ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums

ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/index.php)
-   Serious Debates & News (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=61)
-   -   PC brigade trying to trash British legends (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/showthread.php?t=338247)

Brillopad 16-05-2018 07:57 AM

PC brigade trying to trash British legends
 
https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv...l-tv-GMB-clash

With Morgan on this. No-one is perfect, including her, but Churchill did a great service to this country. Petty PC gripes about a man no longer here to defend himself from those wanting to make a big deal about them can bu**er off. She is just trying to undermine traditional British history and its legends to fit her own PC agenda. Transparent as glass!

Nicky91 16-05-2018 08:07 AM

Churchill was a great PM (during some tough times in WW2)

Mystic Mock 16-05-2018 08:16 AM

Churchill was a racist wasn't he?

Not to undermine his achievements during WWII obviously but he did have his issues that had him be controversial with his people at the time for a reason.

Nicky91 16-05-2018 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock (Post 9996027)
Churchill was a racist wasn't he?

Not to undermine his achievements during WWII obviously but he did have his issues that had him be controversial with his people at the time for a reason.

i didn't know this, i only have respect for him cause of his achievements during WWII

arista 16-05-2018 08:19 AM

Yes writer Afua Hirsch
has been on about the Bad sides of Churchill
for a long time.
the problem is way back then was nothing like today.

Mystic Mock 16-05-2018 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nicky91 (Post 9996029)
i didn't know this, i only have respect for him cause of his achievements during WWII

Tbf he had his views of his time, he wasn't the only one to have his racist views and he certainly won't be the last.

I actually agree with Afua that the good and the bad points of Winston Churchill are more interesting to talk about than trying to make him a holy figure that can't be debated about on his negative sides.

Brillopad 16-05-2018 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock (Post 9996027)
Churchill was a racist wasn't he?

Not to undermine his achievements during WWII obviously but he did have his issues that had him be controversial with his people at the time for a reason.

Times were different then and this woman is using it to try to undermine traditional ‘white’ Britain for PC gain. It’s weak and it’s cheap - rather like her. :rolleyes:

Nicky91 16-05-2018 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock (Post 9996034)
Tbf he had his views of his time, he wasn't the only one to have his racist views and he certainly won't be the last.

I actually agree with Afua that the good and the bad points of Winston Churchill are more interesting to talk about than trying to make him a holy figure that can't be debated about on his negative sides.

of course, negative things are usually most interesting to talk about, criticizing people, alive or dead


Geert Wilders also has his racist views, towards any non-dutch person living in my country (even though his own wife is Hungarian :joker: :joker: )

jaxie 16-05-2018 08:43 AM

I think it's difficult to judge historical figures by the standards of today because living in those times were different, beliefs and upbringing was different. If you are raised to see the world a certain way then that is what you will do. People were men and women of their times. What we can do is compare Churchill most favourably when you look at Hitler.

kirklancaster 16-05-2018 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brillopad (Post 9996042)
Times were different then and this woman is using it to try to undermine traditional ‘white’ Britain for PC gain. It’s weak and it’s cheap - rather like her. :rolleyes:

Just another MONEY GRUBBING fake seizing an opportunity to promote her book.

user104658 16-05-2018 08:53 AM

He was a white supremacist but not a hostile one; basically he believed that white people were literally intellectually superior genetically and should therefore be in charge... but he wasn't hateful of other races. It's a complicated one, like people say, very much a product of his time and this is what he was educated to believe :shrug:.

People will say it doesn't matter what "the times" were but it sort of does... it's a totally different situation today where everyone KNOWS that there are no significant biological differences between races other than skin colour and other physical features, and to believe that one is "superior" one has to be actively ignoring the abundant available evidence and choosing to be a supremacist.

There was a thread about this recently though I think.

My stance hasn't really changed; measuring historical figures by modern ethical standards is daft and pointless.

Nicky91 16-05-2018 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kirklancaster (Post 9996061)
Just another MONEY GRUBBING fake seizing an opportunity to promote her book.


bots 16-05-2018 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier (Post 9996065)
measuring historical figures by modern ethical standards is daft and pointless.

Correct. Times change, the world moves on. What people seem to forget is that without Churchill, people wouldn't be able hold and express the views they do so freely today.

Kazanne 16-05-2018 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock (Post 9996027)
Churchill was a racist wasn't he?

Not to undermine his achievements during WWII obviously but he did have his issues that had him be controversial with his people at the time for a reason.

I don't know Mock,was he? even so I think it was more likely to be racist back in the day , back then Britain was a very proud nation and weren't we predominantly English ,I don't know much about it all so am probably wrong but from what I have seen and heard times have changed a lot regarding peoples views from the Churchill days.

Twosugars 16-05-2018 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier (Post 9996065)
He was a white supremacist but not a hostile one; basically he believed that white people were literally intellectually superior genetically and should therefore be in charge... but he wasn't hateful of other races. It's a complicated one, like people say, very much a product of his time and this is what he was educated to believe :shrug:.

People will say it doesn't matter what "the times" were but it sort of does... it's a totally different situation today where everyone KNOWS that there are no significant biological differences between races other than skin colour and other physical features, and to believe that one is "superior" one has to be actively ignoring the abundant available evidence and choosing to be a supremacist.

There was a thread about this recently though I think.

My stance hasn't really changed; measuring historical figures by modern ethical standards is daft and pointless.

TS read my mind and expressed it better than I could so
This^^

Oliver_W 16-05-2018 11:08 AM

Discrediting his achievements because he had dodgy views is just stupid. I think nearly everyone acknowledges he held those views, but it's pointless to trash his legacy because of them. Why was that woman even given airtime?

smudgie 16-05-2018 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier (Post 9996065)
He was a white supremacist but not a hostile one; basically he believed that white people were literally intellectually superior genetically and should therefore be in charge... but he wasn't hateful of other races. It's a complicated one, like people say, very much a product of his time and this is what he was educated to believe :shrug:.

People will say it doesn't matter what "the times" were but it sort of does... it's a totally different situation today where everyone KNOWS that there are no significant biological differences between races other than skin colour and other physical features, and to believe that one is "superior" one has to be actively ignoring the abundant available evidence and choosing to be a supremacist.

There was a thread about this recently though I think.

My stance hasn't really changed; measuring historical figures by modern ethical standards is daft and pointless.

Couldn’t put it better.
Agree with everything in this post.

Tom4784 16-05-2018 11:26 AM

He probably was a racist, it was more acceptable back then. I don't think ignoring that aspect and saying it's 'besmirching' Churchill's legacy is a very healthy attitude to take. Most historical 'heroes' are far from perfect and it's important to remember that.

It's quite a PC attitude to try to protect historical figures from criticism for fear of causing offense. No one is above criticism.

Nicky91 16-05-2018 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dezzy (Post 9996173)
He probably was a racist, it was more acceptable back then. I don't think ignoring that aspect and saying it's 'besmirching' Churchill's legacy is a very healthy attitude to take. Most historical 'heroes' are far from perfect and it's important to remember that.

It's quite a PC attitude to try to protect historical figures from criticism for fear of causing offense. No one is above criticism.

true, but a hero like Churchill has done great unforgettable things in WWII

Tom4784 16-05-2018 11:31 AM

He was a human like anyone else, I don't think the darker aspects of his character should be wiped away for the sake of his achievements because they were a part of who he was. Most figures like Churchill operated in shades of grey and I think it's rewriting history to ignore the parts that might 'besmirch' his legacy.

Crimson Dynamo 16-05-2018 11:33 AM

"i think that a fundamental British value is integrity and intellectual curiosity"


what is a British value, who decides on them and who decides what they are?

What is integrity?

What is intellectual curiosity, define intellectual?


"i cant understand why the British nation in 2018 are comfortable with a Propagandist version 0f history"

who is comfortable?

what is a Propagandist version 0f history?

---------------

This awful woman is literally making up here own facts and data to hang her massive shoulder chip on

just vile

:bored:

Twosugars 16-05-2018 11:41 AM

Don't see a problem telling things as they were, after all, hiding them would be worse and those reading original sources would discover them anyway,
but need to put a disclaimer that his was a prevalent attitude at the time.
No point in trying to whitewash things though.
He overindulged in alcohol, used drugs, suffered from depression etc, that doesn't dimish him, just makes him human.

Crimson Dynamo 16-05-2018 12:20 PM

Lets face it she is doing this to make herself feel important, its more about her than anyone else

Nicky91 16-05-2018 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 9996216)
Lets face it she is doing this to make herself feel important, its more about her than anyone else

http://cdn.thisisbigbrother.com/cust...37810_1186.gif

Twosugars 16-05-2018 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nicky91 (Post 9996222)

Nicky is dragging LT :hehe:

Northern Monkey 16-05-2018 12:33 PM

I knew who it was going to be before i even clicked.
She was calling out for our historical statues to be torn down the other month.
I’ve seen her on a couple of things.She basically takes the anti British view on any topic.
(And she said she’s got a book coming out so she’s trying to get attention).

Brillopad 16-05-2018 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey (Post 9996235)
I knew who it was going to be before i even clicked.
She was calling out for our historical statues to be torn down the other month.
I’ve seen her on a couple of things.She basically takes the anti British view on any topic.
(And she said she’s got a book coming out so she’s trying to get attention).

Silly c*w - who does she think she is. She has no right to try to destroy our history or it’s legends whatever SHE thinks of them. A loud mouth control freak using PC to to get her own way and endorse that massive chip on her shoulder. History is history and cannot be changed by tearing down statues - it does not dictate the future, and neither does she. Neither does she dictate the rights and wrongs of the past.

The day she can prove to the world she is PERFECT is the day anyone should even consider taking her seriously on this - and on many other issues I suspect.

Oliver_W 16-05-2018 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 9996216)
Lets face it she is doing this to make herself feel important, its more about her than anyone else

This, pretty much.

Redway 16-05-2018 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock (Post 9996027)
Churchill was a racist wasn't he?

Not to undermine his achievements during WWII obviously but he did have his issues that had him be controversial with his people at the time for a reason.

He was around in the first half of the 20th century. Of course he was a racist.

Underscore 16-05-2018 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliver_W (Post 9996157)
Why was that woman even given airtime?

Because believe it or not, this is an impartial news programme where all views are heard.

Alf 16-05-2018 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redway (Post 9996339)
He was around in the first half of the 20th century. Of course he was a racist.

It's true that, Nelson Mandela was a massive one.

Oliver_W 16-05-2018 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underscore (Post 9996346)
Because believe it or not, this is an impartial news programme where all views are heard.

I have the view that we shouldn't keep building over the countryside, but that wouldn't get me on GMB. But the random and pointless views of that woman need to be heard?

Underscore 16-05-2018 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliver_W (Post 9996362)
I have the view that we shouldn't keep building over the countryside, but that wouldn't get me on GMB. But the random and pointless views of that woman need to be heard?

How are they pointless? Also this is a contentious issue which is largely not covered.

Also just because you don't like her views doesn't mean she should be censored - thats very PC

Alf 16-05-2018 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underscore (Post 9996371)
How are they pointless? Also this is a contentious issue which is largely not covered.

Also just because you don't like her views doesn't mean she should be censored - thats very PC

She shouldn't be censored, but she should be ridiculed and insulted. That's free speech.

Oliver_W 16-05-2018 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underscore (Post 9996371)
How are they pointless? Also this is a contentious issue which is largely not covered.

Also just because you don't like her views doesn't mean she should be censored - thats very PC

Churchill existed, and did good and bad things, mostly good. He deserves his place in history, despite the bad. Does she want History lessons to include "and let's not forget, Churchill was a naaaaasty racist!!1" or something? It's pointless because there's nothing worth changing. Like I said upthread, most people acknowledge Churchill had views of his time.

Brillopad 16-05-2018 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underscore (Post 9996371)

Also just because you don't like her views doesn't mean she should be censored - thats very PC

SHe would be getting a taste of her own medicine then wouldn’t she! Karma - isn’t’ it great!

Tom4784 16-05-2018 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brillopad (Post 9996385)
SHe would be getting a taste of her own medicine then wouldn’t she! Karma - isn’t’ it great!

'Grrr being PC is bad unless it's me doing it!'

Underscore 16-05-2018 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliver_W (Post 9996376)
Churchill existed, and did good and bad things, mostly good. He deserves his place in history, despite the bad. Does she want History lessons to include "and let's not forget, Churchill was a naaaaasty racist!!1" or something? It's pointless because there's nothing worth changing. Like I said upthread, most people acknowledge Churchill had views of his time.

I never got taught in school the criticisms of Churchill - quite the opposite.

Students should be taught a balanced view of Churchill. He had his good points and he had his bad points. End of story.

Underscore 16-05-2018 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dezzy (Post 9996388)
'Grrr being PC is bad unless it's me doing it!'

:hehe:

Brillopad 16-05-2018 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dezzy (Post 9996388)
'Grrr being PC is bad unless it's me doing it!'

Yeah it’s bad - isn’t that the point! Those on the left can’t just dish it out and then whine when it gets directed back at them. People are being censored and labelled by the PC brigade endlessly so if she now feels censored herself - I for one won’t be crying about it.


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:50 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.