'Winston Churchill is no better than Adolf Hitler'

[Banglar Bir]

'Winston Churchill is no better than Adolf Hitler,' says Indian politician Dr Shashi Tharoor
'Churchill has as much blood on his hands as Hitler does,' says author

Maya Oppenheim
@mayaoppenheim
Tuesday 21 March 2017 14:15 GMT
The Independent Online

Dr Tharoor, a former Under-Secretary General of the UN, says the blame for the Bengal Famine rests with Churchill ROHIT JAIN PARAS/AFP/Getty Images
An Indian politician has said Winston Churchill is no better than Adolf Hitler and the two leaders have equivalent amounts of “blood” on their hands.
Dr Shashi Tharoor, whose new book Inglorious Empire chronicles the atrocities of the British Empire, said the former British Prime Minister should be remembered alongside the most prominent dictators of the twentieth century.

Dr Tharoor, a former Under-Secretary General of the UN, said the blame for the Bengal Famine rested with Churchill. In 1943, up to four million Bengalis starved to death when Churchill diverted food to British soldiers and countries such as Greece while a deadly famine swept through Bengal.

“This [Churchill] is the man who the British insist on hailing as some apostle of freedom and democracy," the author told UK Asian at a launch for his book. "When to my mind he is really one of the more evil rulers of the 20th century only fit to stand in company of the likes of Hitler, Mao and Stalin".

“Churchill has as much blood on his hands as Hitler does,” the Indian MP said. “Particularly the decisions that he personally signed off during the Bengal Famine when 4.3 million people died because of the decisions he took or endorsed."

"Not only did the British pursue its own policy of not helping the victims of this famine which was created by their policies. Churchill persisted in exporting grain to Europe, not to feed actual ‘Sturdy Tommies’, to use his phrase, but add to the buffer stocks that were being piled up in the event of a future invasion of Greece and Yugoslavia”.

“Ships laden with wheat were coming in from Australia docking in Calcutta and were instructed by Churchill not to disembark their cargo but sail on to Europe,” he added.
“And when conscience-stricken British officials wrote to the Prime Minister in London pointing out that his policies were causing needless loss of life all he could do was write peevishly in the margin of the report, ‘Why hasn’t Gandhi died yet?'"
The 5 of the worst atrocities carried out by the British Empire
Talking about the Bengal famine in 1943, the Prime Minister who led Britain to victory in World War Two, said: “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion. The famine was their own fault for breeding like rabbits.”

READ MORE
Britons suffer 'historical amnesia' over empire, says author
Dr Tharoor, a former Indian government minister, rose to further prominence after his impassioned speech at the Oxford Union in July of 2015 went viral. In the address, he discussed the economic toll British rule took on India.

He said: "India's share of the world economy when Britain arrived on it shores was 23 per cent. By the time the British left it was down to below four per cent. Why? Simply because India had been governed for the benefit of Britain. Britain's rise for 200 years was financed by its depredations in India."

"In fact, Britain's industrial revolution was actually premised upon the de-industrialisation of India."

Dr Tharoor recently gained headlines for suggesting Britons suffer "historical amnesia” over the atrocities and plunder committed by the empire.
Shashi Tharoor
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...itician-post-colonialist-author-a7641681.html

 

[T90TankGuy]

He is right !!! the way Winston starved the people of Bengal which led to millions dying was horrid.

 

[Piotr]

He is right !!! the way Winston starved the people of Bengal which led to millions dying was horrid.

And Modi was right to back call for UK to pay India reparations:

Modi backs call for UK to pay India reparations for colonial-era damage
Published time: 24 Jul, 2015 10:21 Edited time: 25 Jul, 2015 12:30

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has backed a politician’s calls for Britain to pay reparations to India for the damage it caused during colonial rule.
Modi made the remarks after a video made by Shashi Tharoor, a Congress party member speaking at the Oxford Union, was posted on social media and became an instant success.

"Speeches at the Oxford Union have long provoked debate, as the comments made by MP Shashi Tharoor have done. We are focused on the future and how we strengthen ties with our Indian partners, including through Prime Minister Modi's visit to the UK this autumn," an FCO (Foreign and Commonwealth Office) spokesperson told RT.

Speaking to the Indian parliament in Delhi on Thursday, Modi said Tharoor had encapsulated the sentiment of “patriotic Indians.”

“Tharoor’s speech reflected the feelings of patriotic Indians on the issue and showed what impression one can leave with effective arguments by saying the right things at the right place.”

Steve Uncles from the English Democrats Party told RT that Britain already contributes “quite a bit to India” in terms of foreign aid, adding that it's “totally inappropriate for such a prosperous nation now as India.”

“And the reason that India is a prosperous nation is, basically the people of England helped to set up India into a country. We provided their legal system; we provided the infrastructure in terms of their roads and their railways; we provided their governance in terms of the way that the country is run and ordered. All of the intellectual property rights on that if we are going to start trying to score points – all of that is due back to the people of England.”

The video, in which Tharoor made a passionate speech at the university claiming India was entitled to financial compensation after centuries of exploitation and foreign rule, was viewed more than 1.5 million times on YouTube and reported on in the Indian press.

“Britain’s rise for 200 years was financed by its depredations in India. We paid for our own oppression. It’s a bit rich to oppress, maim, kill, torture and repress and then celebrate democracy at the end of it,” Tharoor said at the debate.

He further said Indians had “paid for [their] own oppression” by buying British goods, arguing that by the turn of the 20th Century they were the biggest buyers of British products in the world.

Tharoor said he was “touched and grateful” by the support he had received from the Indian prime minister.

The politician has, however, been disciplined by his party leader Sonia Gandhi for praising Prime Minister Modi’s economic initiatives, and his position as party spokesman was revoked in October 2014.

He has previously said that Britain solely took control of India for its own benefit and used the country to create overseas wealth.

“As far as I am concerned, the ability to acknowledge a wrong that has been done, to simply say sorry, will go a far, far, far longer way than some percentage of GDP in the form of aid,” he said.

“What is required, it seems to me, is accepting the principle that reparations are owed,” he added.

However, Modi did not state whether he agreed with the demand for an apology.

Modi, who leads the Bharatiya Janata party, became PM in 2014 in a landslide victory, and was elected on the promise he would invigorate the economy, which had flagged under Congress party rule.

He is due to visit Britain later in 2015, but the dates of the trip have yet to be finalized.

Source: https://www.rt.com/uk/310652-modi-backs-colonial-reparations/

 

[313ghazi]

Kudos to Shashi Tharoor. I respect his stance on colonialism.

 

[Sugarcane]

Hitler was saint in comparison with Churchill, had he won the whole world would have been praising him.

 

[Mrc]

I agree with tharoor on this one... british empire flourished by pillaging of india

 

[gambit]

One way to counter the veneration of Churchill is to celebrate Hitler.

 

[VCheng]

Hitler led his nation to defeat and ruin, while Churchill led his nation to victory in WW2. They were leaders of their respective nations and answerable to their own people.

 

[Cherokee]

Hitler led his nation to defeat and ruin, while Churchill led his nation to victory in WW2. They were leaders of their respective nations and answerable to their own people.

You have capacity to post most shallow posts sometimes.

 

[cocomo]

 

[VCheng]

You have capacity to post most shallow posts sometimes.

My comment is relevant, for both men were duty bound to put the national interests of their own nations first and foremost. Blaming them for anything that would be secondary to their sworn duties would be the shallow thing to do.

 

[Politico]

Off course Churchill was a monster. If we had a saint leading Britain then we would have been crushed by the Nazis and the Russians during World War 2. Churchill was elected to make strong and not popular or humanist decisions. That he did. And Britain won the war. History is written by the victors and the victors of WW2 say that Churchill made the right decisions, even when he was wrong

 

[leapx]

I do not like Churchill’s part as a defender of imperialism and colonialism either.

 

[Cherokee]

My comment is relevant, for both men were duty bound to put the national interests of their own nations first and foremost. Blaming them for anything that would be secondary to their sworn duties would be the shallow thing to do.

If your national interests involve starving 4.5 million people and taking away their produce for your reserve stockpiles there is something seriously wrong with your nation.

 

[VCheng]

If your national interests involve starving 4.5 million people and taking away their produce for your reserve stockpiles there is something seriously wrong with your nation.

That, Sir, is a totally different debate.