The Times: Cambridge college named after Churchill to debate his ‘backward’ views on race

Don't be daft. The uplifting story of how a working-class former painter and decorator rose to be the leader of a country? He's proof that anyone can succeed.

Forget the messiness with the Jews. The Far Left seems to manage to quite readily.
You left out tee-total, vegetarian and animal loving.
 

Joshua Slocum

LE
Book Reviewer
And for all the fans .......................

I did my Apprenticeship with an Ex Submariner who was part of that massive procession
he said it was a day he would not forget
where he still alive He would be tickled to know that I own the same make model and colour of Car that the old man drove
in Smoke Grey
A Salute to Senior Service
 

Daxx

MIA
Book Reviewer
Churchill was of his time, his views on race were little different to the rest of society’s.

What is hoped to be gained by vilifying Churchill?

Is it not better to look at society as a whole a consider how it has progressed (or regressed) and were you think it needs to go.

What you must also consider is why different races have different reputations and if that reputation is appropriate. It’s not for nothing that Fijians have a reputation as wife beaters and Nepalese (Gurkhas) are seen as scary little buggers.
At the same time, you had Guy Gibson and 'that dog'. I always find it odd and a little naive when modern society judges historic people, views, events etc with present day standards.
 
Don't be daft. The uplifting story of how a working-class former painter and decorator rose to be the leader of a country? He's proof that anyone can succeed.

Forget the messiness with the Jews. The Far Left seems to manage to quite readily.
the far right too.... it's not so much a left-right issue, it's more an ignorant-non-ignorant one.
 
They may be being (or trying to be) clever here (even though they are operating under the serious disadvantage of being Cantabrigians...)

'Critically reassess' doesn't necessarily mean 'take a critical stance'.

It's based on the idea of critical thinking - i.e.: "the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualising, applying, analysing, synthesising, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action" (to steal but one definition).

That in turn means - or should mean - that both sides of the argument are heard. This will not necessarily be understood by those who'd like the college to be renamed 'Mary Seacole College ' (or whatever they'd prefer), and if done properly, the squeals of outrage as the review highlights the fact that yes, Winston could be a teensy bit racist in the same way that a significant number of men of all classes who were born in 1874 could be, but he also had many good points (like fighting the Second World War against an opponent who regarded BAME people as simpletons to be exploited for their labour, homosexuals as vermin to be exterminated, transgender people as vermin to be exterminated, the disabled as vermin to be exterminated, etc, etc).

Critical reassessment - again if done properly - will run the very grave risk of John McDonnell being shown up as a charlatan who misrepresented history, as well as shattering some of the shibboleths held by the anti-Churchill camp. And Heaven forfend if the verdict on the Bengal famine turns out to be more nuanced than the 'correct' account presented by a variety of critics...

This does, of course, all depend upon the college doing this properly - but: the college's income from students isn't sufficient to support the establishment. They rely upon income from donors. These donors tend to be those who are not influenced by the whims of those who'd like to see Churchill cast down from all his plinths and his reputation destroyed.

Hence my suggestion that this could be being quite clever - it reduces the wind in the sails of those who'd like nothing more than the college to be renamed and Churchill's papers piled up in the quad and burned, but also means that the college is - to no small extent - going to have to take on board the views of historians like Andrew Roberts (an absolute gent, in my experience, but with occasional lurches to the right which make Mrs Thatcher look like Clem Attlee), Richard Toye (who is to the left of centre, but is balanced - some of his recent conclusions have offended both right and left for being simultaneously 'apologist' and 'snowflake'),Peter Hennessey (middle of the road and a damned good historian) and others. Were Paul Addison still with us (a Labour man, although you'd not have guessed from his books; Gordon Brown was a huge fan after being tutored by him), he'd be giving the ahistorical 'alternative facts' approach a stiff going over its proponents really wouldn't like.

If the college doesn't follow this approach, they'll be panned - from within academia, for not understanding 'critical reassessment' and for an inherently biased approach; from the media, for being overly woke and pandering to a vocal minority for whom facts and nuance don't matter; and from their donors. And unless they've cravenly stupid - not often associated with Cambridge colleges - they know this...

Which is why I say that this might in fact be a very clever means of carrying out a critical reassessment which, when complete, doesn't actually deviate much (if at all) from Addison's conclusion:

"...the recognition of his frailties and flaws has worked in his favour. It has brought him up to date by making him into the kind of hero our disenchanted culture can accept and admire: a hero with feet of clay.”

They can then claim to have carried out a reassessment, presented a 'new' perspective (which is pretty much the mainstream historical perspective - great man, flawed, but still great) and it's all been done with the utmost rigour. Your move, snowflakes...
This is the sort of assessment I come to Arrse for. I cannot think of any MSM I can get / or trust another slant on things.
 

Yokel

LE
I am not sure how true to life it was, but I watched Darkest Hour the other day. During Churchill's ride on the tube on his way to the Commons, he spoke to people on the tube, including a black guy with a Caribbean accent, who encouraged him to reject any idea of seeking peace with the Nazis.

Could that be what actually did happen?
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
I am not sure how true to life it was, but I watched Darkest Hour the other day. During Churchill's ride on the tube on his way to the Commons, he spoke to people on the tube, including a black guy with a Caribbean accent, who encouraged him to reject any idea of seeking peace with the Nazis.

Could that be what actually did happen?
I did wonder at that, too.
 
I am not sure how true to life it was, but I watched Darkest Hour the other day. During Churchill's ride on the tube on his way to the Commons, he spoke to people on the tube, including a black guy with a Caribbean accent, who encouraged him to reject any idea of seeking peace with the Nazis.

Could that be what actually did happen?

The screenwriter is on record as having said that he had no evidence for this occurring, but that it 'was the sort of thing he [Churchill] would have done'.

There is some evidence to support this contention - there are accounts of him talking to Londoners after nipping out of No.10 for a walk - but the 'tube scene' is a dramatic device.
 
The screenwriter is on record as having said that he had no evidence for this occurring, but that it 'was the sort of thing he [Churchill] would have done'.

There is some evidence to support this contention - there are accounts of him talking to Londoners after nipping out of No.10 for a walk - but the 'tube scene' is a dramatic device.
This 'faction' thus becomes accepted fact 'cos it's been on the tele'.
 

Yokel

LE
Slightly irrelevant to the issue of that film scene, but perhaps not entirely irrelevant to this thread, I remember seeing an interview with a Caribbean veteran of the war. He said he was inspired by Churchill's speeches, as well as deeply offended by Hitler describing blacks as half apes in Mein Kampf.
 
Last edited:
But what a painter. An entire apartment in one afternoon... two coats! He was big into interior design too and wrote the book on it.

3iR2BH8.jpeg.jpg
 

Mom who survived Mao’s China calls critical race theory America’s Cultural Revolution​

By Lee Brown
June 10, 2021 | 12:34pm |

“Critical race theory has its roots in cultural Marxism — it should have no place in our schools,” Xi Van Fleet said to cheers and applause at a Tuesday meeting of the progressive Loudoun County School Board.

“You are now teaching, training our children, to be social justice warriors and to loathe our country and our history,” she told the meeting of the district already bitterly divided for pushing the policy that critics accuse of itself being racist.

“Growing up in Mao’s China, all of this seems very familiar,” insisted the mom, who finally fled China when she was 26.

“The Communist regime used the same critical theory to divide people. The only difference is they used class instead of race,” she said.

The mom — whose son graduated from Loudoun High School in 2015 — compared the current division in the US to her experience growing up under Mao Zedong, one of the most brutal rulers in history until his death in 1979.

She recalled seeing “students and teachers turn against each other,” and school names being changed “to be politically correct” as they were “taught to denounce our heritage.”

Mao Zedong brutally ruled China until his death in 1979.
“The Red Guards destroyed anything that is not Communist — statues, books and anything else,” she said.

“We were also encouraged to report on each other, just like the Student Equity Ambassador program and the bias reporting system,” she said of systems that other parents have sued over.

Link to full article: Mom who survived Mao’s China calls critical race theory America’s Cultural Revolution
 
I am not sure how true to life it was, but I watched Darkest Hour the other day. During Churchill's ride on the tube on his way to the Commons, he spoke to people on the tube, including a black guy with a Caribbean accent, who encouraged him to reject any idea of seeking peace with the Nazis.

Could that be what actually did happen?
Clip -

 

Latest Threads

Top