Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 8/3/09 05:43 PM, liljim wrote:

At 8/3/09 05:25 PM, Figter wrote: Liljim what the hell are you doing on the General forum?

I'm always here. Watching.

Like a literate stalker : )

At 8/3/09 05:43 PM, liljim wrote:

At 8/3/09 05:25 PM, Figter wrote: Liljim what the hell are you doing on the General forum?

I'm always here. Watching.

Can you see what I'm doing right now?

At 8/3/09 05:08 PM, liljim wrote: I suppose your opinion on whether or not he was racist depends on what definition of 'tribe' you choose to use in your decision, of which there are quite a few.

I think given his history as a military member of a 19th century highly-imperial power, during which he exhibited behavior variously described as "bellicose" and "war-mongering," and during which he was perfectly happy to extinguish native peoples from their lands for the continuance of his country's economic and military dominance of the entire world, Churchill is at best a rabid nationalist, and at worst an all-out racist.

I think he was brilliant and witty. I doubt that he was a racist, given the involvement he had with the Gurkha regiments at the time of world war 2, and with his family's outspoken comments about mistreatment of the gurkhas in recent times.

I found the full quote I mentioned earlier, and I think it more specifically addresses the sort of tribe to which Churchill was referring when he expressed his opinion in favor of gaseous exterminations of ethnic
peoples, simply because of their ethnicities.

In 1919, as Colonial Secretary Churchill advocated the use of chemical weapons on the "uncooperative Arabs" in the puppet state of Iraq. "I do not understand the squeamishness about the use of gas," he declared. "I am strongly in favor of using poison gas against uncivilized tribes." Some year's later, gassing human beings to death would make other men infamous.

An example of Churchill's racial views are his comments made in 1937: "I do not admit that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race, has come in and taken their place."

"Stronger" race? "Higher-grade" race? Denial of the Native American and Aboriginal Exterminations? Justification of the partitioning of Africa, in which he himself participated? I'd say those are the characteristics of a person with racial preferences. I can see how he could be classified as belligerent and a product of the super-nationalism of the times in which he lived, perhaps, but witty (implying subtlety) and brilliant (implying enlightened viewpoints)? I'd have to say not.

Heard an absolutely hilarious thing on Radio 4 on saturday during the comedy hour, a song much like this flash...

• 
  The Assumption Song by Oney

  Click to view.

  Type

  Movie

  Rated

  Everyone

except every fourth line ended with

"like that time that david cameron said tw-

before launching off into some completely random line.

i'll see if i can dig it up on iplayer

For a minute I thought it said twat.

At 8/3/09 09:01 PM, ShaolinFunk wrote: For a minute I thought it said twat.

And then you stopped reading the thread?

Personally i approve of this. Such remarks show a politician as more of a mistake maker, more human.

He gets a thumbs up from me.

At 8/3/09 07:40 PM, liljim wrote: Regardless of any of all of that, let's not derail this thread any further. Churchill is long dead. I have little interest in, or no time to research his history, and he is not what this thread is about.

Worry not, this is my last post on the subject.

And I think a) You mean 20th Century and b) that you can find various other sources that contradict items in that article (that, amongst other things, is Austrian-based (guess where Hitler was from), full of grammatical errors, put the quotes in context (which it fails to do), yadda yadda yadda).

I definitely mean 19th century, as Churchill was both born in and a product of 19th century imperialist ideas, being a military man during that period. Just because Churchill lived most of his life in the 20th century, doesn't make him any less of an avid believer in the ideals which were forged in his youth, of racial superiority and absolute nationalism.

And really, how would putting ANY of those quotes in context make them any less disturbing and racist? He clearly indicated a belief in the racial and cultural superiority of Western Culture, and the supposed moral depravity of any competing culture. These quotes are cited all over the place, and the surrounding context doesn't really tend to soften the blow. In fact, Churchill actually compares "lesser" races to dogs:

I do not agree that a dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place.

Just my two cents, really. I intensely dislike the man.

I can't help but wonder how many people actually give a damn about politicians saying something like that. I suspect it is less than we are led to believe.