Churchill: Pantomime Villain or Cartoon Superhero?

Status
Not open for further replies.
dixie1928

dixie1928

Player Valuation: £1m
LCAB posted a thread about dinner party guests the other day and I was a bit surprised he included Churchill. Not being critical for a minute ... people like who they like. But it did get me thinking about how this chap got out of the doghouse so cheaply.
As my understanding goes, from the time of the miners strike in 1923 to the bad days of 1941, the working class hated him nearly as much as the middle class. As a very young man, he was a believer in eugenics. He put us back on the gold standard in later life (which completely screwed the economy). In the first war, he organised the farcical Gallipoli campaign. When he resigned after that, he started a war in an otherwise quiet sector of the Western Front.

Most interestingly, straight after the second war, he lost a General Election by a massive, historical, number of seats - which suggests that the people who knew him best didn't trust him. In the 30's, he called Ghandi a "Half naked fakir", and in '45, referred to Attlee as "The Socialist Gestapo".

So why is he deified now? Is it just his wartime exploits as a speech maker? Or, more interestingly, is he being used as the acceptaable face of nationalism, at a time when the country is going through huge demographic changes?

I'm only asking because I haven't got quite enough little red things on my doings, - whatever the **** they're meant to mean.
 

dixie1928 said:
LCAB posted a thread about dinner party guests the other day and I was a bit surprised he included Churchill. Not being critical for a minute ... people like who they like. But it did get me thinking about how this chap got out of the doghouse so cheaply.
As my understanding goes, from the time of the miners strike in 1923 to the bad days of 1941, the working class hated him nearly as much as the middle class. As a very young man, he was a believer in eugenics. He put us back on the gold standard in later life (which completely screwed the economy). In the first war, he organised the farcical Gallipoli campaign. When he resigned after that, he started a war in an otherwise quiet sector of the Western Front.

Most interestingly, straight after the second war, he lost a General Election by a massive, historical, number of seats - which suggests that the people who knew him best didn't trust him. In the 30's, he called Ghandi a "Half naked fakir", and in '45, referred to Attlee as "The Socialist Gestapo".

So why is he deified now? Is it just his wartime exploits as a speech maker? Or, more interestingly, is he being used as the acceptaable face of nationalism, at a time when the country is going through huge demographic changes?

I'm only asking because I haven't got quite enough little red things on my doings, - whatever the **** they're meant to mean.
Click to expand...



Indeed , mate .

The Miners , the Black and Tans - Irish thing , India , the Boers , ... HE WAS WRONG ON LOADS .

HE WAS RIGHT , however , upon the Nazis . HE was right , when leading Politicians - Halifax ; Newspaper Proprietors - Beaverbrook , and the Goddamned erstwhile King of Fukn England , were of a different mind . He was vilified and buzzed off . Yet he remained staunch to his principles and his Country .

Moreovre, IF NOT FOR HIM FOR HIM PERSONALLY this Country would've capitulated . FACT .

NOT a perfect individual by ANY means , but for me , the GEATEST EVER ENGLISHMAN .

( I AM a Historian , incidentally , in that I have a History Degree . That don't mean much aside from my being well researched upon this subject . )
 
Last edited:
Good post Dixie. He was a drunk who only made one right call in his whiskey-sodden existence: he opposed appeasement (not particularly because he was anti-Nazi, he just wanted the British Empire in tact). That's it really. As for the war, Churchill may have made the stirring speeches and become an icon, but it was the likes of Ernest Bevan who ran the economy in the wartime cabinet that kept things chugging along.
 

I see him as like one of those lads from school. racist, bully and a bit of a bruiser. Not the type I'd want in my house but the kind you're glad turns up when 3 lads from a rival school kick off on you on your way home.
 
Churchill was much more a creature of his time than ours - a Boy's Own hero rather than something out of cartoons, and being pro-Empire, anti-Indian independence and anti-Irish nationalist was not exactly unusual at his time or social level.

His role in the anti-appeasement crowd is a bit overstated now as well, at least in the way it has obscured everyone else involved - Amery, Macmillan, Boothby and the weed Eden amongst more than a few others - and lets not forget once the war started he was bought off with the Admiralty (which admittedly was the best run of all the services at the time, and the only one on a war footing), which left Chamberlain in charge for almost enough time to cost us the war, nor did he actually play any meaningful role in getting rid of Chamberlain following the infamous Norway Debates.

That said, he was unquestionably the best man for the job in 1940 and his contribution between then and 1945 was probably the vital key to eventual victory. Nor should the massive defeat in 1945 be put down to him - the last election before the war had returned a massive Tory majority, almost all of whom were creatures of appeasement - which meant that once the war was ended, most of these spectacularly spineless creatures (281 of them voted with Chamberlain in the Norway debate) were rightly kicked out.
 
I cant stand the bad wobbly head......




































































churchill-dog.jpg
 
Yeah, I agree with everybody else. Right man at the time, great speach maker and rallyer just when we needed one and deserves to be remembered fondly for that. You can say all you like that the only thing he did right was to save us from the Nazis but when you've got that on your CV who needs anything else.

Not half the politian Attlee was, though.
 

davek said:
Good post Dixie. He was a drunk who only made one right call in his whiskey-sodden existence: he opposed appeasement (not particularly because he was anti-Nazi, he just wanted the British Empire in tact). That's it really. As for the war, Churchill may have made the stirring speeches and become an icon, but it was the likes of Ernest Bevan who ran the economy in the wartime cabinet that kept things chugging along.
Click to expand...

He also identified the "iron curtain" and the Soviet grab of eastern europe, and the Marshall plan and subsequent formation of Nato would have meant that Champagne Socialists like yourself would have embraced Stalinist tendencies even more than you have.

it was Churchill who tried to convince the americans your sort in England weren't communists...


Although in your particular case - I'm not so sure!
 
Last edited:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top