yep, the British empire in its heyday was a cruel colonial power. and Winston Churchill was a part of that legacy."The fact is that such a question immediately brings to mind in my memory a distant February evening in 1945 in the Crimea. I, at that time a young anti-occult scientist, was invited to one of the Allied after parties. Standing with cognac, surrounded by a variety of diplomats, spies who imagine themselves to be journalists, and journalists who imagine themselves to be spies, I carefully watched the chuckling trio of winners. Someone next to me sighed and said: "I don't understand how they can talk to this executioner of nations."
I turned around. The speaker was swarthy and bespectacled - later I repeatedly visited him at Bombay University to exchange experiences.
- You understand, my dear, that I am not ready to carry on a conversation about my leader in such a tone. I replied.
- And what about your leader? - the Indian was surprised. - I'm talking about Churchill.
I was also surprised: I only knew about Churchill that he was an uncle who smokes cigars, drinks cognac and raises a bulldog, and also that Hitler was defeated under him and Winnie the Pooh was invented.
But the doctor told me that the real Churchill is somewhat broader than his image. He told me about the recent famine in Bengal (1943), during which 1.5 to 2.5 million people died - and the British authorities prevented the faminers from fleeing to more prosperous areas. “When Churchill became Undersecretary for the Colonies at the beginning of the century, the Empire stopped publishing data on the victims of the famine. But under him, we alone in India had several famines - millions died, up to 80 million people starved,” Dr. Kumar said. “But he started with the blood of innocents, he’s no stranger to it.”
He spoke, and the real, uncut version of Churchill stood up in front of me in full growth. The young aristocrat began his career with the suppression of the Jose Marti uprising in Cuba and punitive operations in Sudan against Latinos and Negroes who had done nothing wrong to him. Then he participated in the genocide of the Boers. Then, as best he could, he strangled the Irish, Somalis, Rhodesians and Indians. Diving and emerging from power, he drove hungry Kenyans from the land, sent thousands of English homeless children to Australian labor colonies, bombed refugees in Dresden, rushed about the project of sterilizing 100 thousand "inferior" compatriots and concluding them in special concentration camps, and so on and so forth. “Do you know what he said about us Indians? “A stupid race, saved only by its reproduction from the fate it deserved,” the doctor read from memory. And he explained what fate Churchill had in mind, citing the politician’s appeal from 1937 : "I don't think that an injustice was done to the natives of Australia - a wiser, purer race came and took their place."
- Churchill and his empire rob half a billion people, mutilate the conquered countries, kill by the millions, cut out the flower of local nations - and you all think that this is a cute cunning guy in a top hat. Dr. Kumar finished bitterly. - you'll see, in a year he will again declare you devils and try to isolate you from the world. And in 50 years, in honor of the victory over Hitler, a monument will be erected to him in London - to him and Roosevelt, maybe - and your Uncle Joe will have been forgotten by that time. And no one will condemn the crimes of Churchillism. Everyone will think that he defeated the Germans - is it possible to recall everything else to him?
We parted that evening in silence.
From myself (AK), I’ll just add that the opium wars in China, which the British waged against it (I already wrote about these wars), claimed the lives of 50 million Chinese, and made 100 million Chinese into complete drug addicts.
Question: is no one going to answer for this? Are the British really going to teach morality to the whole world? Yes, in comparison with them, Stalin and Hitler and Pol Pot and Mao are real children.
he's not really famous for "winning" ww2 though. I've never heard that sentiment expressed before now.
i think it was mostly the US and Russia who actually beat Hitler. although the British did conduct massive bombing raids with heavy losses.
i will say that Russia suffered the most casualties at the hands of the nazis in ww2. i think 20,000,000 is about the right number.
and i can see that generating a deep fear and loathing of nazis.
the Russians are the ones who had to face the full force of German armor in open terrain.
the battle of Kursk was epic!