Fiedler, if you're going to praise Churchill's commitment to civil liberties, due process, and not committing genocide, I'd recommend you to tell it to the Kikuyu, Malay Chinese, Iranians, and of course Bengalis. They might have a different attitude towards Mr. Churchill's commitment to those ideals, and none of them can really fairly be described as broadly supporting Nazi Germany or the Co-Prosperity Sphere.

wtf does any of this have to do with webdip.

There is much to criticise about Churchill. However, in my view fascism would have triumphed, excluding perhaps the Americas were he not the right man in the right place at the right time.

It is interesting to speculate why some people have such a violent reaction against him in the light of this. Pick any one or any combination of the following.

1) communists who would like to forget/ gloss over the nazi/soviet pact.
2) anglophobes
3) those who think WW2 began with Pearl Harbour
4) Irish nationalists who wish to retrospectively justify Eire's neutrality and therefore condemn Churchill's (and America's) attitude to this in the context of the U boat war.
5) closet and open fascists/anti semites.

Past discussion here indicates to me that certain contributors hold several of these positions at the same time. Not that this would be inconsistent with their world view.

Awesome. It's been a while since I was called a fascist anti-semite because I question the morality of a genocidaire.

I really fancy a cider right now

Rekorderlig

No, wjessop, a cider. Not a glorified alcopop in a fancy bottle

Lol !

"glorified alcopop in a fancy bottle"

It's like you're defining Sweden entirely.

As for the discussion...

Winston Churchill was a human being with strengths and weaknesses like any other.

In the UK, he is venerated like a saint. Rose-tinted nostalgia at its most dangerous.

I wish people would stop acting like he was a British Joan of Arc -- but sadly that's a dominant voice in Britain that hasn't passed off yet: heavy focus on the Second World War 'triumphs' and an inappropriate, overdue longing for a time when Britain was an Empire. Life is supposedly simpler when the nation is at war, because everyone knows which side they're on, and simple people like simple times.

"Winston Churchill was a human being with strengths and weaknesses like any other."
- what an astoundingly brilliant statement.

"In the UK, he is venerated like a saint. Rose-tinted nostalgia at its most dangerous."
- yes because some people have values and are able to admire others. How is it dangerous? Good job on providing your evidence there.

"heavy focus on the Second World War 'triumphs' "
- yes they were indeed triumphs. Would you have preferred Hitler to win? Just a small question to distract you from your iPhone I guess.

"and simple people like simple times."
- why on earth do you think WW2 was simpler times? That just amply demonstrates how simple you are wjessop. Completely laughable.

This whole superior attitude that kids have nowadays towards people of the past is beneath contempt beyond description.

"yes because some people have values and are able to admire others"
Ah, the values of bombing factory cities for no actual military purpose other than pissing off Germans as well as despising Bengalis. What a great set of them to have.

"and simple people like simple times."

- hey wjessop, I went to the dentist a couple of weeks ago, my jewish dentist told me how his grandfather escaped from Poland to Russia just before the holocaust that wiped out his entire family. Then he fought in the war nearly starved to death and then lived out most of the rest of his life under anti-Semitic Stalin.

Ahhh, SIMPLER TIMES.

"pissing off Germans as well as despising Bengalis. What a great set of them to have"

TrPrado they didn't piss off the germans, hey killed lots of them. They were at war, you see.

Despising benghalis - GOSH!. Did you know Gandhi despised blacks? What a world.

Anyway, sorry to distract you embarrassments from your iPhones.

The main argument of the side saying Churchill was a great and moral man hinges on saying Hitler was an evil man and Churchill fought Hitler, so Churchill can't be anything other than moral and good. Good and evil is not so simple, and there wasn't a really moral power fighting that war. Countries fought for their own self-interest, as countries have done since the close of the 19th century.

"They were at war, you see."
Oh, so he declared war with the citizens of Dresden and bombed them as such?

@fiedler: For many people they were a simpler time, fiedler: dividing people into goodies and baddies.

Actually I think your point about the death camps expresses exactly the brutal simplicity of those times: when anyone you disagreed with was simply put into a death camp, that is of course a simple way of dealing with people. Far, far too simple. The worst disaster of humanity.

Fiedler, you are entitled to your opinion but stop acting like you are superior to everyone you are discussing because you don't agree with their viewpoint.

Thank you, Clarinet + Clarinet.

I must say, for someone who only joined the website less than 4 hours ago, you already have a pretty good grasp of Fiedler!

"Europe would be a far-right dictatorship."

Nazism was far-left, not far-right.

@leon: That's simply not true.

Nazism was right-wing totalitarianist fascism. Individuals were subordinate to the state. The Nazi hierarchy wanted all of the nationalism with as little of the socialism as possible.

Fascism is a right-wing ideology, liam.

Just because they used the word "socialism" doesn't mean they were left-wing.

You have to analyse deeper than that.

Nazi Germany, like the German Empire, was founded on German ultra-conservative principles. "National socialism" is much better described as nationalistic than socialistic, considering Hitler was fine with private businesses, he simply wanted a homogenous German nation-state. There's no reason to defend far-right from anyone who wants to criticize it.

Well there was a faction of NSDAP that took the socialism aspect seriously, but they were purged in that whole Long Knives thing.

Nazis were left-wing in many ways. They advocated for animal rights and environmental protection more than any other European country at the time. Nazis nationalized education, health care, transportation, and other major industries. They were strictly anti-gun. They were pro-abortion and pro-atheism. They were nationalistic and inspired by fascist Mussolini, but the Soviets were also nationalistic, and the policies of Hitler and Mussolini were quite different. And even though Nazi Germany may not have had the opportunity to practice socialism on a wide scale, Hitler frequently denounced the "bourgeois capitalists", especially the Jewish ones.

Right, they were only the beloved successors of the imperial family. Wilhelm II almost disowned his son for being as far-right as the Nazis (until WWII started, when Wilhelm started praising Hitler again).
Also, Hitler most definitely didn't want a full nationalization of all industry, mostly just enough to where all industry was German industry (a lot of nationalization that has occurred throughout history has had the goal of removing foreign influence). He strictly had the goal of destroying all the liberalization that had occurred due to the Treaty of 1919.

Also, Hitler hated communists (the epitome of leftism) about as much as he hated laissez-faire (which wasn't considered as far to the right in Germany then as it is in America today).