Why can't Britain handle the truth about Winston Churchill?

[Tommy Tainant]

Why can't Britain handle the truth about Winston Churchill? | Priyamvada Gopal

Nothing, it seems, can be allowed to tarnish the national myth – as I found when hosting a Cambridge debate about his murkier side, says academic Priyamvada Gopal

www.theguardian.com

Even his contemporaries found his views on race shocking. In the context of Churchill’s hard line against providing famine relief to Bengal, the colonial secretary, Leo Amery, remarked: “On the subject of India, Winston is not quite sane … I didn’t see much difference between his outlook and Hitler’s.”

Its because we are programmed to flap like seals when the "glory" of empire and our outdated societal norms are discussed.
Its good that someone has come out and said it. Interesting observations about right wing authoritarians marching against different ideas. Hypocritical bastards.

 

[shockedcanadian]

Why can't Britain handle the truth about Winston Churchill? | Priyamvada Gopal

Nothing, it seems, can be allowed to tarnish the national myth – as I found when hosting a Cambridge debate about his murkier side, says academic Priyamvada Gopal

www.theguardian.com

Even his contemporaries found his views on race shocking. In the context of Churchill’s hard line against providing famine relief to Bengal, the colonial secretary, Leo Amery, remarked: “On the subject of India, Winston is not quite sane … I didn’t see much difference between his outlook and Hitler’s.”

Its because we are programmed to flap like seals when the "glory" of empire and our outdated societal norms are discussed.
Its good that someone has come out and said it. Interesting observations about right wing authoritarians marching against different ideas. Hypocritical bastards.

He was a product of his time. It both formed his biases, his drinking habits, and, his patriotism.

He was imperfect. Not unlike every model that ever lived. You can't cancel and cleanse every human for their imperfections, or we'd have nothing left.

 

[jbrownson0831]

Why can't Britain handle the truth about Winston Churchill? | Priyamvada Gopal

Nothing, it seems, can be allowed to tarnish the national myth – as I found when hosting a Cambridge debate about his murkier side, says academic Priyamvada Gopal

www.theguardian.com

Even his contemporaries found his views on race shocking. In the context of Churchill’s hard line against providing famine relief to Bengal, the colonial secretary, Leo Amery, remarked: “On the subject of India, Winston is not quite sane … I didn’t see much difference between his outlook and Hitler’s.”

Its because we are programmed to flap like seals when the "glory" of empire and our outdated societal norms are discussed.
Its good that someone has come out and said it. Interesting observations about right wing authoritarians marching against different ideas. Hypocritical bastards.

You nutbags should be glad he wasn't like pantywaist Neville Chamberlain. There wouldn't be a Great Britain today

 

[Mac-7]

Churchill was the greatest leader of any country in the 20th Century

it serves no purpose to focus on your petty complaints

no purpose whatsoever

He was your hero and if brits want to trash him thats none of my business

but I still consider him a great man

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Churchill was the greatest leader of any country in the 20th Century

it serves no purpose to focus on your petty complaints

no purpose whatsoever

He was your hero and if brits want to trash him thats none of my business

but I still consider him a great man

He was a fucking monster.

 

[Mac-7]

He was a fucking monster.

Thats a matter of opinion

Churchill led Great Britain during the darkest hour in your history

and will continue to be an honored figure in America no matter how the ungrateful brits see him now

 

[Lastamender]

Why can't Britain handle the truth about Winston Churchill? | Priyamvada Gopal

Nothing, it seems, can be allowed to tarnish the national myth – as I found when hosting a Cambridge debate about his murkier side, says academic Priyamvada Gopal

www.theguardian.com

Even his contemporaries found his views on race shocking. In the context of Churchill’s hard line against providing famine relief to Bengal, the colonial secretary, Leo Amery, remarked: “On the subject of India, Winston is not quite sane … I didn’t see much difference between his outlook and Hitler’s.”

Its because we are programmed to flap like seals when the "glory" of empire and our outdated societal norms are discussed.
Its good that someone has come out and said it. Interesting observations about right wing authoritarians marching against different ideas. Hypocritical bastards.

Britain can't handle the truth about Islam either. That is a more pressing problem than trashing Churchill.

 

[surada]

Churchill was the greatest leader of any country in the 20th Century

it serves no purpose to focus on your petty complaints

no purpose whatsoever

He was your hero and if brits want to trash him thats none of my business

but I still consider him a great man

Churchill approved gassing Kurds and Iraqis in 1920.

The 1920s British air bombing campaign in Iraq - BBC News

The 1920s British air bombing campaign in Iraq

British planes are involved in a third air campaign over Iraq in 23 years. But the RAF has bombed Iraq before - more than 90 years ago.

www.bbc.com

Oct 07, 2014 · As war secretary in Lloyd George's coalition government, Churchill had to square huge military budget cuts with British determination to maintain a grip on its mandate in Iraq. …

 

[Sunsettommy]

Why can't Britain handle the truth about Winston Churchill? | Priyamvada Gopal

Nothing, it seems, can be allowed to tarnish the national myth – as I found when hosting a Cambridge debate about his murkier side, says academic Priyamvada Gopal

www.theguardian.com

Even his contemporaries found his views on race shocking. In the context of Churchill’s hard line against providing famine relief to Bengal, the colonial secretary, Leo Amery, remarked: “On the subject of India, Winston is not quite sane … I didn’t see much difference between his outlook and Hitler’s.”

Its because we are programmed to flap like seals when the "glory" of empire and our outdated societal norms are discussed.
Its good that someone has come out and said it. Interesting observations about right wing authoritarians marching against different ideas. Hypocritical bastards.

Yawn...... Zzzzzzzzzzzzz

Go beat up on someone still alive, it takes raw courage to do that I know......

 

[Mac-7]

Churchill approved gassing Kurds and Iraqis in 1920.

You make it sound like Churchill did it all by himself

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Why can't Britain handle the truth about Winston Churchill? | Priyamvada Gopal

Nothing, it seems, can be allowed to tarnish the national myth – as I found when hosting a Cambridge debate about his murkier side, says academic Priyamvada Gopal

www.theguardian.com

Even his contemporaries found his views on race shocking. In the context of Churchill’s hard line against providing famine relief to Bengal, the colonial secretary, Leo Amery, remarked: “On the subject of India, Winston is not quite sane … I didn’t see much difference between his outlook and Hitler’s.”

Its because we are programmed to flap like seals when the "glory" of empire and our outdated societal norms are discussed.
Its good that someone has come out and said it. Interesting observations about right wing authoritarians marching against different ideas. Hypocritical bastards.

Because you've become a clot of pansies.

 

[surada]

Churchill approved gassing Kurds and Iraqis in 1920.

You make it sound like Churchill did it all by himself

Arthur Harris who also bombed Dresden gassed the Iraqi Arabs and Kurds.
Saddam was hanged for the same thing.

 

[cnm]

He was a product of his time. It both formed his biases, his drinking habits, and, his patriotism.

Yes. A drunk, racist, imperialist.

 

[cnm]

Churchill led Great Britain during the darkest hour in your history

He managed to kill an awful lot of New Zealanders with sorely mistaken campaigns.

 

[GLASNOST]

Why can't Britain handle the truth about Winston Churchill? | Priyamvada Gopal

Nothing, it seems, can be allowed to tarnish the national myth – as I found when hosting a Cambridge debate about his murkier side, says academic Priyamvada Gopal

www.theguardian.com

Even his contemporaries found his views on race shocking. In the context of Churchill’s hard line against providing famine relief to Bengal, the colonial secretary, Leo Amery, remarked: “On the subject of India, Winston is not quite sane … I didn’t see much difference between his outlook and Hitler’s.”

Its because we are programmed to flap like seals when the "glory" of empire and our outdated societal norms are discussed.
Its good that someone has come out and said it. Interesting observations about right wing authoritarians marching against different ideas. Hypocritical bastards.

I plead ignorance.

 

[Mac-7]

Harris who also bombed Dresden gassed the Iraqi Arabs and Kurds.
Saddam was hanged for the same thing.

Does any of that change the outcome of WWII?

no

Churchill is still a great man

 

[Mac-7]

He managed to kill an awful lot of New Zealanders with sorely mistaken campaigns.

If you mean Gallopoli in WWI yes that was a blunder

the governemnt also sent colonial troops - possibly New Zealaners to Hong Kong just before the Japanese invaded

so Chruchill was not a perfect leader - only a great one

 

[DGS49]

The article and some of the commentary in this thread are sophomoric. NOBODY claims that Churchill was a perfect man - far from it. He was a flawed man who accomplished great things at a time when Western Civilization itself was on the brink. One must not assess historical figures against sensitivities of the modern era, any more than one would assess a modern-day politician against the social standards of generations past. Context is everything. And to suppose that Churchill and Hitler were two side of the same coin because Churchill held some racist views? I don't recall him suggesting mass extermination of any group of inferiors, eh?

As for Churchill's "racism," the entire creation and maintenance of the British Empire was done with the fervent and seldom-challenged belief that white people were intrinsically superior to brown, yellow and Black people, a position that was supported by a mountain of universal evidence. If one were to "cancel" every historical world leader who held similar views, the history of the world could be contained in a short pamphlet.

Where does this writer think India would be on the world scene today had the British not come in and imposed a bit of order, common law, and modernity? Just another shit-hole country dominated by disease, infighting, and corruption, one might guess.

If they want to hold seminars to examine Churchill's leadership history in context, no one would have a problem with it. But to highlight only his shortcomings through the lens of 21st Century Woke attitudes? Gimme a break. Grow the Fuck up.

 

[jbrownson0831]

The article and some of the commentary in this thread are sophomoric. NOBODY claims that Churchill was a perfect man - far from it. He was a flawed man who accomplished great things at a time when Western Civilization itself was on the brink. One must not assess historical figures against sensitivities of the modern era, any more than one would assess a modern-day politician against the social standards of generations past. Context is everything. And to suppose that Churchill and Hitler were two side of the same coin because Churchill held some racist views? I don't recall him suggesting mass extermination of any group of inferiors, eh?

As for Churchill's "racism," the entire creation and maintenance of the British Empire was done with the fervent and seldom-challenged belief that white people were intrinsically superior to brown, yellow and Black people, a position that was supported by a mountain of universal evidence. If one were to "cancel" every historical world leader who held similar views, the history of the world could be contained in a short pamphlet.

Where does this writer think India would be on the world scene today had the British not come in and imposed a bit of order, common law, and modernity? Just another shit-hole country dominated by disease, infighting, and corruption, one might guess.

If they want to hold seminars to examine Churchill's leadership history in context, no one would have a problem with it. But to highlight only his shortcomings through the lens of 21st Century Woke attitudes? Gimme a break. Grow the Fuck up.

Don't see them with a black queen....not Winston's fault.

 

[cnm]

If you mean Gallopoli in WWI

I mean the Greek campaign and the Italian campaign in WW2 as well. Churchill didn't stint.