The House of Commons has a strict code of etiquette, with many traditions and conventions governing the making of speeches. How are the structure and content of Churchill’s “Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat” speech affected by the strictures of this system? Do the constraints influence the speech’s effectiveness?

Clement Attlee, Churchill’s successor to the role of prime minister, described Churchill’s speeches during the war as “expressing the will not only of Parliament but of the whole nation.” Is this claim true of “Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat,” given the views of the British public at the time? Have viewpoints changed significantly in the present day, and if so, in what way?

Churchill describes war as an “ordeal of the most grievous kind” (Paragraph 6), addressing a nation that just endured the First World War. Nonetheless, Churchill still presents War as a Necessary Evil, claiming that “without victory, there can be no survival” (Paragraph 4). How does this view of war hold up in the modern world? Are there other instances in history where victory in war was seen as the only possible means of survival?