Andrew Roberts - Churchill Revisionism

Andrew Roberts’ biography of Sir Winston Churchill became a Sunday Times and New York Times bestseller and won the ICS Churchill Award for Literacy and the Council on Foreign Relations’ Arthur Ross Prize. ‘In a single volume,’ Henry Kissinger wrote of it, ‘Roberts has captured the essence of one of the world’s most impactful, most memorable statesmen. ‘It is the crowning achievement of his career - and it will become the definitive biography of his subject.’ Here, he speaks to History Reclaimed on the subject of ‘Churchill Revisionism”.
About History Reclaimed
Our Mission
The abuse of history for political purposes is as old as history itself. In recent years, we have seen campaigns to rewrite the history of several democratic nations in a way that undermines their solidarity as communities, their sense of achievement, even their very legitimacy.
These ‘culture wars’, pursued in the media, in public spaces, in museums, universities, schools, civil services, local government, business corporations and even churches, are particularly virulent in North America, Australasia and the United Kingdom. Activists assert that ‘facing up’ to a past presented as overwhelmingly and permanently shameful and guilt-laden is the way to a better and fairer future. We see no evidence that this is true. On the contrary, tendentious and even blatantly false readings of history are creating or aggravating divisions, resentments, and even violence. We do not take the view that our histories are uniformly praiseworthy-that would be absurd. But we reject as equally absurd the claim that they are essentially shameful.
We agree that history consists of many opinions and many voices. But this does not mean that all opinions are valid, and certainly none should be imposed as a new orthodoxy. We intend to challenge distortions of history, and to provide context, explanation and balance in a debate in which dogmatism is too often preferred to analysis, and condemnation to understanding.
Who We Are
We are an independent group of scholars with a wide range of opinions on many subjects, but with the shared conviction that history requires careful interpretation of complex evidence, and should not be a vehicle for facile propaganda. We have established the History Reclaimed group as a non-profit making company limited by guarantee.
Visit our website - historyreclaimed.co.uk/
Donate to the channel - historyreclaimed.co.uk/make-a...

[@lucianopavarotti2843]

Thanks for this, very useful. I once heard a talk on 'Churchill and India', given by Martin Gilbert at a private club in New Delhi. Members of the extended Gandhi family were there. The atmosphere was frosty to begin with, but warmed as Gilbert's nuanced presentation continued. By the end of the evening some of the local grandees were complimenting Gilbert and vying to take him out to dinner. I think the main thrust of Churchill criticism in India has lately come from the likes of Shashi Tharoor, who as a highly westernised Indian politician presumably feels he has something to (over)compensate for.

[@markbateman9222]

I am constantly reminded, whenever a "historian" in search of some cheap headlines comes up with this sort of stuff about Churchill, of what AJP Taylor called him; "the saviour of his country". Taylor was a man of the left (supported the 1926 strike, closely involved with the early days of CND etc.) but recognised that in the nation's moment of greatest need Churchill was there. What would have happened in 1940 if Chamberlain had remained in office, or Halifax succeeded him, doesn't bear thinking about. Ironically (since Churchill was always a strong opponent of Socialism in all its forms), and Andrew Roberts didn't mention this, Churchill to an extent owed his elevation to the Premiership to Labour's refusal to serve in a coalition under Halifax and Labour members of the Cabinet were amongst the most vocal against putting out feelers to see what terms Hitler might be prepared to offer in May-June 1940.

[@hamishstewart5188]

Well said

[@liambrown8447]

Those who protest Churchill never seem to get the irony that if it weren’t for him, they’d be protesting in German… or not protesting at all.

[@tb8865]

As opposed to what actually happened? Look at Great Britain today. What do you think the men who fought in the war would make of it?

[@laneromel5667]

Wrong, the British that protested Churchill would be protesting in Russian.

[@KevinArdala01]

This was great. Makes me want to read more of Churchill's writing. 👍

[@ianwalter62]

I found the comments about the Bengal famine most intriguing. I do not doubt that WSC sent some cables to Canberra and Ottawa seeking the release of wheat stockpiles to alleviate the famine, although the precise timing of that wasn't mentioned. The intriguing part is that Lord Roberts failed to mention the subsequent communications back to London, seeking the allocation of shipping tonnage to carry it there, were, initially at least, rejected. Eventually Australian wheat, at least, was shipped, but I would be appreciative if Lord Roberts could examine ALL the relevant primary documents relating to this issue, and specify the timing of Churchill's cables.. It may be that it wasn't specifically WSC's fault that the relief supplies arrived too late to prevent a disaster, but the buck stops somewhere.

[@Expatred66]

Read Churchills instructions to Wavell, Governor General of India: ‘The hard pressures of world-war have for the first time for many years brought conditions of scarcity, verging in some localities into actual famine, upon India. Every effort must be made, even by the diversion of shipping urgently needed for war purposes, to deal with local shortages….’ Churchill shipped grain from Australia, but UK lacked ships in the theatre as D-Day was looming.. Churchill requested ships from FDR USA who refused. There is your buck.

[@ianwalter62]

@@Expatred66 On what date (or month/year) did the famine start? On what date was the British War Cabinet aware of the famine? On what date did Churchill send that cable to which you refer? On what date was any Australian grain (wheat) shipped? How long after wheat was offered (by Australia and Canada) was it shipped? You can't just cherry pick one cable, and sweep culpability under the rug.

[@user-bt8vn3dj6o]

A great presentation.

[@bearowen5480]

In my high school history courses, and through my own freely acknowledged amateurish scholarship, I had been taught that much if not all of Hitler's early political popularity was due to his persuasive exploitation of the deep German resentment over the raw deal they had gotten from the Allies at Versailles. In answering Peter's question about how Hitler had received an overwhelming 90% approval at the polls for his assuming total personal control over the German government, Professor Roberts does not directly mention popular resentment over Versailles and the widespread financial hardships of the imposed reparations as significant factors in Hitler's rise to absolute power. Did I misread history?

[@jaimepatena7372]

I am a very liberal and progressive old man. But I find it amusing and troubling that people want to judge historical figures. People act as they do because of who they are. Churchill was Churchill.

[@ibatan7243]

May our ONLY, EVERLIVING LORD/GOD, JESUS CHRIST - the GREATEST EVER and MOST HIGH - Bless and Protect You, Your Family(ies), Friends, Fans, Subscribers, Staff, Partners, Supporters and your Loved Ones Forever. AMEN