Was Churchill anti-Semitic?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by ZZZzzzzzzz, Mar 11, 2007.

  1. Jews 'partly responsible' for their troubles: Churchill

    Mar 10 7:08 PM US/Eastern

    The Second World War prime minister Winston Churchill argued that Jews were "partly responsible for the antagonism from which they suffer" in an article publicised for the first time Sunday.

    Churchill made the claim in an article entitled "How The Jews Can Combat Persecution" written in 1937, three years before he started leading the country.

    He outlined a new wave of anti-Semitism sweeping across Europe and the United States, which was followed by the deaths of millions of Jews in the Holocaust under the German Nazi regime.

    "It would be easy to ascribe it to the wickedness of the persecutors, but that does not fit all the facts," the article read.

    "It exists even in lands, like Great Britain and the United States, where Jew and Gentile are equal in the eyes of the law and where large numbers of Jews have found not only asylum, but opportunity.

    "These facts must be faced in any analysis of anti-Semitism. They should be pondered especially by the Jews themselves.

    "For it may be that, unwittingly, they are inviting persecution -- that they have been partly responsible for the antagonism from which they suffer."

    The article adds: "The central fact which dominates the relations of Jew and non-Jew is that the Jew is 'different'.

    "He looks different. He thinks differently. He has a different tradition and background. He refuses to be absorbed."

    Elsewhere, Churchill praised Jews as "sober, industrious, law-abiding" and urged Britons to stand up for the race against persecution.

    "There is no virtue in a tame acquiescence in evil. To protest against cruelty and wrong, and to strive to end them, is the mark of a man," he wrote.

    The article was discovered by Cambridge University historian Richard Toye in the university's archive of Churchill's papers.

    At the time, Churchill's secretary advised him it would be "inadvisable" to publish it and it never saw the light of day.

    Churchill was voted the greatest Briton ever in a nationwide poll held by the BBC in 2002.

  2. Using the criteria of Z and Nik, both Churchill and FDR were anti-Semitic.

    Of course we all know that members of a race, religion, nation or culture don't share unique traits or behaviors. We're all randomly the same. Whatever.

    History has ignored the vast political causes of anti-Jewish actions in 1930's Europe. It's easier to publish rubbish like "Hitler was a madman who used fiery speeches to hypnotize the gullable but usually peaceful German populace." The bottom line is this, Jews throughout Europe were in sympathy with the Jewish led Bolsheviks in Russia and sought to expand communism in Europe including Germany and France.

    Few young people today even realize that the governments of Austria, Italy, France and Poland were in full sympathy with Hitler. Why? Were they too "hypnotized"? No, they all saw that Russia and communism were a clear and present danger and that Germany was the one nation on the cusp of fighting Stalin.

    One often hears how the U.S. and the allies 'saved" Europe from Hitler. Residents of Poland, Hungary, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Slovakia, Albania and others would beg to differ......

    None of this is to say Hitler wasn't insane. His bizzarness could fill volumes. However the injustice of Versailles and the influx of Reds into the west made Nazism inevitable. One of the truest saws ever is "history makes the man." If Hitler wasn't around someone else would have filled the void.
  3. Huh?? Is it rubbish or isn't it?

  4. Is this where you sing the glories of Adolph Hitler?

  5. Not the insane part. But do you believe Hitler's political success involved brainwashing?

  6. If Franklin Delano Roosevelt is in Heaven then Hitler feasts side by side with St. Peter.....
  7. Oh please continue, I just love the hole you continue to dig for yourself...

  8. You've made thousands of posts about evil Bush and the Iraq war. Apparently the notion of 500,000 young Americans dying so that Europe could be thrown behind an Iron Curtain bothers you very little.

    Why? Because at heart you're a Soviet communist sympathizer.....
  9. Oh, please continue with your imaginations...

    Maybe throw in a little profanity like you often do...

  10. Gosh, what a compelling, imaginative rebuttal.

    Let's use Z logic.

    Saddam was a mass murderer but the U.S. (if served by a Republican Prez) should never enter an unprovoked war.

    Hitler was a mass murderer but the U.S. (if served by a Democratic Prez) entering the war unprovoked in Europe was just.

    Iraq was a colossal mistake (if served by a Republican Prez) because our "exit plan" (or lack of) means war between rival Muslims, 3000 American dead and trillions in expense.

    WWll was just (if served by a Democratic Prez) even though our "exit plan" (or lack thereof) meant teaming with Joe Stalin, enslaving Eastern Europe to 50 years of Soviet communism, 500,000 American dead and trillions in expense.

    Can I share some more Z logic? Will you next tell us what a great war Viet Nam was? I'm sure LBJ warms you up with admiration.

    #10     Mar 11, 2007