Compare These Sources as Evidence for Churchill’s Attitude to Communist Russia in the 1920’s.

779 Words4 Pages
Source A is the view of a Liberal writer and commentator on Churchill’s views on Communism in a short book about contemporary public figures in 1924. From the source’s provenance, we can depict that Phillip Guedalla may possibly be in a good position to judge Churchill’s thoughts on Communist Russia as, due to the fact he has published a book, he has most likely had to gather evidence to support his statements, and therefore we can start to question the reliability of the source. Guedalla is consistent throughout the source regarding his statements about Churchill which suggests that this source is of good reliability. However, Source A is a second hand account, and is not said by Churchill himself and therefore may contain errors of judgement. Due to this, we can see that the source may be of good reliability but may also contain errors (Guedalla may have over-exaggerated Churchill’s views to make his book more popular.) The source’s content predominantly focuses on Churchill’s strong, opposing views against Bolshevism in Russia. The writer explains, ‘Churchill’s waking vision is haunted by constant fantasies of sinister little communist figures.’ This suggests that Churchill has strong opinions on the Bolshevik’s in Russia, and it depicts that his thoughts consisted of Bolshevism in Russia alone, which suggests he almost has an obsession with dealing with the problem of Communist Russia as quickly as possible, as he is shown in source A as having nightmares about Communist Russia. Source E, Churchill’s sequel to his history of the First World War and events which led to it which consists of his views of Communist Russia, reinforces the quote ‘Churchill’s waking vision is haunted by constant fantasies of sinister little communist figures’ written in Source A. This is applicable when Source E, written by Churchill himself says, ‘the Revolution in Russia
Open Document