Is this what society has come to?

[Gwadien]

History always revises great figures.

I just can't wait until the official line on Winston Churchill to change, you'll all lose your shit then.

 

[DaGaffer]

History always revises great figures.

I just can't wait until the official line on Winston Churchill to change, you'll all lose your shit then.

What official line? Indians already think he was literally worse than Hitler

 

[Wij]

Penn and Teller did an episode on Gandhi and mother Theresa years ago.

 

[Gwadien]

What official line? Indians already think he was literally worse than Hitler

British public perception.

 

[Job]

History always revises great figures.

I just can't wait until the official line on Winston Churchill to change, you'll all lose your shit then.

We voted him out straight after the war

 

[Gwadien]

We voted him out straight after the war

That wasn't because he was a cunt though.

 

[Job]

I love the way half the quotes on the internet are attributed to him.

 

[Job]

The Guardian actually printed this utter shite.

Welcome to the Men's Rights Activists Seething Divorced Resentful Fathers Support Group | First Dog on the Moon

 

[dysfunction]

The Guardian actually printed this utter shite.

Welcome to the Men's Rights Activists Seething Divorced Resentful Fathers Support Group | First Dog on the Moon

Again it's an opinion piece...

 

[Scouse]

Again it's an opinion piece...

Absolutely.

It get why it's been done the way it has, but it lacks balance tbh. Not great, but as you say, just an opinion piece.

 

[DaGaffer]

Absolutely.

It get why it's been done the way it has, but it lacks balance tbh. Not great, but as you say, just an opinion piece.

I've never really liked First Dog on The Moon; its an Australian thing and even on the odd occasion when I agree with it there's always something off about the tone (condescending without the necessary wit), and I can do snarky and sarcastic with the best of them.

 

[Bodhi]

Hasn't he been considered a bit dodgy for a while now? There's the sleeping with young girls thing "testing his faith", the racism (at this point cant we just agree that everyone everywhere born before 1940 was/is racist and leave it at that?) and he's quite controversial on the caste system as well. But having said all that, the good still outweighs the bad

I dunno I just get very uncomfortable evaluating historical figures based on the values of today, especially when the people in question have demonstrably had such a positive impact on history.

Who's next? Martin Luther King? Mother Theresa? Justin Trudeau ))?

 

[Gwadien]

So what you're saying is we should ignore the negative sides of great figures?

But like the Founding Fathers of the US who all preached for liberty, so they were completely aware of the concept of freedom, not just for their slaves.

 

[Bodhi]

So what you're saying is we should ignore the negative sides of great figures?

But like the Founding Fathers of the US who all preached for liberty, so they were completely aware of the concept of freedom, not just for their slaves.

 

[Scouse]

So what you're saying is we should ignore the negative sides of great figures?

But like the Founding Fathers of the US who all preached for liberty, so they were completely aware of the concept of freedom, not just for their slaves.

Don't need to ignore it at all - but I don't see the value in demonising them because that will be used by arseholes today to undermine the long-standing good messages that stand (Ghandi's peaceful protest message will be discounted by wankers like Job because he can).

It's a bit like saying MJ's music should be blacklisted because maybe-paedo or Richard Wagner's music should be banned because he was a nazi supporter.

 

[Gwadien]

Don't need to ignore it at all - but I don't see the value in demonising them because that will be used by arseholes today to undermine the long-standing good messages that stand (Ghandi's peaceful protest message will be discounted by wankers like Job because he can).

It's a bit like saying MJ's music should be blacklisted because maybe-paedo or Richard Wagner's music should be banned because he was a nazi supporter.

But the problem is that revisionism of historical figures isn't a Leftie thing which Bodhi and Job want to suggest, it's a thing that happens naturally and has happened all throughout history, the Victorians loved it.

 

[Scouse]

The victorians loved egalitarianism and personal responsibility combined with freedom of speech and look how that's turned out

 

[Gwadien]

The victorians loved egalitarianism and personal responsibility combined with freedom of speech and look how that's turned out

 

[DaGaffer]

So what you're saying is we should ignore the negative sides of great figures?

But like the Founding Fathers of the US who all preached for liberty, so they were completely aware of the concept of freedom, not just for their slaves.

No, but its very easy to evaluate the complexity of someone like Churchill and still accept that for all he was a politically flaky racist imperialist, he also quite literally (no, not figuratively) saved the world from pure evil, so on balance, he's got more positive in the balance sheet. The problem a lot of historical revisionism is that it goes for the cheap shot without any nuance. Using Churchill again, Indians have been blaming him personally for the Bengal Famine for about the last decade or so, no because its true, but because its much easier to blame one person with high name recognition than accept "it was much more complicated than that" (and in the case of Indians, take any responsibility for their own actions). In the case of Gandhi its the same, lots of weird stuff but a profoundly important message in the end. Mother Theresa on the other hand, deserves every bit of revisionist vilification you can throw at her; she didn't make the lives of street Indians better at all.

 

[Scouse]

What point are you making @Gwadien?

Be explicit please - that picture could be taken a lot of different ways.

 

[Scouse]

he's got more positive in the balance sheet.

Agree. In this day and age we don't do "balance sheet" social economics.

Instead we now do social and economic destitution by single allegation - and it's the left that largely drive that (whilst simultaneously controlling what is 'acceptable' to say).

Mother Theresa on the other hand, deserves every bit of revisionist vilification you can throw at her; she didn't make the lives of street Indians better at all.

I'd have like to have punted the bitch in the cunt. But, you know, personal responsibility n' all that

 

[Gwadien]

What point are you making @Gwadien?

Be explicit please - that picture could be taken a lot of different ways.

Yet you agreed when Bodhi posted it :S

 

[Scouse]

Yet you agreed when Bodhi posted it :S

You know which way Bodhi leans and his context provided an idea of what he was saying (but even then I hesitated with the agree (but hit fuck it ))

You got a reason why you don't want to make your point explicit? Rather than just complain about an agree I gave someone else?

Come on teach. Stop being such a weirdo.

 

[Gwadien]

You know which way Bodhi leans and his context provided an idea of what he was saying (but even then I hesitated with the agree (but hit fuck it ))

You got a reason why you don't want to make your point explicit? Rather than just complain about an agree I gave someone else?

Come on teach. Stop being such a weirdo.

Because you're obsessed with changing the subject to freedom of speech.

 

[Gwadien]

No, but its very easy to evaluate the complexity of someone like Churchill and still accept that for all he was a politically flaky racist imperialist, he also quite literally (no, not figuratively) saved the world from pure evil, so on balance, he's got more positive in the balance sheet. The problem a lot of historical revisionism is that it goes for the cheap shot without any nuance. Using Churchill again, Indians have been blaming him personally for the Bengal Famine for about the last decade or so, no because its true, but because its much easier to blame one person with high name recognition than accept "it was much more complicated than that" (and in the case of Indians, take any responsibility for their own actions). In the case of Gandhi its the same, lots of weird stuff but a profoundly important message in the end. Mother Theresa on the other hand, deserves every bit of revisionist vilification you can throw at her; she didn't make the lives of street Indians better at all.

But as I said, revisionism happens all the time, and most the time it's generally chucked out of public history after it's been debated.

Thatcher is a prime example of someone who will go through lots of revisionism in the future, especially in light of all the incompetence we've had recently.

But back to your point about Churchill; don't you think Churchill being responsible for beating the Nazis and him being responsible for the famines in India is equally as far fetched?

 

[DaGaffer]

But back to your point about Churchill; don't you think Churchill being responsible for beating the Nazis and him being responsible for the famines in India is equally as far fetched?

No. We actually know he was the only potential PM in 1940 who would have kept Britain in the War; it's really as simple as that. Whereas we also know he didn't deliberately starve Indians and we have a ton of documented evidence of him personally trying to get grain shipped to India. (Not opinion, primary source letters and memos).

 

[Wij]

Mother Theresa is not a complex case at all. She was a fucking monster.

/edit: Like Jordan Peterson.

 

[Job]

Theyre just trolling now arent they?

Does Extinction Rebellion have a race problem?

 

[Scouse]

Theyre just trolling now arent they?

Does Extinction Rebellion have a race problem?

Yep. Total chancer.

He's worked for the FT and the Express as well as the grauniad. He writes emotive shit people will click on.

I clicked on it too @Job. But the tit is trying to earn a wage.

Ignore it - you know it's shite.

 

[Job]

Im so used to reading this kind of shite thats its hard to tell.

Hes actually complaining that only white people get arrested.