Slave Trader Edward Colston's statue torn down in Bristol

mick087

nickkinneg wrote: »

Not sure why the BLM want to pull down Churchill - if he hadn't won the war - they must likely would be living under the Nazis and there wouldn't be any black people to begin with? Would make more sense for the far right to want to take him down? Some people are confusing patriotism with racism. At the end of the day all lives matter.

Churchill didnt win the war.

It took many countries to defeat the Natzis and its alies.
Churchill was without doubt an important figure pointing out Hitler from the start and in rasing the UK spirits but he did not win the war.

Christy42

nickkinneg wrote: »

Not sure why the BLM want to pull down Churchill - if he hadn't won the war - they must likely would be living under the Nazis and there wouldn't be any black people to begin with? Would make more sense for the far right to want to take him down? Some people are confusing patriotism with racism. At the end of the day all lives matter.

I mean the Soviets were massively massively important in the war. Stalin was still scum.

nickkinneg

Christy42 wrote: »

I mean the Soviets were massively massively important in the war. Stalin was still scum.

True - sorry Churchill was an important part of it - I'm sure Putin and China are watching events unfold and UK and US with interest

FrancieBrady

mick087 wrote: »

Churchill didnt win the war.

It took many countries to defeat the Natzis and its alies.
Churchill was without doubt an important figure pointing out Hitler from the start and in rasing the UK spirits but he did not win the war.

The British airbrushed Churchill and they are paying the price for it now. His status if not his statue has come tumbling down because they didn't confront his racism and white supremacist traits.

mick087

Christy42 wrote: »

I mean the Soviets were massively massively important in the war. Stalin was still scum.

They was all important.
Who did the most who did what is subjective.

All countries races should be remembered equally,


If the allies had not of won i really dont think Boards ie would be here today.

nickkinneg

mick087 wrote: »

They was all important.
Who did the most who did what is subjective.

All countries races should be remembered equally,


If the allies had not of won i really dont think Boards ie would be here today.

True - neither would these protests either or any sort of liberties that we have if you did not conform - Nazi's were truly one of the most evil regimes ever - I think even Lucifer himself would be hard pressed to outmatch them

mick087

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The British airbrushed Churchill and they are paying the price for it now. His status if not his statue has come tumbling down because they didn't confront his racism and white supremacist traits.

If the allies had not won the war i think we would not be having a Conversation about racism. As for his statue thats up to the locals and elected to decide.

mick087

nickkinneg wrote: »

True - neither would these protests either or any sort of liberties that we have if you did not conform - Nazi's were truly one of the most evil regimes ever - I think even Lucifer himself would be hard pressed to outmatch them

This is true. Im for changing the situation with the statues but it must be done by the locals and elected. People pulling things down with no accountability is a very very dangerous road.

Tony EH

The Second World War was Winston Churchill's saving grace, both in terms of career and legacy. Up until the opportune moment, his had been in the wilderness and his name was tainted because of his past actions. Not in matters of racial opinions or anything, many of which were shared by his contemporaries (including Hitler) but over the likes of the Dardanelles fiasco in WWI.

Churchill was simply in the right place at the right time in 1940 to take advantage of a situation that got him out of the doldrums he'd found himself in.

But Churchill was no enlightened angel. Far from it and his views on a great many things are eye opening when researched, without the glossy veneer of post war propaganda.

jackboy

nickkinneg wrote: »

I'm sure Putin and China are watching events unfold and UK and US with interest

Id say they think what is happening is hilarious. They can continue to invade other territories and open more concentration camps with impunity. Meanwhile the idiot people in the west are attacking their own police and governments.

Tony EH

mick087 wrote: »

If the allies had not won the war i think we would not be having a Conversation about racism.

It's a mistake to think that any allied nation went to war with Germany over matters of race.

mick087

Tony EH wrote: »

It's a mistake to think that any allied nation went to war with Germany over matters of race.

There are numerous reasons they went to war, and race would of been bottom of the list.

joe40

This Irish love affair with Churchill is curious. Listen to this clip where he says he would have invaded Ireland "quit easily" if the need had arose.

https://youtu.be/7O0wmPIv8CA

De Valera's response is below

https://youtu.be/zbgPpG8pO8U

mick087

nickkinneg wrote: »

True - neither would these protests either or any sort of liberties that we have if you did not conform - Nazi's were truly one of the most evil regimes ever - I think even Lucifer himself would be hard pressed to outmatch them

All these dictatorships empires from the start of time to now are evil. But we hopefully learn and move forward. Some would have you think some are better worse than others. All was built on slaves and cheap labour.

mick087

Tony EH wrote: »

The Second World War was Winston Churchill's saving grace, both in terms of career and legacy. Up until the opportune moment, his had been in the wilderness and his name was tainted because of his past actions. Not in matters of racial opinions or anything, many of which were shared by his contemporaries (including Hitler) but over the likes of the Dardanelles fiasco in WWI.

Churchill was simply in the right place at the right time in 1940 to take advantage of a situation that got him out of the doldrums he'd found himself in.

But Churchill was no enlightened angel. Far from it and his views on a great many things are eye opening when researched, without the glossy veneer of post war propaganda.

I talked to an old war vetran in the early 90s about Churchill, his exact words was.

Hated the man, brilliant war leader, dreadful man.

That was a man who was fighting in Africa.

Tony EH

mick087 wrote: »

There are numerous reasons they went to war, and race would of been bottom of the list.

Race was nowhere on the list at all.

CrankyHaus

Tony EH wrote: »

The Second World War was Winston Churchill's saving grace, both in terms of career and legacy. Up until the opportune moment, his had been in the wilderness and his name was tainted because of his past actions. Not in matters of racial opinions or anything, many of which were shared by his contemporaries (including Hitler) but over the likes of the Dardanelles fiasco in WWI.

Churchill was simply in the right place at the right time in 1940 to take advantage of a situation that got him out of the doldrums he'd found himself in.

But Churchill was no enlightened angel. Far from it and his views on a great many things are eye opening when researched, without the glossy veneer of post war propaganda.

He entered the political wilderness in the 30s over his opposition to granting Home Rule to India, a minority position. His arguments against it were fairly racist by our standards, and even passe by the standards of the day.

Tony EH

mick087 wrote: »

I talked to an old war vetran in the early 90s about Churchill, his exact words was.

Hated the man, brilliant war leader, dreadful man.

That was a man who was fighting in Africa.

Churchill only became a "great" war leader when he learned to butt out of military affairs. He was responsible for the disaster in Narvik in 1940 when his was the First Lord of the Admiralty and tried to strong arm his military leaders with his own opinions of how the war should have been run, despite the fact that he'd buggered up numerous things from a military perspective going back to the Boer War.

When Churchill relegated himself to concentrating on parliamentary speeches and propaganda, he served his purpose. but he was a man who was largely obsessed with securing his own place in history after the war was over, because much of his history left a lot to be desired.

In fairness to Churchill, he did actually learn to butt out. Something which Adolf never could manage and in too many cases, just made things worse for Germany from a military point of view.

mick087

Tony EH wrote: »

Churchill only became a "great" war leader when he learned to butt out of military affairs. He was responsible for the disaster in Narvik in 1940 when his was the First Lord of the Admiralty and tried to strong arm his military leaders with his own opinions of how the war should have been run, despite the fact that he'd buggered up numerous things from a military perspective going back to the Boer War.

When Churchill relegated himself to concentrating on parliamentary speeches and propaganda, he served his purpose. but he was a man who was largely obsessed with securing his own place in history after the war was over, because much of his history left a lot to be desired.

In fairness to Churchill, he did actually learn to butt out. Something which Adolf never could manage and in too many cases, just made things worse for Germany from a military point of view.

I think that was the old war Vetrans point to be honest.

Chicoso

da_miser wrote: »

The Uk is anti white central.
Fly the Union Jack or St.George flag, must be a racist white nazi
Take pride in English achievements, 100% white nazi
They have allowed a small minority of woke idiots to take the Reins, Ireland is a coming up toward the same crossroads on these issues, we have Leo telling us the civil service is too white, i'd expect it to be in a white country, we have foreigners telling us we are nasty racist bigots, Who asked them to come to Ireland. why they stay here if we natives are so bad?
Why are all these woke people and the BAME folk suffering in the white world when they could go to any one of the Wakanda paradises in Africa and live there?

You're funny but Britain brought a lot of this upon themselves with their past

I'm not blaming them entirely they have their good points

Tony EH

CrankyHaus wrote: »

He entered the political wilderness in the 30s over his opposition to granting Home Rule to India, a minority position. His arguments against it were fairly racist by our standards, and even passe by the standards of the day.

Churchill was a man of his class and of his day. He shared numerous opinions that, today, would be reckoned as thoroughly abhorrent if said aloud in public life and he would end up pilloried for it. In fact, there were numerous contemporary voices who did take him to task over his more controversial views as well.

He considered the Indians as a "beastly people" and was a committed Imperialist with all the negative connotations that go along with such ideas. He was also a proponent of forced sterilisation to preserve superior racial characteristics. Something that he would have shared with Hitler's own Aryan contemplations, which weren't a 100 miles away from the average British ruling class opinion on eugenics.

Churchill's image has been carefully stage managed, first by the man himself, and then afterward by the British establishment who continues to put forward a terribly skewed depiction of the man.

FVP3

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Yes, we were part of the British Empire but I don't suppose it matters to you that at the time a lot of the funds were pouring in from the Slave Trade we had our own parliament in Dublin?

It was a protestant Anglo Irish supremacist parliament. "we" my ass.

It even sat in a building build from revenue from the Slave Trade.
That building is still there.
It became the Bank of Ireland.
So, yes. We, as a nation, benefited even though we 'inherited' it.

I mean I am sure there are colonial buildings across the Empire financed by slavery but whomever inherited the buildings still weren't responsible for the Empire.

Trinity has educated a hell of a lot of Irish people - it was founded in the reign of Elizabeth I - do we not benefit from that?
How about UCC? NUIG? UCD? All originally Queen's Colleges and founded in Victoria's reign. Do we not benefit from those?
The original sewage systems.
The roads.
Hospitals.
National Schools.
No lasting benefit?

What about the fact that we are conversing in English? Is that of no benefit either?


1922 did not wipe the slate clean. It created a new chapter in a very long book.

You could do that kind of argument for any part of the British empire. It reads, in fact, like an apology of Empire.

We did not tear down the infrastructure of the old Empire (although we did blow up the documents left from Gaelic Ireland so make of that what you will)- we took it as our own.

Of course, so did every country that was colonised inherit buildings. In fact there are building funded by slavery in state where there

As a people who were colonised, who lost our native culture, laws, and language is it really too much to ask that we could recognise that some of what we benefit from was left behind was build using money earned from the sweat and blood of other people also oppressed by that same empire?

Sure with the proviso that we say that it was the British wot did it. Although we seem to be moving beyond statues to buildings which isn't happening elsewhere. Maybe because we got rid of all the statues.

How other former colonies deal with their history is their own business. They don't need Ireland telling them what they should and should not do - and we wouldn't take kindly to say, India, telling us.

I don't think anybody is telling them what to do, but you are clearly demanding a certain standard in Ireland ( apologies or acknowledgement that "we" did it) that you probably wouldn't apply elsewhere.

In fact even in Bristol, they aren't attacking the buildings funded by slavery except perhaps to rename them. We don't have statues, so its buildings.

Zebra3

mick087 wrote: »

I talked to an old war vetran in the early 90s about Churchill, his exact words was.

Hated the man, brilliant war leader, dreadful man.

That was a man who was fighting in Africa.

Did you ask the man why he was fighting for the British occupation of foreign lands and peoples?

Madeleine Birchfield

The only reason why Winston Churchill has a good reputation in the UK because he led the UK against the Nazis in WWII and allowed the Labour Party to dominate UK domestic policy during the coalition government. Before WWII he was largely viewed in the UK as a pathetic failed politician with failed economic policies and whose actions with Lloyd George in the late 1910s and early 1920s lead to the UK losing Ireland.

mick087

Zebra3 wrote: »

Did you ask the man why he was fighting for the British occupation of foreign lands and peoples?

No i didnt go into all that to be honest. I was talking to him about his role in Africa and Monte Cassino.

Madeleine Birchfield

Also, Churchill was an atheist so seeing some Christians trying to defend Churchill as some defender of Western Civilisation which they equate to Christianity is just mindboggling.

RasTa

Smegging hell

RasTa wrote: »

Great to see these brave patriots heroically defend Britain's monuments against Aunt Aoife.

Zebra3

mick087 wrote: »

No i didnt go into all that to be honest. I was talking to him about his role in Africa and Monte Cassino.

What a pity.

I'd be interested to hear him justify his white supremacism.

mick087

Zebra3 wrote: »

What a pity.

I'd be interested to hear him justify his white supremacism.

The chap is dead now, this was back in the early 90s. When i was living in London i used to help some of the elderly with shopping etc and you would get talking to all sorts of people.

I never got that feeling from him that he felt he was a white supremacist. I got to hear his stories of death and misery. His daughter told me i was one of few people he talked to about his war days.