This is garbage. The real villains are Neville Chamberlain and Lord Halifax. They would have condemned half a billion people to death just to give Britain a few extra years of peace.
What do Chamberlain and Halifax have to do with whether Churchill is considered a villain?
Vae victis I suppose.
Edit: response to Ntrails:
People find comfort in black and white worldviews. Pointing out that somebody who was a hero in one respect was a villain in other seems to induce some sort of dissonance that gets some people angry. The article says that Churchill was a villain with respect to British colonies, not in every conceivable respect. But this has made some people angry, they see Churchill as a hero in the fight against Germany, so they're unwilling or unable to see Churchill as a villain in Ireland or India. There is no logical contradiction here, but there is an emotional contradiction. I don't consider this a moral failing on the part of those upset, it just seems to be how people are wired.
Why on earth do people find this so hard to comprehend?
Oh and then there’s the whole Indian famine thing...
Indeed, I might imagine the UK doing better in WW2, because Churchill was less in direct control of operations.
He was very much responsible for the Norwegian Campaign, which was widely considered a fiasco that handed Hitler a decisive victory and gave the latter enough political momentum to continue with his war plans.
https://www.historynet.com/scandinavian-twist-churchills-194...