Churchill or Carter: Why Tough Leadership Prevails Over ‘Nice’ Leadership
Almost simultaneously, the passing of former U.S. President Jimmy Carter and the release of Netflix’s Churchill at War brought a sharp contrast into focus. It’s a question we’ve wrestled with for decades: Do we value leaders who are moral, clean, and “nice,” or those who are tough, pragmatic, and willing to deliver results at any cost?
Winston Churchill, to me, represents the pinnacle of leadership. His greatness, paradoxically, stemmed from traits that many would call flaws: he was abrasive, blunt, and unapologetically ambitious. Yet, it was this very “not-nice” nature that allowed him to face down the greatest threat the modern world has ever known—Nazi Germany.
Churchill’s ability to inspire resilience, even as Britain endured relentless bombings during World War II, came not from offering comfort or optimism, but from demanding sacrifice. He didn’t sugarcoat the truth. Instead, he famously pledged “blood, toil, tears, and sweat” as the cost of survival. It was precisely his ruthlessness, determination, and willingness to challenge appeasement that saved Britain and the free world.
Churchill’s journey to greatness wasn’t smooth or celebrated. He was controversial, often unpopular, and dismissed by many of his peers as egotistical.........
© The Times of Israel (Blogs)
![](https://cgsyufnvda.cloudimg.io/https://qoshe.com/img/icon/go.png)