Was He Racist? | Winston Churchill Myths DEBUNKED With Professor David Reynolds

[@TimesRadioHistory]

Remember to subscribe to Times Radio History: www.youtube.com/@TimesRadioHistory?sub_confirmation=1

[@JonniePolyester]

As the late great leftwing comedian Jeremy Hardy said whenever he heard people castigate Churchill as a racist bigot, he would always reply ‘wait till you see the other guy!’

[@norcatch]

I will never tire of listening to David Reynolds. Brilliant man.

[@TheLucanicLord]

The real genius of WW2 was Alanbrook, who prevented Churchill doing several Gallipolli style pranks.

[@peterwebb8732]

It may or may not have been Allenbrook, but someone who worked with Churchill wrote that Churchill had an average of three very good ideas per day. The hard work was in talking him out of the other 97 ideas that were not so good. One of the points being that Churchill was providing a great deal of impetus and drive. The other being that he would listen and could be talked out of bad ideas. To call Gallipoli a “prank” is an injustice. One ☝️ f the things that Churchill believed, was that being a naval power gave you the advantage of projecting power. You could choose where you wanted to fight, because you could get men and machines anywhere that the Navy could take you. That is not a stupid idea, but one of the problems was that no-one had engaged in an opposed landing in modern warfare, so there were a great many un-knowns and the learning-curve was very steep indeed. That’s not counting the known failures of intelligence and command on the ground, which cannot fairly be laid at Churchill’s door.

[@davidmcintyre8145]

Two things must be remembered. After France falls it is not the UK or as too many people see it England against Germany; it is the British empire,which in 1940 was still the largest empire the world had ever seen with 25 percent of the entire population of Earth under direct British rule against Germany a situation that had the British actually looked at the position and moved would have led Germany to be crushed within days of attacking Poland. It is also true to say that the main difference between the leaders Churchill and Hitler was that Churchill was kept away from any vital strategic or tactical planning,his idea for a new 9.2 inch(a wwI calibre no longer used)armed cruiser that would take 6 years to build being a classic example as was his desire to see new cavalry regiments was that Churchill had admirals and generals who felt able to say; no unlike in Germany

[@CB-fz3li]

How exactly was Britain to move within days of Germany attacking Poland?

[@peterwebb8732]

And Churchill listened……

[@davidmcintyre8145]

@peterwebb8732 Not always the military brass often had to have"secret"meetings to ensure there were no enthusiasms from Churchill

[@peterwebb8732]

@@davidmcintyre8145 Do not confuse a discussion on how to best persuade C. to abandon certain lines of thought, with mutinous conspiracies to deny the PM his rightful authority. The testimony of those who worked with him was that you had to have good arguments and know your subject. But if you did, he listened.

[@davidmcintyre8145]

@@peterwebb8732 It was not denying Churchill his authority it was merely that the military chiefs especially from the Admiralty were well aware that Churchill in many ways was as drawn to the spectacular but impractical as Hitler with many remembering why Churchill lost his position in government and the admiralty in WWI and admiral Fisher was certainly aware and would have told Churchill that Gallipoli would be a mistake. In fact Churchill wanted to rehash in WWII an impractical plan(that was never actually serious)from WWI attack Germany directly from the sea in a Gallipoli style landing

[@Trecesolotienesdos]

With respect, does it matter if he was? Most whit British were at the time. They ran a colonial empire based on white supremacy, as in the "white man's burden" to uplift the "lower peoples". This was the essential rationale for all of European colonialism by that era, compared to the early modern period and Age of Discovery. It would be like judging the Duke of Wellington or Pitt the Younger for thinking "women should know their place" when most men of all classes thought that way in their era.

[@elbacr9501]

Google his "Dogs in a manger" speech - he was so racist that he upported the "replacement" of native Americans, and black Australians. "Replacement" is code for genociode in a "settler colomialism." The only difference betwen Churchill and Hitler - is that Hitler dared do the "settler colonialism" on white Europeans, particularly towards the Slavs - and Churchill thought it obscene to treat white Europeans in the same way he treated non-white people - as he showed in the "Dogs in a manger" speech. How many millioins of Indians died as a result of famine when Britian confiscated their food to feed the British Army and Civil servants?

[@Wolf-hh4rv]

@@elbacr9501oh please

[@Evemeister12]

You say Churchill was of his time, as if that's some sort of excuse. Imagine someone trying to make excuses for Adolf Hitler by saying that he was of his time. Technically an accurate thing to say as Hitler's attitude was common in European society, but it'd be denounced as an unpalatable take.

[@Nickel1147]

You do know that African tribes believed in racial superiority, as do Indians - the caste system.

[@Nickel1147]

​@@elbacr9501How about actually reading source records?

[@jim.franklin]

This was a really good discussion on Churchill, a flawed human, like all of us, and was a product of the times and his background. I think calling him racist, by the modern standard, is unfair and misleading, he was a product of a time, culture and education that gave him an arrogant air of superiority that may have had a race basis in its origins, but it is clear he was not racist in the way many claim. I have ordered David's book 👍👍

[@wildflower8481]

I think he used Australian soldiers as cannon fodder so many people died

[@jim.franklin]

@@wildflower8481 I don't think, I know you do not know what you are talking about as you have no idea how things work. As the political appointment he was ultimately responsible, but the execution of the orders was the responsibility of the Admirals and Generals that had operational authority for the strategic and tactical prosecution of the operations in theatre.

[@wildflower8481]

@@jim.franklin He is not in Heaven if thats for sure

[@grahambuckerfield4640]

@@wildflower8481 Attlee was mentioned, while his deputy in WW2 he also Churchill’s political opponent afterwards. Attlee thought Churchill was not the main culprit of Gallipoli, he should know being an junior officer wounded twice there, for him it was not the plan, it was the execution by the senior officers. But there are always the movies I suppose, With the not at all drunk racist, anti semitic actor who specialized in inaccurate anti British movies. Being hated by him is a badge of honor.

[@bengaisford3304]

Other people of the time were against the bengal famine and the colonisation of palestine.

[@magnussigurdsson9045]

Very educating. Thank you.👍

[@KnawedOne]

Churchill was a unique talent.

[@km3268]

Love David Reynolds!

[@jameseldridge4185]

Yes. So was Ghandi

[@gumdeo]

Gandhi

[@edytha2090]

But Gandhi dnt commit genocide...at the end Gandhi was himself a creation of the British

[@rpaulcelso]

Very interesting video, and it eventually answers the clickbait question, with the answer, ‘yes he was racist.’

[@peterwebb8732]

Not in the sense most apply to the word. There is a difference between arguing that different peoples are INHERENTLY and BIOLOGICALLY inferior - as Hitler did - and the belief that they will benefit by better education and example.

[@KOMET2006]

"His Majesty did not make me First Minister to preside over the liquidation of the British Empire." - Winston Churchill.

[@MartinWillett]

But he did it anyway.

[@peterwebb8732]

@@MartinWillettHe had no choice. Keep in mind that some of the more developed colonies had been independent since before WW1 (Australia, Canada, NZ….) The worldwide mood was for independence, whether many areas were ready for it or not. Administering and protecting an Empire was more costly than profitable, and the British taxpayers were not in the mood to keep paying for it.

[@vickyking3408]

For all of Churchills flaws without him we would have been under the fascist rule

[@elbacr9501]

Looking at Britain today, given the polisies of the Conservative Party - you are under fascist rule. Ayn Rand and Fredrich Hayek and the like were hidden fascisism because after Hitler and Mussolini, Fascist had to pretend to be neo-liberals and economic rationalists.

[@anthonyferris8912]

everyone was.

[@rob5944]

Another fascinating video, most of which I entirely agree with. Let us not have the impertinence to think of ourselves as the finished article, lest others that come after us sit in judgement. As an animal respector I don't find Churchills comments at all offensive. Indeed they're rather accurate I'd say.

[@meglomania2001]

I think you will find that most people were racist in the historical past.

[@Evemeister12]

Hitler was racist too, but by your logic he's also excused as most people were also racist back then.

[@Nickel1147]

A racist does not invite coloured people to their home

[@ShawnKennedy-w2i]

@@Evemeister12 Racism is used to give today's people a false sense of moral superiority.Can you prove racism isn't justified?

[@peterwebb8732]

@@Evemeister12Hitler believed in killing people. Churchill believed in educating them

[@Dhouston1125]

@@Evemeister12 and so what?

[@MartinWillett]

Why is a speech radio channel using annoying (or any) background music?

[@fintonmainz7845]

The Austrian Painter was of his time. Great excuse

[@indrajitgupta3280]

If we now look at Churchill's supposed racism, and see it as a series of rigid positions pre-determined by his stereotypes of other nations, for instance, the Italians under Mussolini, we have to look deeper. One thought that comes repeated to an Indian mind is his racism towards Indians. Quite apart from his beastly people, beastly religion remark, and discounting for a moment the sycophantic accounts and the kissing of the ring performed by the Nawab of Bhopal, the Maharaja of Alwar, G. D. Birla, and persons like that, his supporters will find it difficult to refute the argument that his assessment of India and the Indians was not supported by the 75 years of Indian history after independence from the UK. There have been hiccups, there have been stumbles, but the country continues. That is perhaps his greatest error of judgement.

[@alastairbrewster4274]

By modern standards he was racist by th standards of his contemporary foes , no he wasn’t. Revisionism at its most delinquent.

[@the_bunse]

Revisionism is not understanding the past and what will the future say of those that practice it.

[@peterwebb8732]

Revisionism also refuses to understand the difference between believing that others are inherently inferior, and believing that they are poorly educated, but will improve with help.

[@newtronix]

Billy Bunter!

[@cheesenoodles8316]

I believe Winston is the "Man of the Century". It seems all the hardships and triumphs of his life give him the skills to deal with WWII and prevail. Excellent video.

[@gerrycastlemanwarde5933]

Yes he was racist! However he should be remembered for his leadership during WW2.

[@djrudog1158]

Churchill hated the working class

[@davidworsley7969]

Really????😂😂

[@JonniePolyester]

@@davidworsley7969 I know, a stupid statement.

[@bengaisford3304]

​@@davidworsley7969he sent soldiers to quash minor strikes.

[@tridbant]

Basically, the right man at the right time.

[@gumdeo]

He sure was.

[@gilespritchett]

Racism has become a national obsession in the uk .with BBC leading the way. 😂😂😂

[@robertmoyse4414]

Oink.

[@nicholasbethell2921]

Britain never faced Hitler alone; it had an empire behind it. Myth-busting.

[@gumdeo]

Exactly. All those Canadians, South Africans, Indians, Australians and others were vital.

[@Nickel1147]

​@@gumdeothe Battle of Britain was fought predominently by British airmen - by thousands

[@cfox7811]

The prof. Said alone in terms of major allies.

[@nicholasbethell2921]

@@cfox7811 I would call the British Empire a major ally in terms of manpower and resources.

[@GWAR2334]

He was deeply racist.