great politician. Due to His aptitude to detail, it is possible that he could have detected political clashes and then apply his problem solving skills to resolve the problem. Another possibility is that the extended amount of time he spend within the confides of his office made is career as a serious politician far more prominent.
ReplyDeleteKing's practicality and logical nature compensated for his lack of intellectual prowess. He used the people around him, especially his cabinet, which he respected and listened to. He was also in tune with the public, which many politicians often aren't, which allowed him to craft much more effective policy. King's personality died with him, although books and diaries may help future generations remember him, it's not the same. But his policies have had a lasting effect on Canada, and that is something that historians take into greater consideration when reflecting on his legacy.
ReplyDelete