richard51 Posted February 5, 2018 Author Share Posted February 5, 2018 Look at what he did for India.In his nastyness he was indeed a great deal less "successful" than Herr Hitler. Both bad guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Do you mean the famine, Richard? Check the facts on that first before spouting off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DraytonBoy Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 If the time is right to vilify Churchill then the same must apply to countless Kings, Queens, Emperors etc. We'll be told next that Stalin was a boy scout in comparison to Winnie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard51 Posted February 5, 2018 Author Share Posted February 5, 2018 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29701767Its sometimes down to opinion WB - but he definitely was no saint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patf Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Who said he was? Not me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomoss Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 I'm not sure any of his contemporaries considered him a racist.But he definitely disliked Huns................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harnser Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 This is where he got it from, a puff piece from the independant.http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/world-history/winston-churchill-adolf-hitler-no-better-shashi-tharoor-indian-politician-post-colonialist-author-a7641681.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickP Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Just about right Hanser, a piece of puff from a Russian owned propaganda rag. What more could you expect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomoss Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Probably the first thing he ever read about Churchill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard51 Posted February 5, 2018 Author Share Posted February 5, 2018 Harnster - NO that was not where I got it from. But thanks for the reference.WB (rather too right wing for me) will be honest enough to confirm that this india issue was raised on this forum, I think before that reference.Nb Why do you think that it was incorrect BTW?NB that reference is a good example as to why the UK will not get too many favours from past colonial countries - again the result of right wing ideologists (imperialists etc)NB2 my first knowledge of WC was how wonderful he was. Though nort a historian, my basic instinct is to always question what I am told - sadly not everybody takes that approach! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Concerning India, look at this. A rather more balanced view:https://winstonchurchill.hillsdale.edu/did-churchill-cause-the-bengal-famine/And,yes, Richard that was quoted earlier. But I am wary of mickey mouse academics on the make Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard51 Posted February 5, 2018 Author Share Posted February 5, 2018 Agreed, BBC not the best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard51 Posted February 5, 2018 Author Share Posted February 5, 2018 For goodness sake WB is this an unbiased source!!!https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillsdale_CollegeNB just done a quick tally of political alumni (excluding justices) and 11/14 were republican. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Doubt there are any, Richard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard51 Posted February 5, 2018 Author Share Posted February 5, 2018 Delving deeper:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Gilbertfor those who want to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Richard, I have no doubt about the integrity of Martin Gilbert and his fellows, never did, but my doubts persist about some of the most recent criticism of Churchill by more recent academics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard51 Posted February 5, 2018 Author Share Posted February 5, 2018 Mmmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lindal1000 Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 I haven't read the whole thread but does any of this matter? The man belonged to a different era and is long dead. I'm not sure that I care that much about him , what he did or what he was like. We've got plenty of modern day despots to worry about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybanana Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 [quote user="richard51"]Mmmmm[/quote]Dr. Tharoor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alittlebitfrench Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 Lindal wrote: "We've got plenty of modern day despots to worry about".I would not describe homeless FE forum members as depots? Well yes, some perhaps. Don't worry, they will find another forum. Or maybe a park bench in the Dordogne to wine on. Lol I could imagine drunken Brits in a park in Sarlat rambling on about about living in France. "I used to be a important you know". "I was an executive". "And now look at me". "I run a fecking Gîte....with no customers". "And don't get me started about French plumbers". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinBretagne Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 Or maybe a park bench in the Dordogne to wine on. That sentence is almost as good as the one you used with the missing apostrophe in the Westerns’ thread. Surely they are not mistakes, you must be doing it on purpose. Real subtle humour! Brilliant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DraytonBoy Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 There is a growing trend to re-visit history and look again with 21st century eyes at events and people. In many southern states in the US statues of confederate generals are being taken down and across the country sports teams with names associated with Native American tribes are being encouraged to re-name.IMO why should learn from history not rip it to pieces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinBretagne Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 I couldn’t agree more. Different times, different experiences, different values. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoddy Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 I was brought up by parents who almost worshipped "good old Winne". Recent history was not on the syllabus at school.When I first met my late husband's maiden great-aunts who lived in a small farm on the edge of the moors in the West Riding and were very straight-laced old-fashioned Liberals, I was shocked that they always referred to Churchill as 'that turncoat".As Brit said different times different values.This is doing the rounds this morning -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhHB0dOVOYs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard51 Posted February 6, 2018 Author Share Posted February 6, 2018 In 1999, the national curriculum for history for schools in England stated:"History fires pupils‘ curiosity about the past in Britain and the wider world. Pupils consider how the past influences the present, what past societies were like, how these societies organised their politics, and what beliefs and cultures influenced people‘s actions. As they do this, pupils develop a chronological framework for their knowledge of significant events and people. They see the diversity of humanexperience, and understand more about themselves as individuals and members of society. What they learn can influence their decisions about personal choices, attitudes and values. In history, pupils find evidence, weigh it up and reach their own conclusions. To do this they need to be able to research, sift through evidence, and argue for their point of view—skills that are prized in adult life."As somebody who considers himself to be more of a scientist that an"arty" type subject person, I find the lack of understanding about the use of history demonstrated on here to be truely sad.https://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-library/Library%20Notes/2011/LLN%202011-030%20TeachingHistorySchoolsFP2.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.