XPost: alt.war.world-war-two

Her Majesty's Realms ·
Follow
Answered by
Tom Curran
Mon

Does Churchill remain revered in the UK, or do modern people frown over
his racism and avoid praising him?
I know this is going to hurt you. Shock you. Completely stun you. But,
trust me, it’s for your own good.

You have been taught, for years, about racism, the ultimate evil. The
thing that has caused all the world’s woes. The sin that can never be forgiven.

But what if I told you there was something even worse?

Really.

You see, in 1939 England was faced with the ultimate challenge - the
loss of its very existence. An enemy was abroad. A powerful, evil enemy
that would stop at nothing to overrun and annihilate the nation and its society. An enemy that had already done horrific, inhuman things to
others it had conquered. And there was only one person powerful enough
to stop the threat, to defeat the tyrant enemy. Only one person - a
racist. And even worse, an old, white, cis male.

The conflict was almost too much. Which was worse? To be overrun and
wiped out by an enemy of unspeakable ferociousness and cruelty? Or to be
saved by such a person?

Well, the people chose. They decided that survival mattered more than
holding the correct beliefs. They decided that, even though many would
be offended, it was better to be offended and alive, than to die happily knowing that one’s death was pure, innocent of political and social error.

Incredible, isn’t it? Today, people, including your teachers, will tell
you that the English, in 1939, chose wrongly. That Churchill, that
racist male, should never have been allowed near the levers of power.
But I have a secret for you. And please, don’t tell your teachers. They
will be shocked. And will probably punish you.

Had your teachers had their way in 1939, you probably wouldn’t be here.
The world would be dominated by Nazis and other autocratic powers.
Democracy would have been destroyed. And, no, life wouldn’t be ideal - because in that world, being Black, or gay, or female, or disabled, all
meant death.

That’s right. A white, cis, racist male led the fight against all that.
And your teachers would have you believe that he was the problem.

10.6K viewsView 912 upvotesView 2 sharesSubmission accepted by
Justin Mihalick
81 comments from
Rupert Sheard
and more

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.war.world-war-two

On 08/01/2022 16:14, a425couple wrote:

Does Churchill remain revered in the UK, or do modern people frown over
his racism and avoid praising him?

Churchill was an alcoholic warmonger who sacrificed the British Empire
for his own selfish aims during WWII. (A war the British couldn't win
without help from the USA.) *If* Winston Churchill is still revered in
the UK it's only because history is written by the victors.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.war.world-war-two

On 1/8/2022 9:13 AM, Blueshirt wrote:

On 08/01/2022 16:14, a425couple wrote:

Does Churchill remain revered in the UK, or do modern people frown
over his racism and avoid praising him?

Churchill was an alcoholic warmonger

Perhaps.

He certainly repeatedly warned about Germany
rearming, and becoming belligerent.
Turns out, Churchill was right.

who sacrificed the British Empire
for his own selfish aims during WWII.

I can not think of any UK leader who
would have done an overall better job.

Who would you suggest?

(A war the British couldn't win
without help from the USA.) *If* Winston Churchill
is still revered in
the UK it's only because history is written by the victors.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.war.world-war-two

On 11/01/2022 15:55, a425couple wrote:

On 1/8/2022 9:13 AM, Blueshirt wrote:

On 08/01/2022 16:14, a425couple wrote:

Does Churchill remain revered in the UK, or do modern people frown
over his racism and avoid praising him?

Churchill was an alcoholic warmonger

Perhaps.

He certainly repeatedly warned about Germany
rearming, and becoming belligerent.
Turns out, Churchill was right.

Belligerent, but not necessarily towards the British Empire as such. AH
was always looking east ("living space") after reclaiming 'German' lands
lost through Versailles. By most reliable accounts AH would have been
quite happy to have peace with Britain... once he got the bits of
Central Europe that he wanted!

who sacrificed the British Empire for his own selfish aims during WWII.

I can not think of any UK leader who
would have done an overall better job.

Who would you suggest?

It's quite possible that a leader that was happy to look for peace
before war might have done a better job, we'll never know. Churchill was
quite happy to pursue a war that the UK couldn't actually afford, which ultimately bankrupted Britain because of all the borrowing she had to do
to pay for it.

The British went to war in essence to defend the balance of power in
Europe and safeguard Britain's position in the world, but ultimately
ended up doing the opposite!

So no, looking at the bigger picture I don't think Winston Churchill is
as great a leader as some people have made him out to be.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.war.world-war-two

On 1/11/2022 2:04 PM, Blueshirt wrote:

On 11/01/2022 15:55, a425couple wrote:

On 1/8/2022 9:13 AM, Blueshirt wrote:

On 08/01/2022 16:14, a425couple wrote:

Does Churchill remain revered in the UK, or do modern people frown
over his racism and avoid praising him?

Churchill was an alcoholic warmonger

Perhaps.

He certainly repeatedly warned about Germany
rearming, and becoming belligerent.
Turns out, Churchill was right.

Belligerent, but not necessarily towards the British Empire as such. AH
was always looking east ("living space") after reclaiming 'German' lands
lost through Versailles. By most reliable accounts AH would have been
quite happy to have peace with Britain... once he got the bits of
Central Europe that he wanted!

who sacrificed the British Empire for his own selfish aims during WWII.

I can not think of any UK leader who
would have done an overall better job.

Who would you suggest?

It's quite possible that a leader that was happy to look for peace
before war might have done a better job, we'll never know. Churchill was quite happy to pursue a war that the UK couldn't actually afford, which ultimately bankrupted Britain because of all the borrowing she had to do
to pay for it.

The British went to war in essence to defend the balance of power in
Europe and safeguard Britain's position in the world, but ultimately
ended up doing the opposite!

So no, looking at the bigger picture I don't think Winston Churchill is
as great a leader as some people have made him out to be.

Well, the UK, and much of the civilized world was at
war with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy well before
Churchill was made Prime Minister.

I do not think there are many people who think that
the world would be better off if Hitler was just
left alone to finish off USSR and the Jews.

I'm reminded of the classic warning, "Your Millage
May Vary". Good Luck.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: alt.war.world-war-two

On 16/01/2022 16:49, a425couple wrote:

On 1/11/2022 2:04 PM, Blueshirt wrote:

On 11/01/2022 15:55, a425couple wrote:

On 1/8/2022 9:13 AM, Blueshirt wrote:

It's quite possible that a leader that was happy to look for peace
before war might have done a better job, we'll never know. Churchill
was quite happy to pursue a war that the UK couldn't actually afford,
which ultimately bankrupted Britain because of all the borrowing she
had to do to pay for it.

The British went to war in essence to defend the balance of power in
Europe and safeguard Britain's position in the world, but ultimately
ended up doing the opposite!

So no, looking at the bigger picture I don't think Winston Churchill
is as great a leader as some people have made him out to be.

Well, the UK, and much of the civilized world was at
war with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy well before
Churchill was made Prime Minister.

Pre-1939 Poland must have been very important to them... it's a pity
they seemed to forget that post-1945! Maybe the war was really about
something else and Poland was just an excuse?

I do not think there are many people who think that
the world would be better off if Hitler was just
left alone to finish off USSR and the Jews.

Maybe central Europe after a war where the Soviets had been beaten - and
with no Iron Curtain and cold war - might have been a better place in
the long run? After all, WWII wasn't much of a victory for the freedom
of people in Eastern Europe was it?

I'm reminded of the classic warning, "Your Millage
May Vary".

It does!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)