Portlett Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 He did do some pretty awful things but then anyone in power is going to have to do some pretty horific things. I wonder if history will forgive Blair and Bush as they did Churchill, somehow I think not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ipaul Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Ah, so what if he was racist? Everyone was back in those days, it is only very recently that we have established that everyone is equal and political correctness and blah blah blah. or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place." Meaning Aborigines, I think I might well still agree with him here =P Before anyone chants racist, most true aborigines are much closer to Neanderthals - they are extremely dim and thuggish. I was told when I was in Australia that their skulls are actually considerably thicker because of a lack of development. Where I was, they even had a seperate island offshore to keep them there, as they were considerd a danger to normal society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 It's not racist. Most people thought that back then. Besides many African leaders hate white/western people yet that seems to be considered fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackfox Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Meh, couldn't care less. The man was a great leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falcon_BlizZACK Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Meaning Aborigines, I think I might well still agree with him here =P Before anyone chants racist, most true aborigines are much closer to Neanderthals - they are extremely dim and thuggish. I was told when I was in Australia that their skulls are actually considerably thicker because of a lack of development. Where I was, they even had a seperate island offshore to keep them there, as they were considerd a danger to normal society. That is like the epitome of a racist. You basically believe people who vary in appearance and are different to you are some how inferior...FYI, Neanderthals inhabited Europe for the most part...and apparently the true Homo Sapien came out of Africa...But that doesn't matter does it. :p White Australians used to shoot aboriginees like game and it wasn't illegal until recently...So who really was the danger to 'normal' society? ...I call tw@t. It's not racist. Most people thought that back then. Besides many African leaders hate white/western people yet that seems to be considered fine. Name...one. And thats all you probably could name...One. (Robert Mugabe). And they probably have a good reason for it. Yet lets examine the reasoning behind White/'Western' hatred of Africans...Then we see the clear difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyellowbloke Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 You can't demote Churchill from being great on the basis he was racist. If this was the case you'd be classing everyone from 70+ years ago in the same way. You need to judge everyone by the standards of their time and not modern standards and by the standards of his time he was a great leader with view that were not at all unusual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falcon_BlizZACK Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 You can't demote Churchill from being great on the basis he was racist. If this was the case you'd be classing everyone from 70+ years ago in the same way. You need to judge everyone by the standards of their time and not modern standards and by the standards of his time he was a great leader with view that were not at all unusual. Okay, in that sense I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Name...one. And thats all you probably could name...One. (Robert Mugabe). And they probably have a good reason for it. Yet lets examine the reasoning behind White/'Western' hatred of Africans...Then we see the clear difference. Ok that was the only one I could name. But I'm not particularly up on foreign politics. But it's not just the leaders that are racist. A lot of them are. How come the KKK is demonised yet the group of black racist people (I can't remember what they call themselves but they were on Louis Theroux) don't seem to be demonised nearly half as much. I'm not condoning the KKK and I think they are wrong but so are the black racists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khilafah Posted February 7, 2008 Author Share Posted February 7, 2008 I think Churchill is making it pretty clear that he thinks the black/indian race is a weaker race. Plus the fact that he thinks it was not wrong for the Native Indians or Aborigines too lose there land the way they did (It was stolen) is shocking in itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ipaul Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 That is like the epitome of a racist. You basically believe people who vary in appearance and are different to you are some how inferior...FYI, Neanderthals inhabited Europe for the most part...and apparently the true Homo Sapien came out of Africa...But that doesn't matter does it. :p White Australians used to shoot aboriginees like game and it wasn't illegal until recently...So who really was the danger to 'normal' society? ...I call tw@t. Name...one. And thats all you probably could name...One. (Robert Mugabe). And they probably have a good reason for it. Yet lets examine the reasoning behind White/'Western' hatred of Africans...Then we see the clear difference. I get what your saying and I know it seems very racist (I would've thought it had I been in your position) but they are under developed =P If you have ever been to townsville, or if you ever go, you will see what I mean. Theres just this strong collective dislike for 'true' aborigines as they are bruttish thugs who hang around in parks all day long beating each other up and drinking sherry. This is what I saw first hand for myself . I know fine well neanderthals have inhabited Europe in the past but we have evolved into much more sophisticated beings (for the most part) where as these have not. Maybe we should have just left Australia and the aborigines alone and I do disagree with the killings you talk of but they are just not as advanced as us. It is nothing to do with their appearance, it is in their primitive and thuggish nature that they are inferior. I know the original white australians were a big danger to these people and used to kill for fun but the fact is where I went and visited Australia, most of the aborigines were just violent, under developed thugs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayseven Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 I get what your saying and I know it seems very racist (I would've thought it had I been in your position) but they are under developed =P If you have ever been to townsville, or if you ever go, you will see what I mean. Theres just this strong collective dislike for 'true' aborigines as they are bruttish thugs who hang around in parks all day long beating each other up and drinking sherry. This is what I saw first hand for myself . I know fine well neanderthals have inhabited Europe in the pastbut we have evolved into much more sophisticated beings (for the most part) where as these have not. Maybe we should have just left Australia and the aborigines alone and I do disagree with the killings you talk of but they are just not as advanced as us. It is nothing to do with their appearance, it is in their primitive and thuggish nature that they are inferior. I know the original white australians were a big danger to these people and used to kill for fun but the fact is where I went and visited Australia, most of the aborigines were just violent, under developed thugs. it's racist to say that that's all they are :P they're not animals, you know. Their creed has been fucked up by the comparatively rapid appearance of technology, drugs, and in particular alcohol that threw their old tribal order of things into disarray. They might be aggressive towards people like you and I because they associate us with other white people who have mistrusted and abused them in one form or another. I've been to sydney, and for sure that's not exactly bushland, but I met a fair few aborigines and they were awesome. If they have the capacity to be normal people, then they all do, and I think it's wrong of you to go round believing and even spreading the idea that they're primitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ipaul Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 it's racist to say that that's all they are :P they're not animals, you know. Their creed has been fucked up by the comparatively rapid appearance of technology, drugs, and in particular alcohol that threw their old tribal order of things into disarray. They might be aggressive towards people like you and I because they associate us with other white people who have mistrusted and abused them in one form or another. I've been to sydney, and for sure that's not exactly bushland, but I met a fair few aborigines and they were awesome. If they have the capacity to be normal people, then they all do, and I think it's wrong of you to go round believing and even spreading the idea that they're primitive. Hmmmm maybe I have gotten a somewhat bias view when I went to Australia then, the place I went wasn't exactly bushland either but there were still alot of distrust/dislike collectively to the aborigines. They weren't just aggressive to white people but to each other as well, maybe even more so. Some of the aborigines that had been successfully intergrated into normal society with white parents or familys where absoloutley fine, but most (not all) of them were aggressive, undeveloped things. They were barely allowed on the mainland where I went, they often caught them trying to come from the island and sent them back. I thought it was quite sad really but accepted there must be something wrong with most of them for the people to do that. The image I had of aborigines before I went was a creative, peaceful race, but this just didn't seem to be the case when I went there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haver Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Gaggle is spot-on. That statement is racist by definition. The relativism of this 21st century astounds me. We demonize Bush and Blair but dance in the street for racists and tyrants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
somme Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 That is like the epitome of a racist. You basically believe people who vary in appearance and are different to you are some how inferior...FYI, Neanderthals inhabited Europe for the most part...and apparently the true Homo Sapien came out of Africa...But that doesn't matter does it. :p I've lived in Australia and aboriginals are a danger to society. If they aren't glue sniffing they're beating people up for cigarettes. Although the tribal aboriginals are apparently quite nice, the city ones, especially on the west coast are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shino Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 I've lived in Australia and aboriginals are a danger to society. If they aren't glue sniffing they're beating people up for cigarettes. Although the tribal aboriginals are apparently quite nice, the city ones, especially on the west coast are not. Not much different from the regular chav. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Not much different from the regular chav. Don't be stupid. They're way more advanced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paj! Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Read Heart Of Darkness, then you'll realise the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ipaul Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Read Heart Of Darkness, then you'll realise the truth. Erm....care to elaborate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pestneb Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 no one is perfect.Churchill is considered a hero for the good he has done. He is honoured because of that. he probably ate chicken in his life time. we don't comment on that. why? because its mundane, and doesn't make him stand out from the crowd. its the same with his racism. it was a VERY rare person back then who wasn't racist, and sexist. lets face it, its not like women had been able to vote when he was born. if someone is born in a puddle of mud, you shouldn't be surprised if they're muddy. your environment affects you more than you like to think, and if you were alive in those days its more than likely you would hold similar views. YES such a comment is racist. NO nothing big ought to be made of it. If people of the 1940's could critique our views and ways of live in the same manner that we can theirs, they would on the whole be pretty disgusted and outraged, and really they'd be just as justified to do so as we are in critiquing them now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Ahhahaha. Do you really think most of these so called British 'Heroes' with their statues littering central London were anything but war mongering, egotistical savages? I believe there are statues of Darwin and Mandela... One the whole, this thread needs to work "zeitgeist" injected into it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Well things have changed alot in 60/70 years. Back then in America, black people weren't allowed to walk on the same side of the street as white people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Plus the fact that he thinks it was not wrong for the Native Indians or Aborigines too lose there land the way they did (It was stolen) is shocking in itself. Not really, at the time it was fairly common (zeitgeist, etc...). In fact, it would have been seen as extremely liberal, if not eccentric, for a white person to think of black people as being completely equal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayseven Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 Not really, at the time it was fairly common (zeitgeist, etc...). In fact, it would have been seen as extremely liberal, if not eccentric, for a white person to think of black people as being completely equal. I guess that depends on your idea of "completely equal"; there were people fighting for the equal treatment of black people over two hundred years ago, so it's not an ideology that just sprouted one day I think it's always worth bearing in mind that when you say "everyone", you're generalising. I'm sure there were people back when Churchill said this that disagreed with what he said because they disagreed with any such 'common' perception there was. Pobody's nerfect, ho ho ho... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noodleman Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 No it isn't, you're just twisting shit to create...shit. :P (no honour on the internets). British imperalists were far succesful at 'Nazism' than Hitler himself. No i'm not, saying that every single person who has a statue in London was a racist is a racist comment in my book. Also do you even know what National Socalism is, because even when Brittain was out colonising half the world we had none of the policies of 'Nazism'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshMat Posted February 7, 2008 Share Posted February 7, 2008 I AM SO SICK OF RACISM Also no, i don't think he was racist. Damn racists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts