Ian H
Legendary Member
A new book about Churchill, reviewed here.
View: https://twitter.com/TariqAli_News/status/1516810665977159680
View: https://twitter.com/TariqAli_News/status/1516810665977159680
No, Johnson's inept hagiography is merely mentioned.Did tariq Ali write a book specifically about Johnson's hero worship? That's rather ... niche, isn't it? :-/
[can't see the tweet right now, sorry]
That looks like a balanced, objective view. Let's see ...
Like so many bad ideas, it has its roots with Margaret Thatcher. ...
What would you consider 'balance' to require? Like all histories, it's written from a particular perspective. I'd say that venerating Churchill as a near-saint is unbalanced.
I don't think anybody could pretend that Churchill was a saint. The only thing that matters is what he managed to do in the five years when faced with The Other Guy.
No, Johnson's inept hagiography is merely mentioned.
Here's a better link: https://www.currentaffairs.org/2022/04/winston-churchill-imperial-monstrosity
So if they write a book saying that Adolf Hitler was actually a great guy you say the same? it's the same one sided focus right?That looks like a balanced, objective view. Let's see ...
Like so many bad ideas, it has its roots with Margaret Thatcher. ...
You can't have balance if you say you concentrate on his ''imperial'' past or something, if you want balance you write a bigger book with both his good and bad points. but that doesn't sell these days, if it's about our past hero's you got to put them in the racist,imperial, slave killers corner, whether facts back it up or provide context or not. de trend is remove all facts and concentrate on the most negative output you can find.What would you consider 'balance' to require? Like all histories, it's written from a particular perspective. I'd say that venerating Churchill as a near-saint is unbalanced.
There's been enough big books written only bigging up wartime 'hero' Churchill.So if they write a book saying that Adolf Hitler was actually a great guy you say the same? it's the same one sided focus right?
You can't have balance if you say you concentrate on his ''imperial'' past or something, if you want balance you write a bigger book with both his good and bad points. but that doesn't sell these days, if it's about our past hero's you got to put them in the racist,imperial, slave killers corner, whether facts back it up or provide context or not. de trend is remove all facts and concentrate on the most negative output you can find.
if it's about our past hero's you got to put them in the racist,imperial, slave killers corner,
So if they write a book saying that Adolf Hitler was actually a great guy you say the same? it's the same one sided focus right?
you can't ''redress'' the balance, it's just an book claiming the same bullshit as the original just the other way round. two wrongs never makes one right.Writing a medium sized book that redresses the balance , and discusses the other known facts of what Churchill did, or allowed or encouraged in other parts of the world, some of which was deeply racist and imperialist seems perfectly reasonable.
Mine neither, but that's wasn't the point at all. The point is it's trying to change how some poeple out our history that our commonly seen as hero's or important persons from that time as something else by taking one point out, magnifying that and removing all context, without decent knowledge what could possibly go wrong?My heroes are none of those things.
oh, ok my bad didn't see that. agree with your assement of the credibility of said reviewer.The point is I was quoting from the review - which Ian linked* to - not the book. The reviewer wrote:
"Like so many bad ideas, it has its roots with Margaret Thatcher. In his opening chapters, Ali draws on ..."
(the book may well be a balanced analysis of Winston's life, warts and all.)
I'm saying that sort of thing detracts from the credibility of the reviewer - is this a review of a history book, or a wannabe-Alexei-Sayle rant?
*https://www.currentaffairs.org/2022/04/winston-churchill-imperial-monstrosity