What were the strengths and weaknesses of Eamon de Valera as a political leader?
#625Lab – History. You may also like: Leaving Cert History Guide (€). Credit: Ellis Byrne.
Eamon de Valera was a strong leader during all of this time in politics, lasting nearly sixty years. As Mullaghy notes in his book, Dev the Unvarnished Truth, “W.B Yeats once commented on him De Valera, “He is a living argument more than a living man.” As a political leader, he was strong in many regards. Hehad some weaknesses, though. His political system stemmed from militant republicanism, as he had been the leader of the 3rd Battalion during the 1916 Rising, stationed at Boland’s Mill. This militant beginning led him to have strongly conservative policy when he formed Fianna Fail and was, which he acted on when his party came to power in 1932, after Cumann na nGaedheal. This hobbled the economic development of the country and damaged Anglo Irish relations, especially during the 30’s and the Second World War with Winston Churchill.
A huge strength of De Valera was his fantastical were his strong oratory skills. He was known to give rousing speeches during his time as a political leader, which earned him the nickname of “The Chief” and “The Irish Spaniard”, alluding to his Spanish heritage. After he left the Dail in 1922 with the majority of Sinn Fein TD’s, he gave a speech about his opposition. He famously said, “The majority have no right to do wrong.” This was alluding to the fact that the vote to pass the Anglo-Irish Treaty was won by the Pro-Treaty side, with a majority of votes of 64 to 57. Then again when his party entered the Dail, despite saying for years he would never take the Oath of Allegiance to the King stated in the terms of the Anglo Irish Treaty, he gave another famous speech. He called the Oath, As Mullaghy notes in Dev the Unvarnished Truth, “An empty formula, nothing binding.” His oratory skills were strength of his, as he was capable of convincing anyone to agree with him.
De Valera was an imposing man as well, so his public image was a huge strength of his. He was tall man, with a height of six feet five inches. He was known to buy suits from the famous suit store on Henry Street, Louis Copeland. When compared to others leaders of both Ireland and Europe, he was seen to be stronger and healthier. Compared to W.T Cosgrave and Winston Churchill, who were five feet and four inches tall each, De Valera was seen to be a stronger leader, physically. As well as that, he was known for his striking features, specifically his nose and round spectacles. Another strength of De Valera was his impressive public image, which he took great pride in.
His industrial policies while in power in the 30’s were a strength of his, as he was able to improve them from the previous Cumann na nGaedheal government. He had a strong minister in the form of Sean LeMass, who worked constantly to improve Irish industry. Despite losing the most industrialised part of Ireland with the Government of Ireland Act 1920, which was East Belfast, they were able to improve their industry. Under their government, many industrial companies were set up which are still active today. These include Born na Mona in 1936 and Aer Lingus in 1939. As well as that was they set up the ICC {Industrial Credit Corporation} in 1933, which was similar to the ACC set up by Cumann na nGaedheal. It was meant to help the intake of credit in companies.
However, a weakness of De Valera as a leader was his ineffectiveness of economic growth inability to improve economic growth. Following such a strong protectionist policy, the country was ill-equipped to deal with making their own goods. The Control of Manufactures Act of 1934 attempted to bring into law that a certain amount of Irish people was needed on a foreign company’s board of directors of a foreign company. However, this was ineffective as there is no record of this actually occurring, as companies could just apply to bypass the act. There was very little economic growth in the country during his time in office, which is seen in the shoe industry. Despite making £19 million worth of goods come 1939, they only ever exported 117 pairs of boots. Foreign investment is integral to a countries development economically, but De Valera was weak with dealing with other countries. This is evident when compared to Cumann na nGaedheal’s policy of free trade and Laissez Faire, as seen with the Shannon Scheme of 1927. De Valera was a weak political leader in terms of economic growth.
However, a Another strength of De Valera as a leader was his emphasis on national pride in Ireland. Amidst the scandal of the King of England abdicating with Wallace Simpson in the 1930’s, De Valera brought forth two bills. These were the Constitutional Amendment Bill of 1936 and the External Relations Bill of 1937. These removed the King from the constitution, and he was able to do this under the Statute of Westminster 1931, which said that all dominions of Britain could change a law in their own country. This resulted in the 1937 Bunreacht na Heaireann hÉireann, which became a staple of Irish pride. This had few articles in which made Irish people brim with pride This constitution contained several articles that were designed to instil pride in the Irish people. It allowed the Catholic Church a “special position” in Ireland, which was popular amongst the people due to promoting a Catholic Irish identity against a Protestant English. It also said that “the place for women is in the home”, which was popular to the male dominated country at the time. Although outdated now, during the time period, this was huge statement of Irish independence. It was a strength of De Valera as a leader, as people were now more likely to support him.
As well as that, another strength of his was how he dealt with threats to the Irish State. While in power, there was a rise of Fascism across Europe, specifically in Italy and Germany. It therefore came as no surprise than when Ireland had its own Fascist group, the Blueshirts under Eoin O’Duffy. Xenophobic and violent, the Blueshirts, under the lead of the former Garda Commissioner, were a militant group of fascists. O’Duffy was known as “The Green Duce” and spewed hatred at all of his many meetings and speeches, where his followers would lead the one armed salute to him. In 1933, to commemorate the deaths of Arthur Griffith and Michael Collins, the Blueshirts planned a march in Dublin. Fearing a coup- de-teat coup d’état, similar to the march Mussolini’s March on Rome which overthrew Italy’s leader with Mussolini’s March on Rome. De Valera stooped. He used the Special Powers act to stop the march and the Broy Harriers to enforce it. The group backed down and it was seen as a victory for De Valera. The efficient and quick way in which he dealt with threats to his state is a testament of De Valera’s strength as a leader.
However, a Another significant weakness of De Valera was agriculture his agricultural policy. During the time of Cumann na nGaedheal, Cosgrave signed the Ultimate Financial Agreement Act of 1927. This meant that Ireland would continue to pay both RIC pensions and the Land Annuities, while Britain would drop the £250,000 owed to them from the Civil War. They would pay £3 million each year. Fianna Fail got into power by promising to stop paying these Land Annuities and in 1932, De Valera held the £1.5 million due for the first half of the year back. He cited the fact that the bill was never ratified in the Dail to support his actions but the British still placed a 20% tariff of Irish cattle. Thus began the Economic War. The war damaged Irish cattle sector, as the numbers fells from 775,000 in 1932 to 550,000 in 1938. The number of cattle fell by 5%. Eventually, the war was ended. It began with the Coal-Cattle Act of 1935, which meant both countries would buy more from each other. Ireland more coal and Britain more cattle. This was rectified again in 1936. This was a weakness, as agriculture employed 51% of people in Ireland as a historian FSL Lyons notes, “Upon the wellbeing of agriculture rested the wellbeing of the country as large.”
De Valera was weak in Anglo Irish relations during the Economic War. It ended in 1938 with the Anglo Irish Agreement, which meant there would be a once off payment of £10 million to the British and Ireland would gain their Treaty Ports back. These were the ports of Cobh, Bareheaven and Loughswilly. This meant we could remain neutral during the war. Although it benefited Ireland, this war damaged Anglo-Irish relations. By remaining neutral, De Valera lost an ally in both Churchill and Roosevelt. This was worsened when De Valera sent condolences to the German government after Hitler’s death, which is diplomatic protocol. Despite this, his image was damaged in both England and America. This was a weakness of De Valera as a leader, as it led to more bitterness between the two countries.
Eamon de Valera was an efficient leader. He helped the neediest in his country, as can be seen with the Unemployment Assistance Act of 1936 and the National Health Insurance Act of the same year. He built 132,000 houses between the years 1932 and 1938, resulting his high levels of employment. He set up schemes to helped the needy get homes, which meant that 5,000 Irish people got homes. However, he had some potent weaknesses. His way of acting seemed slevine, as Mullaghy notes “Dev knew of all the atrocities Hitler committed when he sent his condolences.” He also, despite giving them a “special positon” in the country, annoyed the Catholic Church with the Constitution. The Pope sent him a letter saying, “We are neither disappointed or glad. We will remain silence.” De Valera was strong leader in a number of way but also weak in many ways.
Feedback: This essay is a nice length, with a good number of paragraphs of a decent length. You make really good use of quotation, and all of the factual information you include is relevant and helps you to answer the questions. While you focus more on his strengths than his weaknesses, it is not hugely unbalanced. Structure-wise, I would recommend you start of by discussing all of his strengths and then follow up with his weaknesses, as it would allow the essay to flow better, but this is not a major problem. Your introduction sets up the essay well, and answers the question without going in to too much detail, which is great. However, your conclusion is not as string as it almost reads like another paragraph in the main body of the text. You really shouldn’t introduce any new material in the concluding paragraph – if you’re struggling to come up with a conclusion, just sum up what you’ve said in the essay. Otherwise, your only big problem is spelling and syntax. For spelling, make sure that you know the correct spelling of phrases like Bunreacht na hÉireann and coup d’état, as these are likely to come up a lot. You overuse the word ‘however’ in this essay, and repeat the same phrase, ‘However, a weakness of De Valera…’ – try to have a look for alternative ways of phrasing this. Some of your sentences are not structured very well, I’ve suggested alternative ways of structuring them above, so that the essay might flow a bit better.
Cumulative Mark: I’d give each of these paragraphs a mark of around 5 or 6, which would give you around 50 out of 60 cumulative marks. To ensure that you definitely reach the 60, try to bring in another paragraph along the way, or to write a stronger conclusion.
Overall Evaluation: For Overall Evaluation, I’d give this about a 30 out of 40, just because of the lack of fluency in some areas, sometimes poor word choice and the lack of a proper concluding paragraph.
Total mark: approximately 80/100