Posted on 03/30/2018 6:11:49 AM PDT by granada
David Olusoga has claimed Winston Churchill was a war criminal.
And David Olusoga, who co-presents the BBC’s new Civilisations series, said those who criticised tributes to various historical figures should not be derided as “snowflakes”.
Mr Olusoga made his sensational claims during a speech to the Oxfordshire Literary Festival.
Suggesting that "almost all historical figures did good and bad", Mr Olusoga said academics were entering a period of ‘history wars’ in which accepted versions of Britain’s past are being challenged.
He explained: “So while I’m personally glad that Churchill overcame Halifax in early 1940 and it was Churchill who faced the Nazis that year and the years that followed, that doesn’t mean that he wasn’t somebody that wasn’t responsible, or largely responsible, for the Bengal famine of 1943-44.
“It doesn’t mean that he wasn’t someone who took part in things we would consider war crimes in Africa.
“It doesn’t mean that his views, the things he espoused, were shocking to members of his Cabinet, never mind to people at the time.
“We’re going to have to accommodate the fact that these things are true, and there are two sides to these stories and we’re not good at it.”
Mr Olusoga claimed people were brought up with a “certain version” of British history so that some subjects become “sacrosanct”.
(Excerpt) Read more at express.co.uk ...
Every few years, someone accuses Churchill of being a war criminal.
I went to the story but didn’t read it after seeing a picture of Olusoga, who looks like a snowflake’s snowflake.
Applying the tastes, culture, transient sentiment and temporal judgement of one era to another is bigotry.
Without Churchill this idiot would be speaking German.
Yep.
And, he had hundreds of slaves! And, he had “relations” with one of them!!
Same ol’ story.
“doesn’t mean that he wasn’t somebody that wasn’t responsible, or largely responsible, for the Bengal famine of 1943-44.”
Nonsense!
Churchill was a bit preoccupied in that time frame.
He had no responsibility for saving the rest of the world.
The Bengal famine of '43-'44 was due to WORLD WAR TWO, you idiot "historian". And if his reference to Africa refers to Churchill's stint as a young subaltern in the Sudan, let's talk about the "war crimes" committed by the other side before we worry about Britain's response to them . . . they were Islamic fanatics btw, same old story . . .
Where I take issue with people like him is not that they want to study and/or reveal the negative things that great figures from history may have done, but that they tend to maintain a laser-like focus on those negative actions to the point of "redefining" the good things that these people accomplished.
My other problem with them is that they only seem to want to subject white, European & American historical figures to this "revisiting" process. How about "revisiting" Montezuma? Or Shaka Zulu? Or the Islamic African chiefs who sold their own people in to slavery?
Humans of all colors from all continents have been treating each other badly tens of thousands of years - it did not start and end with the British Empire or Belgium's Leopold II.
Did Winston Churchill do some bad stuff in the name of Great Britain? Yes, of course. But left to their own devices, a$$hats with the mindset of David Olusoga would have us believe that there was no moral difference between him and Hitler or Mussolini.
History wars??? There is only truth......AND Leftist revisionist writing. I fear that revisionism will win out and our future generations will be manipulated into believeing all the ‘evil’ that Leftists peddle.
With that said, Adolph Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Emperor Hirohito were responsible for the 1943-44 famine in India.
I’m not sure what exactly he expected Churchill to be able to do about a famine half a world away when Britain itself was under severe rationing, what shipping was available had to be devoted to bringing over troops and supplies from North America, the Nazi hordes were only then starting to be driven back and the Japanese Empire was making an all out assault on India at Imphal. This seems to me to be a weak attempt at getting attention.
As they do FDR, Harry Truman, Bomber Harris, etc. It gets very boring for people who live in peacetime.
We continue the march towards white genocide.
Leftists kill.
Classic academic deconstructionism.
Revising history to fit an agenda. No credibility.
... but all that doesn’t matter if he defends abortion and is a good President.
Churchill was a hard-nosed, practical sort. When he set out to destroy someone or something, he was serious and he would resort to whatever it took to complete the mission.
We live in an era where offending our enemies is considered a war crime. So naturally, small-souled men like Olusoga try to drag him down.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.