Previous posts in this discussion:
PostCancel Churchill? (Eugenio Battaglia, Italy, 09/13/21 2:17 am)
The UK (or future Disunited Kingdom) has made another step toward its final decline.
The "Winston Churchill Memorial Trust" has changed its name to the "Churchill Fellowship" after removing from its site the photos, his biography, and a list of his achievements. This is a resplendent example of "cancel culture."
Frankly, I consider Churchill responsible for destroying the British Empire that he could have saved if he compromised with Hitler in July 1940. Not only that, but the great carnage of the following years of war including the Holocaust would have been avoided. But Churchill was a great Englishman with sound principles, no matter the adversities.
The present UK has even sent part of its Navy to the Indo-Pacific to show that it remains a great power. But for how long will there still be a United Kingdom?
The idea of secession is sneaking into the UK. The "Celtic peoples" are discovering their dream of independence, with Kernow (Cornwall), Alba (Scotland), Cymru (Wales), and Ulster (North Ireland). Plus the city of London, which pretty soon may become a city-state where the English will be a minority among peoples from all over the world.
Kernow really has no chance for independence. Alba has very good chances but its separation will be opposed even by the US Empire, fearful that the nuclear and submarines bases of Northern Scotland may be lost while the so-called European Union will be opposed in order to avoid the possibility of other secessions on the Continent. Cymru could have a chance only following the secession of Scotland. Finally, Ulster has the best chances to obtain a union with Eire. Pretty soon the Catholic minority will be the majority, and the public opinion of the US and Europe will favor such an act. What in the long run may prevent secession may be the great costs to achieve it.
Of course, if we censor Churchill would be also a very good idea to kick out the Monarchy, for which Churchill was a loyal PM.
I wonder what our proud colleagues in WAIS think about these possibilities.
JE comments: The "solution" to World War II would have been...more appeasement to Hitler? And such a move would have prevented the Holocaust? Eugenio, this is revisionist thinking. Hitler's Grand Plan going back to Mein Kampf was to combat his twin obsessions with Bolshevism and "World Jewry."
But let's return to Churchill. He did save a nation and arguably Western liberal democracy itself, but his numerous racist claims and acts (such as against India) make him a potential candidate for "cancellation." I see a partial parallel here with the US president Woodrow Wilson. Can anyone in the UK give us more details on the current debate?
Meanwhile, the Churchill Fellowship (former Memorial Trust) claims it is not disowning Sir Winston--merely that its previous name gave the wrong idea about its mission:
Historical Revision is Inevitable, even Necessary
(Eugenio Battaglia, Italy
09/14/21 6:40 AM)
When commenting on my post of September 13th, John E accused me of historical revisionism. Of course, this is true.
Any moment a new fact is discovered or reconsidered, history is revised.
History is not a dogmatic religion only told according to the established dogmas. (Who gets to establish them, anyway?)
Sadly, history now has really become a dogmatic religion protected by the new inquisition performed by a "democratic" judicial system. In a different context, China is now imposing its own history, seen according to the thought of Xi Jinping, but at least it is not as hypocritical as the Western view.
If we want to consider Hitler's Mein Kampf, why not also quote where Hitler wanted friendship with the British Empire and with Italy too? Oh, by the way, the strongest words in favor of Italian irredentism under the Habsburgs can be found in the pages of Mein Kampf.
With reference to the British Empire, Hitler wrote that a German alliance was necessary not only with Italy but also with the British Empire. Again, perhaps the best pages on the British Empire and on the valor of the Englishmen and of the Scots can be found in Mein Kampf.
About a new appeasement, if you refer to Munich 1938 the appeasement (ethnic justice) was not only for Germany but also for Poland, Hungary, and Slovakia. These details are never remembered. Instead the occupation of Bohemia and Moravia on 17 March 1939 was criminal, and that should have been the moment for Italy to break its alliance with Germany. Mussolini considered this, but also recognized that breaking the alliance at that moment could have been more dangerous than keeping it and accepting the tale of a Czech invitation to Germany. Big mistake.
About the ethnic problem of the Alto Adige/SudTyrol. On 7 May 1938 during his visit to Rome, Hitler told Mussolini: Now that we are immediate neighbors we shall recognize the historical natural border that Providence and history with its 2000 years of experience have placed between our two nations. I ask you to transfer into Germany all the German-speaking citizens of the Alto Adige. So a referendum was organized, and of the 267,265 ethnic Germans 185,085 chose to go to the Third Reich and most moved on with their Swastika flag. The exodus should have been completed by 31 December 1942, but due to the war, it was (unfortunately) not completed.
Cancel culture is possibly the best example of revisionism.
JE comments: My friend Eugenio Battaglia forwarded me an electronic copy of Mi Lucha in Spanish for review. Once, long ago, I gave Mein Kampf a try, and couldn't get past the first few pages. To be politically balanced, I had a no more productive experience with Das Kapital. A curiosity I've pondered for a long time: Why do the Spanish translators opt for Mi Lucha, while I've never heard of a book called My Struggle? A fear of getting too chummy with Hitler? For that matter, Marx's opus never gets translated as The Capital.
Eugenio does raise an uncomfortable question: is it possible to say anything positive about Hitler? I opt for the negative, with the possible exceptions of the Autobahn and the VW Beetle--which, we should note, was stolen from the Czechs and their Tatra model 97.
"Mein Kampf" as "My Struggle"
(Edward Jajko, USA
09/15/21 2:52 AM)
John E wondered why Hitler's Mein Kampf is never translated into English as "My Struggle," although it is commonly known as Mi Lucha in Spanish.
This is not entirely accurate. See the link below:
JE comments: The title above is from New Delhi, which raises another series of questions. I couldn't find a cover image of the Indian edition, but in my search (not a struggle, but close) I discovered at least two prewar UK editions published as My Struggle. See below. The consensus to leave the original title intact appears to have emerged during WWII. After 1939, the only Struggle worth noting was the one against Hitler.
Regardless, I stand corrected.
- "Mein Kampf" as "My Struggle" (Edward Jajko, USA 09/15/21 2:52 AM)