Don't quote Churchill, you will offend someone

Slick

Veteran
Probably the best leader of his time, despite the obvious flaws.

Please read a good biography of Churchill before making pronouncements on his 'atrocities' and 'racist views'. He committed no atrocities and his views on race 100-years ago cannot be judged by today's standards - generational chauvinism," wrote Twitter user Paul Reid.

"We can't judge historical figures based on modern sensitivities; no one would come out unscathed. Adjusting history to our modern perception is unfair to the times & circumstances that preceded us," commented another.
 
Or don't upset Churchill fans.
 

Slick

Veteran
One of my all time favourites.

When accused by one of them of being 'disgustingly drunk' the Conservative Prime Minister responded: 'My dear, you are ugly, and what’s more, you are disgustingly ugly. But tomorrow I shall be sober and you will still be disgustingly ugly.'
 

Edwardoka

Shambling ruin of a man
While it is unreasonable to expect attitudes of someone long-dead to hold up to contemporary standards, pretty much every person who has ever lived to adulthood will have less than wholesome aspects to their character.

The contrast between an actual historical person and how they are perceived is even more stark when they are deified as a cultural hero.
Anything bad they are implicated in gets glossed over in favour of the traits deemed to be more admirable.

History written by the winners and all that.
 
Location
Reading
2-3 million Indians died of famine about 1943. He did know about it. He was ultimately responsible. Actually the whole cabinet knew about it.
 
Location
Reading
[QUOTE 5404899, member: 76"]Hold on, due to years of decline, and a bloody great big needless war it is all Churchills fault? Don't you think that maybe actually it was Hitler and Hirohito's fault?

With no war to fight, things may have been eased sooner, and rice could have been imported from neighbouring countries, which was obviously problematic as during the early 40's we didn't have much of a trade deal with Japan, and they had taken over many of India's neighbours making free trade extremely problematic.[/QUOTE]

I wasn't saying it was all his fault, but he was PM when it happened. I don't think the Bengal provincial government covered themselves with much credit neither.
 
...his views on race 100-years ago cannot be judged by today's standards - generational chauvinism,"

"We can't judge historical figures based on modern sensitivities; no one would come out unscathed. Adjusting history to our modern perception is unfair to the times & circumstances that preceded us," commented another.
I understand the thinking behind this.

On the other hand, I think a few modern Germans would feel uncomfortable with the logic if applied to our own history. It could all too easily be used to excuse a lot of things, or leave the speaker open to accusations of hypocrisy.
 

subaqua

What’s the point
Location
Leytonstone
Probably the best leader of his time, despite the obvious flaws.

Please read a good biography of Churchill before making pronouncements on his 'atrocities' and 'racist views'. He committed no atrocities and his views on race 100-years ago cannot be judged by today's standards - generational chauvinism," wrote Twitter user Paul Reid.

"We can't judge historical figures based on modern sensitivities; no one would come out unscathed. Adjusting history to our modern perception is unfair to the times & circumstances that preceded us," commented another.

I often wonder if that was because he was a good person or that he knew his political career would have been over if he had ordered the troops to open fire in Tonypandy.

they did open fire in Llanelli , but it is unclear if he ordered them to.
 
Top Bottom