American Reacts How Did Winston Churchill Lose the Election Following Germany's Defeat

Original Video: • How on Earth Did Winst...
Discord: / discord
Patreon: / mcjibbin
Watch stuff and learn and chill hi whatsup ⚔️👋🧐
Hi everyone! I'm an American from the Northeast (New England). I want to create a watering hole for people who want to discuss, learn and teach about history through KZbin videos which you guys recommend to me through the comment section or over on Discord. Let's be respectful but, just as importantly, not be afraid to question any and everything about historical records in order to give us the most accurate representation of the history of our species and of our planet!
Having a diverse perspective is crucial to what I want to achieve here so please don't hold back! I want to learn about all I can! Keep recommending and PLEAESE join my Discord :) ( / discord )
#
#american
#mcjibbin
#americanreacts
#reaction
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

[@freddostudios6186]

I'm biased but this was the greatest election in our history and absolutely the right decision. Attlee, Churchill and the country had come together to fight the war and afterwards Attlee offered a far better program for rebuilding the country so he won. The two were a perfect double act and undoubtedly our two top prime ministers ever.

[@martinwebb1681]

I agree, the best thing Britain ever done was voting for the Attlee Labour government after the war, they had the vision to rebuild Britain.

[@TheCardiffgirl]

The new labour government was an absolute godsend for the working class of Britain. Many of them would have simply died from illness had it not been for the NHS, including some of my family. Everything that was needed was provided immediately, z.B Penicillin, cancer treatment, etc. Above all, they did what they,d promised and how many governments can say that?

[@stewedfishproductions7959]

@@TheCardiffgirl I know this may be a 'tiny' benefit in the whole scheme of things... But my grandmother always considered that having a toilet INSIDE the 'new' house was the best thing that came out of the war! She went on about it for years, while describing having to walk down the garden to a cold 'outhouse loo' in the middle of Winter for most of her life... 😃

[@billyo54]

The sad thing about all this is how badly America responded to the post war era. Instead of coming together and sorting out race relations where black Americans had fought so gallantly during the war, America became even more divided, leading to the mess it is today.

[@williambranch4283]

US military integrated in 1948 by President Truman. The GI bill however failed to be color blind.

[@egriffiths8993]

Labour really did build all those homes. My grandparents among many who had a council house which they could afford to rent and raise a family in. Homes fit for heros

[@martinwebb1681]

Best thing that ever happened to this country, Attlee had the vision to rebuild Britain after the war, much of what we still enjoy today was thanks to his Labour government.

[@markthomas2577]

Most servicemen voted Labour in 1945 .... a higher percentage than civilians did.

[@MrBulky992]

Those men who had been conscripted for up to six years probably wondered, if Churchill were elected and given his fighting talk (possibly envisaging open warfare with the Soviet Union at some stage), whether they would ever be allowed home to their families and civilian life: they will have had more than enough of blood, toil, tears and sweat.

[@stewedfishproductions7959]

Your right, a point made in the Wikipedia artical about the election, thus; "Labour played to the concept of "winning the peace" that would follow the war. Possibly for that reason, there was especially strong support for Labour in the armed services, which feared the unemployment and homelessness to which the soldiers of the First World War had returned. It has been claimed that the left-wing bias of teachers in the armed services was a contributing factor, but that argument has generally not carried much weight, and the failure of the Conservative governments in the 1920s to deliver a "land fit for heroes" was likely more important."

[@lyndarichardson4744]

I think Churchill, coming from the aristocracy, couldn't understand why the public would want a National Health Services, and decent housing and thought people should go on making sacrifices.

[@stirlingmoss4621]

The Conservatives recognised the need for Universal Health & had a plan for the NHS but Labour pipped them to the post

[@freddostudios6186]

@@stirlingmoss4621 Their manifesto recognized a lot of the beveridge report, but they were not well suited to implement it. Labour were much better suited to the necessary economic planning, it's why they ran the economy during wartime.

[@fyrdman2185]

fuck the working class

[@stewedfishproductions7959]

@@stirlingmoss4621 Correct, Labour were all for laying out the social services, homes and health systems, but SO were the majority of the Conservatives... The 'fly in the ointment' was Churchill focusing on everything but the people and that was his biggest mistake, not reading what the public wanted!

[@DB-stuff]

Its always amuses me the problem Americans have with words particularity " socialism " assess on deeds, what actions does socialism take? I liked your analysis and thinking about things

[@MrBulky992]

It's not just the USA who have a problem with the word "socialism". It is rarely used in mainstream politics in the UK since the rise of Tony Blair. You are far more likely to hear the term "social democracy". Jeremy Corbyn might use it and look what happened to him! Since Tony Blair removed public ownership of the means of production from the Labour Party's constitution and its adoption of right-of-centre policies such as market testing, outsourcing, private finance initiatives etc., it is not recognisable as a "socialist" party and its concerns today seem to revolve around identity politics more than the structure of the economy.

[@DavidSmith-cx8dg]

I remember reading David Niven's autobiography . The Hollywood actor returned to serve in WW2 and at the end of the hostilities was hosting discussions for servicemen to pass time before demob. He said that the majority blamed the Conservative party for the war and wanted a fairer society and he wasn't surprised .

[@Somerandomguy7623]

What is glossed over is his history as home secretary in the early 1900s, he sent a gunboat and army to Liverpool to quell a strike, which lead to him being loathed there. It is not the only reason he was disliked. As a war leader, may have been what Britain needed but he was not liked

[@albin2232]

He was respected as a wartime leader, but didn't offer the public what they wanted after it ended.

[@soozb15]

Go ahead and drink, Connor. As long as you don't start belching or picking your nose, we're all good. Dang, you just belched 😂

[@jimpalmer9263]

Churchill was only interested in preserving the status quo: protecting the position of the aristocracy. The war changed everything and those who fought at home and in the military wanted a fairer society where there sacrifice was rewarded.

[@stewedfishproductions7959]

Simply put, Connor: Socialism is EVERYTHING America doesn't have and you don't appear to like! But has provided the UK with all the benefits that the majority of the people appreciate... 🤔

[@williambranch4283]

British party politics and structure of Parliament. PM isn't elected like an American President. In 1945 Labour was more popular than Tory, and Labour delivered with the NHS.

[@J1mmyMack]

During the War, the economy was run pretty socialist in the UK. Food was rationed so everyone got the same amount and no one starved, people were given jobs that the country needed, there was a great deal of government intervention. Much less so in the US, I'm sure.

[@NuWhoSucks]

As much as I revere Churchill, the prime minister who guided us to victory in WW2, Churchill the man had some very dark traits. He was unfortunately a racist, and a colonialist. He didn't want to grant what later became the commonwealth countries their independence, and looked down up on the peoples of South Asia and Africa as less than. Furthermore, he was also an almighty snob, who when asked about the starving families of those who took part in the national strike of 1926, he simply said "Let them eat grass" After the war, people were determined not to return to the days of class struggle, and wanted instead a new future. A utopian egalitarian Britain, which the people saw in Attlee & his party.

[@seansmith445]

Some victory! Look at us now, completely overrun...but at least we're not speaking German😉

[@SpenceJS87]

@@seansmith445 What do you mean?

[@seansmith445]

@@SpenceJS87 I mean it would have been better never to go to war against Germany.

[@SpenceJS87]

@@seansmith445 Overrun?

[@NuWhoSucks]

@@SpenceJS87 Britain is still 88% white. Sean is overeating to the immigration situation.

[@iKvetch558]

Hi Connor...you mentioned the Yalta Conference, and that was in February of 1945 in the Crimean city of Yalta in the USSR...the conference you were thinking of in Iran was the Tehran Conference in late 1943...which was when Stalin, Churchill and FDR met together for the first time. As for a more threatening time for the UK...perhaps the Spanish Armada? That is about the only time that seems to be as threatening or more than Bittchler...unless maybe you could all the way back to the invasion of William the Conqueror in 1066.

[@stephendisraeli1143]

The Spanish Armada was Elizabeth's equivalent of the Battle of Britain, but her England didn't experience anything like the sequel. No bombs, no food shortages.

[@iKvetch558]

@@stephendisraeli1143 That is an excellent point. 💯

[@stevefoulston]

The man was a disaster his father died from attributed his deterioration and death to syphilis. Winston Churchill's mother had a two-year sexual liaison with King Edward VII, the Queen's great-grandfather Some of Churchill's mistakes were major, too. In World War I, he led the disastrous campaign against Turkey. In World War II, he bungled the defence of Norway. And he thought the invasion of Italy would be easy. Churchill also underestimated the Japanese military. He struggled early in school before barely passing an exam to get into a private school. And then, he was only accepted into a military college on his third try. He chose the academically less-demanding cavalry. "He despised school, was a contrarian and an outsider .In February 1915, Churchill was assigned to seize the Dardanelles straits near Constantinople (now Istanbul). The attempt failed. These losses cost the British and colonial troops 214,000 lives. Others were the primary architects of the campaign. But blame landed on Churchill. He resigned from the government. Failure as first lord of the Admiralty during World War I. New Delhi, India - The Bengal famine of 1943 estimated to have killed up to three million people was not caused by drought but instead was a result of a “complete policy failure” of the then-British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. Peace out.

[@jandrexler3224]

You forget about the "Nords", all the vikings invading and sometimes crushing the nascent english kingdoms. But after William the conqueror.... U are right

[@steveallen3434]

Churchill was a great statesman and on the world stage he did great things, But on the domestic stage he was still of the old school and part of the old class system So he still part of the establishment of the empire

[@MrBulky992]

Yes, Churchill was born into an upper class family, a cadet branch of a noble family. Attlee, however, was only one rung down from Churchill - he was born into an upper middle class family amidst wealth and privilege and had been educated at a private boarding school and at Oxford. After his premiership, he was created Earl Attlee, a hereditary peerage still in existence. His grandson, the 3rd Earl Attlee sits in the House of Lords as a Conservative peer! So we are not really talking revolution here!

[@MrBulky992]

"Blen-hime"? "Clerk" rhyming with "twerk"? I can forgive any American but not a British narrator. I wish he would slow down, calm himself and speak (British) English.

[@micade2518]

I just LOVE Churchill's wit! As an (out of context) example, he is said to have had this exchange with the lady sitting next to him at some official dinner: The lady was terribly boring and, out of patience (and manners!) he eventually said to her "Madam, you are ugly", to which the shocked lady replied "Oh, sir, you are drunk!" And Winston to answer "That may be so, Madam, but tomorrow, I shall be sober ..." 😅

[@MrBulky992]

In the version I heard, the first insult "You are drunk" was hurled by Labour MP Bessie Braddock who really was physically unattractive. Unperturbed, Churchill's razor-sharp but perhaps ungentlemanly reply was "You are ugly but I shall be sober in the morning...".

[@MrBulky992]

More wit! Churchill is said to have encountered Attlee at the urinal in the Members’ toilets in the House of Commons and shuffled as far away as possible. Attlee said: “Feeling standoffish today, are we, Winston?” to which Churchill replied with characteristic wit: “That’s right. Every time you see something big, private and productive, you want to nationalise it.”

[@MrBulky992]

Another urinal story: Attlee said to Churchill as the latter had finished using the facilities and was on the point of leaving "When we were at school, we were told to wash our hands". Churchill replied "When we were at Harrow, we were told not to pee on them".

[@MrBulky992]

Lady Astor to Churchill: If I were your wife, I'd put poison in your tea" Churchill's reply: "If I were your husband, I'd drink it."

[@micade2518]

@@MrBulky992 😄And when told "An apple a day keeps the doctor away", Churchill replied "As long as you aim well" ...

[@marieparker3822]

During the Second World War, an emergency situation was declared. A command economy was put in place - this was what the Soviet Union attempted after the Communist Revolution. There was immediate conscription (drafting into the armed forces) for everyone over the age of 18 (unless they had extenuating circumstances, eg looking after children). In World War I conscription was not introduced until 1916 (after so many volunteers had been killed). Enemy aliens were interned on the Isle of Man. There was direction of labour - all over the age of 18 got a letter telling them to enlist at a certain centre or travel to a certain place for work. They had a fortnight's notice, I believe. Women became lumberjills felling trees in the Highlands of Scotland, and land girls, replacing farm workers, and of course munitions workers. They also constituted a large proportion of the workforce of Bletchley Park. Very young men were sent - they had no choice - down coal mines. Rationing was very carefully thought out. Everyone was healthy. No-one was overweight! Everything was rationed, including paper, cloth, furniture et al. Skirts could only be a certain length (knee-length). Dior's New Look in 1947 celebrated the end of fabric rationing. There was crime in the black-out, SPIVS, fear, bereavement, boredom with the diet (so much like bananas unavailable), etc. Rationing of food was gradually withdrawn, and ended in 1953. Attlee decided, in 1945, that Britain would be a nuclear power. He did not tell the Cabinet about this, but convened a committee of two, and told them, 'We will have nuclear weapons'.

[@ianprince1698]

one hangover from the end of the great war was we were promised a land fit for heroes. not more of the same

[@corringhamdepot4434]

Churchill won the 1951 General Election after 6 years in opposition, and was Conservative Prime Minister for another 4 years. "Despite suffering a stroke in 1953, Churchill remained in office until April 1955, when he resigned at the age of eighty. He was succeeded by his ambitious protégé and deputy, Sir Anthony Eden".

[@rasmusn.e.m1064]

To answer the question at 12:45 I think the worst point in British history to be in Britain would probably have been in 1349 when the Black Death had spread to all of England. They say 40-60% of the population died. That's worse than any of the civil wars. That would have been pretty rough, to say the least.

[@Jessy-cs1jz]

I guess Wellington was one of the top 3 Prime ministers we had , not because of good leadership but because he was generally a great Bloke ....

[@grahamsangster1042]

In my city Dundee,they voted the first woman into parliament,she defeated Churchill which I think he was supposed to win quite easy

[@fyrdman2185]

We always knew the Scots were gay, you don't have to keep repeating it.

[@micade2518]

The same happened to French General De Gaulle (also "well born"): a great leader during the war (From London, where Churchill had granted him asylum, he masterminded the French Résistance that played a key role in the ultimate Allied victory). He then too was elected President ... he was not a bad president, but he had been a much better military General! These great men cannot be good at everything, so it seems, and the world of politics is a much more complex world than any battlefield.

[@stephendisraeli1143]

A better line for Churchill would have been that wartime government powers were inappropriate for peacetime, and Labour would want to keep them. That is what happened, anyway, (e.g. food rationing and I.D. cards), which is why they lost power again later.

[@jamesleate]

Socialism essentially puts the emphasis on improving life for all through higher taxes and more substantial investment in social services to give everyone in society the best chance in life. Capitalism requies there to be inequality as in order for someone to have more than average others have to have less than average. For individuals to become extremely wealthy many people must be made poor through wage exploitation and self serving greed. Socialism just forces those people to invest in society and not be so selfish. Socialism puts the needs of the many over right for the individual to amass wealth at their expense. Denmark is probably the best example of a socialist state in my opinion. In Denmark you have a minimum wage that is enough to live on, so someone working in McDonald's earns $23 an hour. Taxes are very high but everyone is well looked after by the state and less stressed by daily life.

[@mandysharp4571]

Hitler was a socialist government. It party wanted all of Germany to prosper, everyone had to have a car. The Conservative party did not want the NHS either. Within a few years. We invited people from around the commonwealth to join the new national health service they came here in their thousands, but we still had a lot of people became afraid of the new nationalitys entering the country. But they stayed and our NHS is one of the best in the world. But if the country was Conservative it would never have happened. But alas we now have a reversal. The labour party is too woke but also a lot of selling off national assets but the Conservative now are more for the people in a lot of ways..

[@danielferguson3784]

It wasn't Constantinople, it was Savastapol in the Crimea. The name of the disasterous battle was Gallipoli. The Turks were much stronger than expected.

[@stirlingmoss4621]

Churchill wanted to keep the Service men & women in uniform for another 2 years to be ready for the Communists in SE Asia in Vietnam and Korea, but having spent 5 years in uniform, fighting the Germans and Japanese, the surviving warriors just wanted to go home and Labour offered them that promise. So they voted socialist and for Attlee.

[@dannjp75]

The last PM to surrender British soil to the Germans. Not as universally popular as it’s made out.

[@LoneRanger100]

Churchill was NOT popular with the working classes, or people in various regions of the uk. He hated most of the public, being a real 1 percenter. Also - “ANurin bayvin”?! That guy is really annoying, can never get through his videos. I’ll give it a swerve.

[@MrBulky992]

"Socialism" became a dirty word as it is in the USA when Tony Blair came to power in the 1990s: the use of the word was banished, his party unofficially rebranded itself as "New Labour" (to put a distance between it and the previously outwardly socialist "old" Labour Party) and they stopped singing "The Red Flag" at party conferences. Clauses in their constitution relating to public ownership of the means of production were repealed. The red flag had already been dropped as the party's symbol in favour of the red rose and the governing echelons of the Labour Party no longer address their audiences as "comrades". Nowadays, left wing politicians are more likely to talk about "social democracy" than socialism.

[@allenwilliams1306]

Social Democrats are far to the left of the current Labour Party.

[@MrBulky992]

​​@@allenwilliams1306Well, if you remember, the Social Democratic Party, a breakaway from Labour, merged with the Liberal Party in the 1980s to form the Liberal Democrats who are supposed to occupy the centre ground between Labour and the Conservatives. Tony Blair muddied the waters after that so it is hard to work out where anyone lies on the lwft-right spectrum these days. You may well be right in terms of the current Labour Party but that would not necessarily stop them bandying about the respectable term "social democracy" (less likely to frighten the electorate) even if it doesn't really fit them in truth as they're almost indistinguishable from the one-nation Conservatives.

[@allenwilliams1306]

@@MrBulky992 You forget (or perhaps do not know) that David Owen refused to join the new “Liberal Democrat” party, as did a substantial proportion of the membership, so the parties did not “merge” at all. A similar situation arose with the Liberal Party. In consequence, The Liberal Democrats, as a party, is fairly new, dating from 1988. The two parties from which their initial membership was drawn still exist. I should know, I was a founder-member of the SDP, having anticipated the likely drift of the Labour ship on to what would become the Blairite New Labour rocks. I still am a member. The Liberal Democrats is a party 7 years younger than the SDP.

[@MrBulky992]

​​@@allenwilliams1306I believe you are technically incorrect: the parties did *merge* and all of the assets and records of the SDP were turned over to the new party whose name became the "Social and Liberal Democrats", shortened to "Liberal Democrats" a year later. Owen and his supporters did not join the new party, as you rightly say, but they founded what was, in legal terms, a new organisation, a party adopting the name SDP. A breakaway group of Liberals did a similar thing. That's what Wikipedia indicates, for what it's worth. If you have convincing evidence to the contrary, I would suggest you correct the entries in Wikipedia. I realise it's a technical distinction but you were the one who raised it.

[@allenwilliams1306]

@@MrBulky992 If the new party was, indeed, a merger on the basis you suggest, one would have thought the SDP logo would have passed to it too, since the copyright belonged to the old SDP. Furthermore, one would have thought, had this been a genuine merger, that memberships would have been automatically transferred to the merged entity. They were not. At least, mine wasn't. I became the acting secretary of the constituency SDP of which I was a member the instant the amalgamation took place, being the one remaining officer, and all the constituency papers and records were placed in my custody. My first job was to verify which members had resigned to join the Liberal Democrats.

[@cireenasimcox1081]

All the questions about Churchill, Atlee, etc. have been answered - but there's another question I've seen you ask twice & which hasn't been addressed yet...about the water? Now I'm pretty sure that there'd be quite a few here on the comments section who don't even notice what you're drinking from; or even give two hoots. But those that do comment adversely, do so because it's considered...well... uncouth. Especially with a giant bottle like the one you use! It's good that you drink water rather than calorie-laden soft drinks. Tons of people do the same. But, unless you're outside - hiking, cycling, shopping, whatever - we use a glass. No-one would bat an eyelid if you just sipped from a glass of water (which you could refill off-camera.). But necking a giant bottle is something that many other people don't particularly want to see.(And also, telling us every time you need to go pee could get a little bit old for some too!)) You're doing so well in amassing information from around the world - and I feel so stoked when you're presenting a new clip, that you now can contextualise it e.g. "Oh, that was after WWII" or "Hang on, didn't she reign in place of her son?" There are other reactors about who've been as active as you with content; but as soon as they've posted something they seem to forget all about it. You take it all in, and think about it, and relate - and your general knowledge is jumping far ahead of what it was when you started this channel. Onya, mate - you're doing really well.😁😁

[@johnbourne4025]

Mate, don't confuse socialism with communism, look at the Nordic countries and even France and Germany capitalist but they really look after their people, health care, education and fair wages.

[@richardhumphrey2685]

I'm not sure about that....would you like to explain why it is that the French are consistently on strike or revolting? they're famous for it....farmers, lorry drivers, train drivers, air traffic controllers ect....they're never happy.

[@johnbourne4025]

@richardhumphrey2685 They strike because they can, and they're really good at it. They still have one of the best health care systems in the world.

[@richardhumphrey2685]

@@johnbourne4025 'They strike because they can'?....they sound like a bunch of Bolshe trouble makers to me trying to rip off the tax payer....I'm glad we don't tolerate that kind of behavior here.

[@staticcentrehalf7166]

Oh dear, Connor. This is magnificently above your intellectual pay grade. Stick to vlogs about the beaches at Tenby and you'll be fine.

[@maethornaur]

Socialism it depends. in the 19th centery the definition was different. that time it was more close to marxism. currently socialism is basically any country giving benefit to the population. so it's not a "bad" word, as almost every countries are socialist in some way. Also socialism is part of capitalism, which is all countries, so ( Yes countries are more controlling, but the economing system are the same). You wouldn't say the united arab republic is socialist, communist or feodalistic, but you might agree it's really controlling. For me we are all part of the same species, and what is matter. We all have to find our part in the world. (I don't like US referring about races, as there's no different human race at the moment). We have difference so what? no one is equal and never be, be we are one species. I hope we can all see we are part of the same group.

[@emperoremperor1486]

Socialisms like Liberalism and Conservatism is a bundle of political views, tendencies and policy that are so wide they become contradictory. I suggest you ignore the word and pay attention to policies used and views held and expressed rather then labels.

[@bunnymc25]

Drink out of a 2l bottle if you want, laddie

[@leehallam9365]

I don't think one can say Attlee shaped Britain today more than Churchill. That isn't to do Attlee down, he was a very effective leader who did shape the country for a generation, its just that in most respects his achievements don't last to today. His economic legacy of state owned industry was dismantled by Thatcher. The reforms of education would have happened anyway, and were changed by later Labour governments. That leaves us with the NHS, we would not have had a unified system instead one more like other European countries, a mixed system with compulsory subsidised insurance, Churchill's legacy is that we didn't fold in 1940, the impact of that achievement remains.

[@freddostudios6186]

I think both Attlee and Churchill have the biggest legacy. Churchill and Attlee came together to save Britain, then Attlee built modern Britain and Churchill ( and Rab Butler to his credit ) pivoted the tory party towards preservation of what Attlee had built.

[@petermizon4344]

STOP INTERUPTING WITH USELESS COMMENTE

[@colinr5791]

It's a 'reaction' video, if you want to watch the original video, uninterrupted, you are free to do so

[@dannjp75]

I LIKE SHOUTING!!

[@matthewjamison]

​@@dannjp75😂😂

[@petermizon4344]

@@dannjp75 SO DO I, IT ANNOYS YOU LOL 😂😂 88

[@petermizon4344]

@@colinr5791 BECAUSE I LIKE TO WATCH HIM NOT BE ABLE TO LISTEN AND HES NOT EVEN LOOKING AT SCREEN THEN REWINDS IT AGAIN AND AGAIN, NOT PROPER REACTING