Socialism & Capitalism

I used to think this, but my brother pointed out that there was no peace party in the UK at the time. Churchill may have been a good/competent war leader (I actually think his obsession with the "soft underbelly of Europe" was idiocy but that's, like, my opinion) but I think it's at best hagiography to say that Britain "needed" him.

If Churchill hadn't become leader the most likely candidate to become PM was Halifax. Halifax was a decent man who despised the Fascists but didn't believe Britain could fight on after the fall of France and favoured making peace.
I think you're right though that as a strategist he was a handicap. He was obsessed with bringing Turkey into the war and the Meditteranean and preserving the Empire was as important to him as fighting the Germans.

Not only after the war

A long time ago I bought for my father as birthday present the "memoires" written by Churchill. He liked history, and WW2 was during his youth.
When I gave it to my father, my mother snapped: "he was not a good man... not everything he will tell in the book will be true".
Churchill is said to have remarked on our Queen Wilhelmina: "the only man" in your government.
No wonder if you know that Queen Wilhelmina was before WW2 very much believing in a new world order where weak politicians had to be reigned in by strong man. They both were not that far away from fascist convictions.
For herself that came close to a divine absolute monarchy. In London she had her chance, because "she" was the hope of her poor occupied people, surrounding herself with yes-nodders and visits from Dutch resistance people who crossed the North Sea, not with those rambling (chosen) ministers around her. After the war she resigned in 1948 as a disappointed person, because democracy was stronger.

One of the Churchill operations was to wage a sabotage war in the Netherlands. A selected group (50 or so) of those Dutch resistance people, that all had their cup of tea with the Queen, were send back during 1942-1944 in small groups to the Nertherlands after a sabotage training in the UK. But were all caught immediately by the Germans when they parachuted down, because the Germans were informed. The Germans very proud that their counter-intelligence operation called Englandspiel worked so well.

The nasty thing here is that although the UK called it one of the biggest intelligence blunders they ever made, especially while they continued the operation after repeated warnings of the Dutch resistance that it was betrayed, there are a lot of indications that this operation was a counter-counter intelligence operation, where these resistance people needed to be sacrificed to feed the Germans with wrong information and extract info from intelligence feedback on that false info.
Nobody will probably ever find out what really happened.
But it left a bad taste in the Dutch resistance about the UK and Churchill, already during the war.
And nobody at that time had forgotten the UK war with the (former Dutch) Boers in South-Africa, the British concentration camps, which happened only 40-50 years earlier. Many childrens books about freemen Boers fighting guerilla against the evil British in SA. Churchill pictured in British press as a South African war hero.

Here some info on that Englandspiel
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uk...gence-send-its-own-spies-to-their-deaths.html

I can believe thats possible. Theres a theory that he knew Coventry was to be bombed but did nothing so that the Germans wouldn't know we had cracked their codes.
 
I mean, from primary sources in that telegraph article you posted it looks pretty clear that it was a counter-counterintelligence operation.

I would rate it 90% or more.
You just never know for sure in that shadow world.

Something that can never be fetched well in ink letters on paper is the attitude of some British officers during the war towards the Dutch resistance people.
Upper class to peasants, if I have to believe my parents.
 
If Churchill hadn't become leader the most likely candidate to become PM was Halifax. Halifax was a decent man who despised the Fascists but didn't believe Britain could fight on after the fall of France and favoured making peace.

I guess my brother didn't know what he was talking about then.
 
I guess my brother didn't know what he was talking about then.

I don't know. Halifax certainly wouldn't have been a good war leader but would the government and parliament gone along with it if he'd tried to make peace? Not sure we can really know.
 
I don't know. Halifax certainly wouldn't have been a good war leader but would the government and parliament gone along with it if he'd tried to make peace? Not sure we can really know.

I think my brother was referring more to the other parties - Labour and the Liberals had both opposed appeasement so they could hardly be expected to make peace with Hitler.
 
I think my brother was referring more to the other parties - Labour and the Liberals had both opposed appeasement so they could hardly be expected to make peace with Hitler.

Thats certainly true. Most senior Conservative had supported appeasement. I think that was why Churchill was important. He was acceptable to the Conservative majority in parliament and to those who had opposed appeasement.
 
Churchill never saw the socialism being discussed here in his lifetime. He saw USSR's state capitalism
 
Churchill never saw the socialism being discussed here in his lifetime. He saw USSR's state capitalism

He also saw the mild socialism of Attlee's Labour government. Churchill went from Conservative to one of the most radical members of a reforming Liberal government then to Conservative reactionary then after the war to paternalist Conservative.
You can't fit the whole man into 1 political stereotype.
 
Churchill might have been a lot of things, but he was right about socialism...Prove me wrong...
Churchill lived under the 1945-1951 Attlee government, and none of his Jeremiads came to pass.

Consider the Gestapo remark: in reality, the closest thing that Britain proper ever had to the Gestapo was the Black and Tans, the creation of which was overseen by a certain Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill.
 
Churchill lived under the 1945-1951 Attlee government, and none of his Jeremiads came to pass.

Consider the Gestapo remark: in reality, the closest thing that Britain proper ever had to the Gestapo was the Black and Tans, the creation of which was overseen by a certain Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill.

Did not know that role of Churchill there

But I assume that Roosevelt with his Irish ancestry was aware what the Black and Tans did in Ireland, and why not also aware of the role of Churchill ?
Interesting in the light of the desire of Roosevelt to dissolve the UK empire
 
Did not know that role of Churchill there

But I assume that Roosevelt with his Irish ancestry was aware what the Black and Tans did in Ireland, and why not also aware of the role of Churchill ?
Interesting in the light of the desire of Roosevelt to dissolve the UK empire


I never heard of Roosevelt having Irish ancestry. His family is New York aristocrats descended from Dutch settlers and property owners.
 
Churchill never saw the socialism being discussed here in his lifetime. He saw USSR's state capitalism
State Capitalism is an oxymoron.

Germany, Italy and USSR all had socialist economies, at least in theory. The ruling parties all called themselves socialist.

J
 
I never heard of Roosevelt having Irish ancestry. His family is New York aristocrats descended from Dutch settlers and property owners.

my bad

I mixed up with Theodore Roosevelt :blush:
 
Who had the same ancestory. They were close relatives. :dunno:

Both had Dutch ancestry... the family name Roosevelt.
But that is the male bloodline only.
Theodore his mother was Scottis-Irish, and there was more of that from other women earlier in the ancestry IIRC.

Do you know what.... I dig in, see how much blood is Irish and Dutch ;)

EDIT
I remenbered that Irish so well because Theodore was so impressed by good presbyterian Irish
 
State Capitalism is an oxymoron.

Germany, Italy and USSR all had socialist economies, at least in theory. The ruling parties all called themselves socialist.

J

The socialist of the Nazis and Fascists was a bit like the People's or Democratic of various Marxist states post-war.

Google state capitalism, even "The Economist" and "Financial Times" use the term. Unfortunately their articles are behind paywalls.
 
State Capitalism is an oxymoron.

Germany, Italy and USSR all had socialist economies, at least in theory. The ruling parties all called themselves socialist.

J


Whatever the theory said, Germany and Italy had capitalist economies in the real world. So the theory is worthless crap.
 
Top Bottom