I'm very comfortable with my view and how it's expressed.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 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.
Have to state that I disagree with this. Any old razzle-dazzle shyster could've pulled off the con, which was likely far more underhand than we'll know for, oh, about a century.There’s no doubt that Churchill was a racist and these views were the foundations of his international decisions. But the other unmistakable truth is we needed his specific skill set at that one moment in time. Identical to Britain needing specifically Boris Johnson to get Brexit over the line.
Overpopulation is clearly not the best predictor of inequality if inequality has been high from 1688-1945 and from 1980-today.What’s birth control from 1945 - 1980 got to do with it
I already posted an article about this which you ignored twice.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.
I read the article, it said that the generation hoped for a utopian future. There’s a shock, every generation does.Overpopulation is clearly not the best predictor of inequality if inequality has been high from 1688-1945 and from 1980-today.
I already posted an article about this which you ignored twice.
Anyway it is clear this is going nowhere.
Oh come on... You know I didn't mean it in that sense, it's a bloody common phrase and almost nobody uses it in the form of a crazed Nazi.
I wonder what poor Vera Lynn, RIP, would think about the actions of these people disrespecting a monument designed to remember those that died to protect the very freedom they are benefiting from.
Trying to find any sort of acceptance to that sort of disrespectful behaviour and permitting people to inflict upset to those who lost family to war is in incredibly unusual hill to choose to die on.
That's the problem rams, Churchill was and still is a rallying cry for those nationalists that you don't like.That’s one of the reasons why I personally am ashamed of our Imperial history and am against any form of nationalism.
From all the history I've seen, once it was clear Chamberlin was not up to the task of fighting Hitler ( a bit like we felt when we realised Moyes was a dud), their was almost unanimous agreement that only Churchill was a big enough cnut to face off vs Hitler. He was hired because of his vicious and uncompromising views, and if the Nazi's could be framed as the real racists, that would give him the sharp purpose to exert his character. It was evidently the right choice, and he is rightly heralded as the man that saved Britain (whatever its national traits were) from the Nazi's. Even as his most devout critic, I credit him with that and agree it was a remarkable achievement in its singular context.Have to state that I disagree with this. Any old razzle-dazzle shyster could've pulled off the con, which was likely far more underhand than we'll know for, oh, about a century.
Simon Cowell? No, you're probably right, mate.So I'm not sure if another shyster could've pulled off the con as well as Boris. Who else do you have in mind?
So am i, and you talk just as much nonsense as you do in the Poch&Ole threads...I'm very comfortable with my view and how it's expressed.
There is no other valid or moral point of view aside from Churchill is a racist, Brits have been lied to about him, and he is a major cause for institutional racism. If I'm making anything up, challenge it with irrefutable evidence and prove me wrong.
I agree, it's a tough gig if you can't see that truth yet. This forum is simply a reflection on what is happening in society.
If you go 'against the cause' because of some guy writing on the internet, I'd suggest you examine what it says about you, not me.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I don't think many disagree with you. Objections are about people calling other people sub-human , well we know where that led us.I have absolutely no sympathy for anyone who gets prosecuted for vandalising war memorials. It's a line that shouldn't be crossed. Statues of famous people are one thing, but the remembrance of ordinary people who died in wars not of their making is quite different. That applies to any war memorial in any country.
My father and his brothers spent years and years fighting in foreign countries in the last war. They didn't want to go, they were all peaceful men, but they were called up. My father came through it unscathed (at least physically), but the fact that he would never talk about his experiences showed the impact it had on him. This is recent history, people are still around who remember first-hand what it was like.
Just curious what myths Being shattered and what people believing them you mean?I don't think many disagree with you. Objections are about people calling other people sub-human , well we know where that led us.
Don't care about statues, good or bad as long as the whole truth is told of what they represent.
My problem is people only using part of the truth, the myth to further their current agenda. Most don't have a clue that their beliefs are wrong, they believe what's been spoon fed to them. Question is should the myths be shattered once and for all or let them carry on believing the myths because the truth is too painful.
Personally I'm sick of the lies.
Just curious what myths Being shattered and what people believing them you mean?
Shortly, nothing in the teaching of history will reflect what really happened, the 'airbrushing' brigade seem to be in full flow.Do they teach real history in schools these days or make it up as they go along?
You are actually unbelievable You'd do the cause you're trying to serve a favour by staying silent. But please do go on sowing discord.There is no other valid or moral point of view aside from Churchill is a racist, Brits have been lied to about him, and he is a major cause for institutional racism.
Well said.Shortly, nothing in the teaching of history will reflect what really happened, the 'airbrushing' brigade seem to be in full flow.
The phrase about "if history teaches us anything its is that we never learn anything from history..."will become gloriously true!
I know its hard to admit what you thought was was not. Else lets see your facts that disprove me.You are actually unbelievable You'd do the cause you're trying to serve a favour by staying silent. But please do go on sowing discord.
Do you find it effective to argue facts with fanatical race ideologues on the right? It's equally fruitless with the ones on the left, I assure you.I know its hard to admit what you thought was was not. Else lets see your facts that disprove me.
So you cant. Thought so. And thanks for admitting your identity too.Do you find it effective to argue facts with fanatical race ideologues on the right? It's equally fruitless with the ones on the left, I assure you.
I've tried both, rarely works. Better to let them expose their own ideology. Please go on.So you cant. Thought so. And thanks for admitting your identity too.
And if you think I'm 'leftist', then you have real issues of empathy and comprehension about political ideology.
Shortly, nothing in the teaching of history will reflect what really happened, the 'airbrushing' brigade seem to be in full flow.
The phrase about "if history teaches us anything its is that we never learn anything from history..."will become gloriously true!
Well said.
Let's face the facts:
Nobody is perfect.
Humans make mistakes.
We hear what we want to hear (hence social media).
Times change as do attitudes.
Politics are mainly about power and personal gain.
The list goes on.
So. Why should we not accept history for what it is. The past. Good or bad is the past.
Far far more relevant and important is to shape the future. And the future holds numerous significant challenges. Both individually and collectively.
That is where we should be focusing our efforts.
Make the future better than the past.
That is the real priority.
You are right.Agree with both of you.
The truth is out there though (sounds like the X Files).
The future though is shaped by the past and if the past is in denial and no lessons are learnt then the errors of the past continue into the future.
Couldn’t they have just done her handing out a couple of plates of turkey twizzlers, chips and bean?It's supposed to be a mother offering food to her children. Apparently.
1 bean, a bit meanCouldn’t they have just done her handing out a couple of plates of turkey twizzlers, chips and bean?
Women like winners.NSFW?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
You'd think right? But then the Health & Safety get involved, start asking about Use By dates, safe storage, rat droppings. Nah, can't get fresher than the booby food Pexbo, you should know this stuff.Couldn’t they have just done her handing out a couple of plates of turkey twizzlers, chips and bean?
Of course I agree with you. But it seems it's selective outrage in UK.I have absolutely no sympathy for anyone who gets prosecuted for vandalising war memorials. It's a line that shouldn't be crossed. Statues of famous people are one thing, but the remembrance of ordinary people who died in wars not of their making is quite different. That applies to any war memorial in any country.
My father and his brothers spent years and years fighting in foreign countries in the last war. They didn't want to go, they were all peaceful men, but they were called up. My father came through it unscathed (at least physically), but the fact that he would never talk about his experiences showed the impact it had on him. This is recent history, people are still around who remember first-hand what it was like.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I don't really mind what statues stay or go, they are only statues in the end, provided there's some due process for it. I'm not a massive fan of mobs in general. If crowds are taking it into their own hands, that's probably because of an absent or failing, or unrepresentative due process.Very little I’d disagree with here:
The history wars
The statues erected at the height of imperial power and prejudice do not belong in 21st-century Britain. But toppling monuments will not help us properly understand our past or resolve our present troubles.
https://www.newstatesman.com/2020/06/history-wars
You'd think right? But then the Health & Safety get involved, start asking about Use By dates, safe storage, rat droppings. Nah, can't get fresher than the booby food Pexbo, you should know this stuff.
Thanks for posting. The bit about Gove demonstrates that historical whitewashing remains an active Tory Government strategy, and must be fought at every step.Very little I’d disagree with here:
The history wars
The statues erected at the height of imperial power and prejudice do not belong in 21st-century Britain. But toppling monuments will not help us properly understand our past or resolve our present troubles.
https://www.newstatesman.com/2020/06/history-wars
Which part do you disagree with? I feel like getting rid of statues is barely anything if we are to actually address the issue. I also think the latter part of the article is kinda unnecessary. Instead, he should've shed more light on the works of people like Tuhiwai Smith and others who have spent their entire lives developing ways to specifically address this issue.Very little I’d disagree with here:
The history wars
The statues erected at the height of imperial power and prejudice do not belong in 21st-century Britain. But toppling monuments will not help us properly understand our past or resolve our present troubles.
https://www.newstatesman.com/2020/06/history-wars
I wouldn’t be sure about labeling Cromwell’s campaign in Ireland “genocide” - but then again, I’m a bit skeptical of the utility of this term in any kind of pre-modern context (a discussion for a different thread maybe), and I’m unsure where exactly Cromwell would fall. I’d also need to think a bit more about the examples he uses in the last part of the article and their relation to each other. But as I implied, these are minor quibbles.Which part do you disagree with? I feel like getting rid of statues is barely anything if we are to actually address the issue. I also think the latter part of the article is kinda unnecessary. Instead, he should've shed more light on the works of people like Tuhiwai Smith and others who have spent their entire lives developing ways to specifically address this issue.
Well..the solution is decolonization, isn’t it? The trap that we keep falling into is expecting historians to offer some sort of solution. But it isn’t their job to do so. The solution lies with black, indigenous researchers like Smith who not just studied but developed techniques to decolonize.I wouldn’t be sure about labeling Cromwell’s campaign in Ireland “genocide” - but then again, I’m a bit skeptical of the utility of this term in any kind of pre-modern context (a discussion for a different thread maybe), and I’m unsure where exactly Cromwell would fall. I’d also need to think a bit more about the examples he uses in the last part of the article and their relation to each other. But as I implied, these are minor quibbles.
I’m not familiar with Smith, how does her work relate to this issue do you think?