评价Cromwell.doc

About the evaluation of Oliver CromwellAbstract: Cromwell is a great leader of the 17th century bourgeois revolution in Britain he is the founder of modern Britain. He defeated the feudal king party so that he has always been praised by the people, and the expedition to Irish, repression to Levellers and Diggers, and the replacement of republic by authoritarian, all of this can reveal that he is the representative of the era of capitalism, and we shouldnt consider that he was a contradiction of historical figures.Keywords: expedition to Irish repression to Levellers and Diggers replacement of republic by authoritarianINTRODUCTIONAbout Cromwell, public opinions are divergent in three hundred years. There are mainly three kinds of viewpoint. The first one: Cromwell never became a real revolutionary. They make his personal motivation such a big deal and think that Cromwell did not try to meet the needs of society sincerely in his heart and due to his selfishness, the feudal dynasty came back. The second one: Cromwell was a strong warrior who was fighting with feudal system and an outstanding bourgeois revolutionary and a new system explorer. In evaluating the character of Cromwell, we must deal with the relationship between the time and the revolutionary tasks, between class and individual practice, between the motivation and the result. If not, we will misunderstand. And the third one: we should basically affirm what he has done before the establishment of the republic, but we should basically negate his behavior after that. And so many people think that Cromwell is a contradictory character. “Cromwells greatness will always be questioned. As a general, he was gifted yet lucky; as a statesman, he had some success but was unable to bring his plans to complete fruition. Although his religious conviction often appears to be a hypocritical cloak for personal ambition, his positive qualities are unmistakable. He believed in representative government (limited to men of property, however). He encouraged reform, and much of it was humane. He brought to the executive side of government a great degree of professionalism, particularly in the army and navy. Britain emerged from the Commonwealth stronger, more efficient, and more secure. Perhaps the most remarkable qualities of Cromwell were his sobriety and his self-control. Few men have enjoyed such supreme power and abused it less.”1 He had to conform to the trend of the times to go against the king and kill Charles, and to establish the Republic, to promote the progress of history. But then, in order to meet the needs of the bourgeoisie, he brutally suppressed the revolutionary democracy, conquered Ireland, this behavior showed limitations. He launched a series of commercial war and expanded the market and colonies for the British, but the long-term consumption of war restrained economic development so that intensified social contradictions. In addition, royalist conspiracy activities, leading to the British the restoration of the feudal dynasty.In my opinion, Cromwell was a great bourgeois revolutionary who was a landmark in the age. He was a bourgeois military innovator and he had outstanding military skills. He was revolutionary in the military but sometimes ambiguous in politics. And in order to protect the commercial profit he became the executors to mercantilist policy.He had faults, but they are the faults of a great man. In the evaluation of Cromwell, which comes first is that we should make sure that he is a great man, and he just has done something he served for the times. Because most of us basically affirm what he has done to fight against feudal system, here, I dont discuss this part and Ill mainly expound the expedition to Irish, repression to Levellers and Diggers, and the replacement of republic by authoritarian.First of all, we must clearly aware of the importance of the time and class nature and the objective environment. To understand Cromwell correctly, we must grasp the time and class nature of Cromwell, and we must pay more attention to the dialectical relationship between motivation and effect. Grasping the time and class nature of Cromwell means not only to grasp the time and class origin, but also to grasp its meet to requirements and contributions of the time and class. For the contribution, can only meet the needs of the times and the degree of the class to measure, and cant be measured by the so-called motivation without the scientific basis. The revolutionary leaders such as Cromwell cant appear from the air, but created by the era, by the times and the objective environment. The era of Cromwell is the transition from feudalism to capitalism. Cromwell was created by this era and he was a product of class contradictions and the system between the new and the old.ABOUT REPRESSION TO LEVELLERS AND DIGGERSBefore we discuss Cromwells repression to Levellers and Diggers, we should aware that what caused the conflict between them. What the Levellers and Diggers want is to build a real free Republic which is private and has a small-scale production. But what Cromwell wanted to realize is to build a country which is based on private ownership. And the repression to Levellers, one of the important reasons is that Cromwell worried about the political equality will change to the property equality, but as to Diggers, because Cromwell was aware of the diggers will break the sacred private ownership. So the behavior of Cromwell was just to protect the fundamental interests of the new aristocracy and bourgeoisie which were got by their arduous struggle. If we have other words, we will find that the way to reach the goal is cruel and we should make a difference between motivation and result. Whats more, the social was unstable and the country faced many big problems at the beginning of the bourgeoisie.ABOUT THE EXPEDITION TO IRISHCromwell decided to expedition to Scotland while suppressing to Levellers and Diggers, what is his purpose is that: “the land of Ireland can be used to repay the soldiers and the debt caused by the civil war and consolidate status in Ireland and eradicate Catholic doctrine,”2. It is entirely in order to meet the needs of aggression and expansion of bourgeoisie and the new aristocracy.Whats more: the contradiction between the bourgeoisie and the king is the main contradiction at that time of the society. The King party led by Charles II in an attempt to use the forces of reactionary in Ireland and Scotland to overthrow the New Republic and the threat is really existed. So, expedition Ireland has dual purposes, not only to suppress the national uprising but also to suppress rebellion which caused by king party while the latter one is main. Here, we can express that Cromwells behavior in Ireland is cruel; his hands were stained with blood and he took some brutal and extreme way to fight with the king Party. We will strongly criticize the behavior in today but it cant be completely blame in Cromwell at that time and in such a situation. In addition, the colonial aggression to Ireland indeed caused the very grave disaster to the Irish people, Cromwell should be blamed. But it illustrates another problem that Cromwell is the representative of the bourgeoisie. In fact, the bourgeoisie require the colonial expansion in the early capitalist countries, and their political representatives (just like Cromwell) tend to try their best to meet their wishes. When we think some problems, we will be deceived if we only consider either the motivation or the result and always we will misunderstand because both of them cant reveal anything, only we make a balance between the motivation and the result we will see the clear truth.ABOUT THE REPLACEMENT OF REPUBLIC BY AUTHORITARIAN“Cromwell tried to create a firm new constitutional base for his power. His first attempt to establish a constitution by means of a nominated Parliament in1653 ended in disaster, so the Council of Army Officers promulgated the Instrument of Government, by which Cromwell became Protector in December 1653. Cromwell believed sincerely in the delegation and sharing of power. Because of this belief, he was assisted in his work by a Council of State. For eight months Cromwell and his council ruled most effectively, sweeping away ancient feudal jurisdictions in Scotland and Ireland and uniting those countries with England under one Parliament, which was also reformed. When the Parliament met in 1654, however, it soon quarreled with Cromwell over the constitution. He once more took power into his own hands and dissolved Parliament on June 22, 1655.”3 Cromwell had try to attempt new things to make the country better and at least it shows his motivation is positive and can be understood and agreed. “Although Cromwell was one of Englands three or four military geniuses, a religious visionary, and a man of towering integrity, in the end he was an indifferent statesman.”4 In fact, Cromwell had been great because he did many explorations as a revolutionary especially in that time. As a great leader and a revolutionary, he must try his own ideas, and it is normal to carry out dictatorship after the early bourgeois revolution and it is a stable period of restoration and the fruits of the revolution.“England was drifting toward authoritarian rule. Commercial, military, and bureaucratic modernization did not necessarily mean enlightened progress toward democratic government. In April 1653, Cromwell dismissed what remained of Parliament with the words, You are no Parliament . . . I will put an end to your sitting. The Council of State was also abolished. Though Cromwell believed he had removed the last obstacle to constitutional reform, actually he created the foundation of a military dictatorship, with the army as the main pillar of the state.”5Cromwell originally intended to build an enlightened and democratic government, but he didnt realize that the result will become different after he removed the last obstacle to constitutional reform. Whats more, Cromwell destroyed the Parliament which had a long-term corruption and a sharp conflict with the bourgeoisie and many of the people. Cromwell wanted a regime to protect the profit of the bourgeoisie and new nobility so he did some things which we regard it as a serious crime, its not appropriate. We cant deny the fact that Cromwells dictatorship is the integrated result of politics, economy, and various situations and it is in accordance with the profit of new productivity in the rising period.CONCLUSIONSFor Cromwell, whether it is praise or blame, we shouldnt forget the objective environment of the revolution and we cant isolate revolutionary and historical environment. “Leaving the influence and restriction of environment and social relations to study his merits and demerits, it is difficult to make a comprehensive evaluation.”6 Cromwell is a great bourgeois revolutionary, he led the great revolutionary movement to overthrow feudal dynasty and defend the revolution, although he had exposed the deficiency and limitations, the era of the bourgeoisie was not mature and we cant simply put the fault to him. If we discuss his crackdown on pro-democracy movement beyond his age, we cant get the right answer and this way is not appropriate. “We should b