Do people really take this drip seriously.
Talking about Churchill's legacy no doubt.
that would make some sense. shame the lady made a challenge on emotional/uninformed grounds, easily batted away. had she raise the question why the Boers needed protecting and from whom (British destroying their farms i believe), dont think Rees-Moog would have been so comfortable.
that would make some sense. shame the lady made a challenge on emotional/uninformed grounds, easily batted away. had she raise the question why the Boers needed protecting and from whom (British destroying their farms i believe), dont think Rees-Moog would have been so comfortable.
Do you also feel so strongly about what is happening to Boer farmers now in South Africa, or only when the British did it? I really think a principle has to be applied fairly and without prejudice. The notion that any injustice caused by the British Empire was wrong and ghastly, but that we will turn a blind eye to what is going on now perpetrated by Africans is a double standard. Wrong is wrong is wrong. When you apply double standards people start to disagree with each other and we end up down a rabbit hole of discussion, and all of the injustices continue to happen anyway.
Do you also feel so strongly about what is happening to Boer farmers now in South Africa, or only when the British did it? I really think a principle has to be applied fairly and without prejudice. The notion that any injustice caused by the British Empire was wrong and ghastly, but that we will turn a blind eye to what is going on now perpetrated by Africans is a double standard. Wrong is wrong is wrong. When you apply double standards people start to disagree with each other and we end up down a rabbit hole of discussion, and all of the injustices continue to happen anyway.
The young woman on the panel demonising Churchill didn’t have a clue what she was talking about and it showed when JRM calmly put her in her place and she went all face pulling and huffy like Kevin the teenager. It was a delight to watch actually.
Are you referring to the clip in shown in the BBC link posted above? The 'young woman' seems to be understandably taken aback by JRM comparing Boer war concentration camps to Glasgow.
Barkley's problem is that by continually referring to concentration camps she is creating a comparison to what the Nazis did. She also referred to the thousands that died and stated it was systematic murder, which it clearly wasn't.
By all means criticize things that happened in the past but when you do so, do so from the point of view of the time in which decisions were made, not from the benefit of our cosy, educated world of the 21st century.
For what it's worth, I can't stand JRM.
Barkley's problem is that by continually referring to concentration camps she is creating a comparison to what the Nazis did. She also referred to the thousands that died and stated it was systematic murder, which it clearly wasn't.
By all means criticize things that happened in the past but when you do so, do so from the point of view of the time in which decisions were made, not from the benefit of our cosy, educated world of the 21st century.
For what it's worth, I can't stand JRM.
that would make some sense. shame the lady made a challenge on emotional/uninformed grounds, easily batted away. had she raise the question why the Boers needed protecting and from whom (British destroying their farms i believe), dont think Rees-Moog would have been so comfortable.
"The lady" got a first class degree in PPE from Oxford and then read African Studies at St Antony's college
Thats where I
Caught her eye...