And that's totally understandable for the late 18th century. He was also a very fine admiral but the main thing is that we teach people the whole package and not just the sweet bits.
Winston Churchill
- Thread starter Cascarino
- Start date
I agree. And statues only get torn down when we don't do this or indeed have any sort of adult conversation as a country about the discordance between the idealised historical figures and the reality of their lives, especially when looked at through a current day lens.
How many times do you want to go in this circle before you listen?
Actually NO, the vast majority didn't know that, because of his whitewashed history since 1945.
Once we get rid of last remnants of 'imperialist jingoism' within UK culture, which is a majority cause for existing racism, we will get onto real issues.
My only prejudice is against Winston Churchill and I own it with pride
Really. This is your style to double down. It's a simple mistake to make if you believe that a person would refer to Mandela by his first name when the biggest effing statue in Britain is of Horatio Nelson.
Never mind, mustn't derail the thread.
Do you feel better now? I hate to disappoint you but I still stand by what I just said. I thought it would be petty to bring up that you still mentioned Gandhi multiple times. But clearly you got something else going on in your head.
What a way to derail a movement by talking about statues. It should be about there here and now. It shouldn't be about lets dig into the past and see what we can knock down next.
You'll be very hard pressed to find someone who didn't believe in white supremacy 100 plus years ago. What are you going to do knock everything down?
Another thing I've noticed in this thread and a few others by certain posters, is blanket statements like the Uk is racist. White people are racist and they don't even know.
I have never been racist in my entire life. Like many many other people haven't, subconsciously or otherwise.
I've not been in this thread for a few days now and we are still going round in circles.
You'll be very hard pressed to find someone who didn't believe in white supremacy 100 plus years ago. What are you going to do knock everything down?
Another thing I've noticed in this thread and a few others by certain posters, is blanket statements like the Uk is racist. White people are racist and they don't even know.
I have never been racist in my entire life. Like many many other people haven't, subconsciously or otherwise.
I've not been in this thread for a few days now and we are still going round in circles.
Moving on.
Uh huh. Clearly you’re doing great.
So why do you think UK has struggled to solve the 'real issues' (see inside spoiler below) when we've known for decades what they actually are, unless we still have institutional racism inbuilt into our culture and systems? Would like a proper answer please.
The UK has had many paper exercises over the past four decades, all of which have failed to take any appropriate measures or make real change. Here are only some of them.
The Brixton Riots 1981 led to the Lord Scarman Report released in November 1981.
The recommendations led to a massive regeneration program that set off the gentrification of Brixton and the dispersal of a long standing Black community. Over 35+ years the Black community and businesses did not benefit from the money received from the UK government.
Stephen Lawrence's murder led to the McPherson Report published in 1999.
Institutional Racism was the buzz word. What has been done to deconstruct it?
Supposed to receive protection from discrimination under the Equalities Act 2010.
yet we still see evidence of health inequalities, wage disparities along with barriers to employment and work place promotions, which continue to have a disproportionate impact on Black people. This has been furthered evidenced by the recent report comssioned to examine Covid-19 and the impact on BAME communities. A report that has been released without releasing the recommendations.
Baroness McGregor's Review into workplace discrimination published 28 February 2017.
26 Recommendation - None have been implemented.
David Lammy MP - The Lammy Review published in September 2017.
35 recommendations - None have been implemented.
The Angiolino Report into deaths in police custody published in October 2017.
110 recommendations have been made - None have been implemented.
The Home Office Review into Windrush published in 2020.
The 275-page report says the “root cause“ of the scandal can be traced back to legislation of the 1960s, 70s and 80s, some of which had “racial motivations”. 30 Recommendations have been made - None have been implemented.
The Brixton Riots 1981 led to the Lord Scarman Report released in November 1981.
The recommendations led to a massive regeneration program that set off the gentrification of Brixton and the dispersal of a long standing Black community. Over 35+ years the Black community and businesses did not benefit from the money received from the UK government.
Stephen Lawrence's murder led to the McPherson Report published in 1999.
Institutional Racism was the buzz word. What has been done to deconstruct it?
Supposed to receive protection from discrimination under the Equalities Act 2010.
yet we still see evidence of health inequalities, wage disparities along with barriers to employment and work place promotions, which continue to have a disproportionate impact on Black people. This has been furthered evidenced by the recent report comssioned to examine Covid-19 and the impact on BAME communities. A report that has been released without releasing the recommendations.
Baroness McGregor's Review into workplace discrimination published 28 February 2017.
26 Recommendation - None have been implemented.
David Lammy MP - The Lammy Review published in September 2017.
35 recommendations - None have been implemented.
The Angiolino Report into deaths in police custody published in October 2017.
110 recommendations have been made - None have been implemented.
The Home Office Review into Windrush published in 2020.
The 275-page report says the “root cause“ of the scandal can be traced back to legislation of the 1960s, 70s and 80s, some of which had “racial motivations”. 30 Recommendations have been made - None have been implemented.
Last edited:
You can only be a fine admiral if you have 100s of massive ships, and in those days you could only have 100s of massive ships if you had a limitless supply of slaves and free labour to make them for you and make them sail. So, no, I dont really even credit him for that.
Clearly, you are not. Carry on making such obvious mistakes and attempting to deflect.
This is why people realise what a huge shitstorm you and a select few have made of this thread so far.
Honestly, people look at you and wonder why they should attempt to listen.
It's perhaps why @Niall has to ask people to be constructive and rein in their aggressive arguments.
Come on Sammy there's no need to be obtuse
Nelson's tactics were kind of instrumental at Trafalgar and lead to British naval supremacy for the next 100 years, gotta recognise that as well as his imperialist mind-setHe was good in The Simpsons too.
Sure, why not? Germany has destroyed almost every remnant of its Nazi past, and anything that's left, is done so with warning signs and proper context.
It may not happen soon, maybe not even in my lifetime, but yes, at some point in next 50 years, every single one will be knocked down. You can choose to get all prickled about it, or you can allow your self stated 'I have never been racist in my entire life' beliefs guide you and support it. Up to you, it's happening either way.
And yes lots of native UK white people are racist and don't even know it. Or are BLM people just out for a laugh?
And my statement was it should be upto white people to prove their decisions are not racist. Eg: I think it should be law that in a job selection process where there are BAME people on list, if BAME is not selected, justification must be given for that choice.
Many such initiatives are needed across all sectors of society to weed out this mental illness.
Last edited:
The UK is still close to world-leading on this one area. Maybe that graph can be commemorated in a statue next; it is exceptional by west European standards.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/mar/02/spirit-45-ken-loach-nhs-history
Seems like a few people in Britain in 1945 thought it was supposed to.
the only fair solution is we have an easily rigged online poll to decide what statues should be where
...or how about one of those famously independent British inquiries?
What’s your problem, mate? I am honestly confused. I am not trying to wind you up, but you are coming across a tad bit unhinged.
Looking back at your contributions I'm sure people will believe you because you say it.What's so wrong with that? Isn't this a generational supremacy purge of the past that do not live upto today's standards....
Sounds good. Hope you feel better now that you’ve gotten it out of your system.
Last edited:
British racists just can't help themselves, its just so deeply ingrained ..... another one bites the dust.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Please do tell me more about how the country should hold your hand through life... ffs.
At what point does it become the individuals fault and not the government? When we all receive a silver spoon at birth and a Bentley off the council at 50?
This country has a deep seeded issue with the self-appointed ‘victim.’
Edit: please also tell me how my ‘peak Bojo bullsh*t’ doesn’t mean that for a huge proportion of the population it’s not an easier or sometimes more economically sound decision to stay home. I can list dozens of staff from my industry alone that have made that very decision. And that’s before the double, treble taxing the govt eek out of the people who have the guts and determination to try start a business and employ them, take all the risk for not so much as a pension.
For the record I can’t stand Bojo and this issue goes way back before the scruffy one.
Edit-edit: This post relates only to my opinion on the flawed govt aid within the country in a general sense, when I say ‘self appointed victim’ that of course does not relate to any one group or race*
Last edited:
My post relates to the economy and govt assistance in general and how the system is flawed, nothing to do with race.
Last I checked you can claim benefits whatever your race.
That is exactly what a society should do. When you need it. I gladly pay a huge amount of tax every year for exactly that.
Such simplistic either or choices are silly. And fault? Please.
And it exactly because I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth nor have inherited wealth or anything like that that I know the value of a social support structure. I don't claim anything but I don't know for sure that I or my offspring won't ever need it. And people can fall off the end of the world very quickly. It doesn't take long of being sick or unavoidably unemployed for you to end up homeless, even living in a society with social security provisions. And living on social securoty is miserable. Not as miserable as starving and being on the street but ....
Empathy doesn't seem to be your string suit.
Those bloody poor people bringing you down. They are so annoying. But at least they distract from BoJo and the 1% with their corporate mates enriching themselves and paying not tax.
Because a) it is untrue for "a huge proportion" and b) when it is true it is because it is designed that way to limit social mobility.
So stop drinking the Tory coolaid.
The unemployed being "lazy" isn't an issue when there aren't enough jobs for everyone. The only ones vacant are due to not paying the market rate for often very shitty employment. If that means the cost of strawberries (or whatever) goes up 5% so what?.
Your graph doesn’t provide much substance, at a glance towards the top over population and the very flawed system I describe no doubt has a major effect.
That said I know what country I would rather be in if I’m unemployed mate, Britain. There is a reason why refugees are desperate to be here and I doubt it’s the lure of our beaches and a full English breakfast.
Of course there should be a social support structure and welfare system, that’s my point, we have one. It’s so good that it stops many from creating a desire to leave it, it’s more profitable to just keep having children than it is to work and for many you get access to better housing. Can you not see the counterproductive effect that has?
There are some problems governments can fix for you and some they can’t.
Ive also lived both sides of the divide, I’ve also seen a mindset in the vast majority of the people I grew up with that further strengthen my opinion on this.
And when you question applying ‘fault’ isn’t that exactly what you are doing with the government?
Everything is the governments fault... if I spent my life thinking that it would have benefitted me very little.
Last edited:
Apparently overpopulation was a problem from 1688 to 1945, and then from 1980 till today. Someone should research birth control 1945-80.
And I notice nothing about how that generation you venerate so much did in fact think it was attempting to create the "utopia" you hate so much.
What’s birth control from 1945 - 1980 got to do with itApparently overpopulation was a problem from 1688 to 1945, and then from 1980 till today. Someone should research birth control 1945-80.
And I notice nothing about how that generation you venerate so much did in fact think it was attempting to create the "utopia" you hate so much.
What I said about Utopia was that winning WW11 was not designed to create financial and healthcare utopia - we were left in massive financial debt to our good friends America whilst their economy grew at an unprecedented level.
America our ‘closest friends’ experienced 15 millions more jobs, a 96% increase in industrial productivity along with corporate tax profits doubling.
Meanwhile they made us pay back every penny for defending the free world whilst Churchill and his cronies struggled to feed the nation.
Every generation tries to create a utopia and a better place for the next generation but that’s not why we went to war is it.
Last edited:
To be honest mate, I’ve absolute no doubt the way you and @entropy attack posters and make stuff up it’s put others off posting in this thread aswel as myself. I can’t put myself across as eloquently as @oates and with as much patience. So I havnt bothered.It's not Churchill or his scribbler that's caused the shitstorm, it's you and me
It seems you are intent on running around with your fingers in your ears screaming racist at everyone with not even a hint of listening or understanding someone else’s point of view.
You Just stop by, post an inflammatory tweet, sometime could be two years old or totally unrelated to this thread With no comment from yourself and then just wait to pounce on someone. It’s amazing to see to be honest.
goodnluck with it all because from where I am you are doing nothing but frustrating people against the cause, but I digress.
You said he was ideologically against Fascism (‘end of’) so you post a link where we find Churchill praising Fascism, and you admit he was continually changing his views. How does that square with your claim? It’s baffling. You’re literally denying the history right in front of your eyes. Churchill did not oppose Fascism. It’s that simple. His only problem with it was when he felt it was detrimental to British interests e.g as we see in his support for the military, Church and Falangist forces in the Spanish Civil War, which he turned back on only once he realised Franco would more likely make Spain an ally of Mussolini and Hitler. These are not the actions of an anti-fascist. Nor are his horrific actions in Greece in 1944. But I’m sure massacring anti-Fascists and supporting pro-Nazi forces in the name of anti-Communism is somehow congruous with Churchill being ideologically against fascism ‘end of’ in your mind.
I don’t want to derail this thread. But I personally think some posters are having an identity crisis. Nothing I’ve pointed out is different from what others have said in this thread. If anything Oates was the one jumping out to reply to me earlier. Feel free to read my posts before you accuse me of calling someone racist.
It could be argued that everybody's stances in this thread are controversial; even those opinions which might called neutral. On that note, I was reading a thread about Elvis Presley, in which some posters called out his lack of political activity or comment during his time as a superstar. Now, in this particular time, it appears that everyone must have an opinion and a position on important matters, and not only famous and potentially influential people.
Yes, it has become controversial to point out a schoolboy error, even one that someone continues to make because it leads to such swings and roundabouts without the schoolboy ever backing up their whataboutery with facts.
You even have a poster who claims he doesn't want to derail the thread when they've done very little else further up the page and in fact on any occasion they are asked to make sense of their deflections and playground diversions. The only thing that occurs to me that doesn't add up about your conjunctive Elvis story is that you have posters who might want to express opinions but are so put off with the quality of debate during this thread that they've been put off by the fear that expressing it will result in being named a racist. The quality of this thread has been brought down to the lowest common denominator's level with attack after attack upon even the most mildest of differing opinion let alone one that wants to support the cause espoused.
I guess it was always going to be the case with this and associated subjects, mate. All that can be asked of posters is to argue in good faith (though not everyone does).
I appreciate your point and certainly this thread could have been only a quarter the length if the debate had been entirely in good faith.
It's such a difficult and potentially ever-widening subject even if debated in good faith. For example, my opinions on Churchill and what he might represent - or even what his statue might represent - are unsophisticated...and yet those opinions are passionately-held and, being so, risk leading the direction of the thread into post-after-post of (possible) irrelevancies. And that's just me, let alone others with their own particular perspectives.
Amen to that. I know I can be quite vocal in my opinions but I never aim them at fellow posters.
I got thick skin but I think I’ve been labelled a racist, uneducated, a Nazi sympathiser, a Churchill sympathiser (which I assume is a thing now) and uneducated. That’s off the top of my head
And to top that verbal assault off I think I’m the only poster who has been warned by admins.But it’s good, I love it, it’s nice to have a bit of back and forth, heated debate. I think it’s fair to say we all want the same outcome.
It’s also sometimes hard to get your opinion across in the way you mean it without writing war and peace in every post in order to not offend anybody. But I agree it’s the posters responsibility to avoid offence so I’m trying to self moderate my posts more going forward.
Thing is though if the topic doesn’t offend anybody then it probably doesn’t need debating.