“ cabinet was warned repeatedly that the exhaustive use of Indian resources for the war effort could result in famine, but it opted to continue exporting rice from India to elsewhere in the empire.” https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/29/winston-church...
1. That article doesn't say Churchill killed millions by causing a famine. 2. Amp? Really? Is amp still a thing?
Maybe we stop hero worshipping and learn the real history? https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/29/asia/churchill-bengal-famine-...
That does take a special kind of ignorance.
Nah that only happens if you use the h work or the other-n-word.
> you have managed to compare Winston Churchill to Hitler!
Oh no! The Godwin threshold has been breached! Awooga awooga!
It's almost like I did that intentionally. Let's think for a moment why that might be an appropriate comparison: first they were historical opponents, on opposite sides of a conflict. Hitler is the bad guy, and at least in most people's minds Churchill was the good guy. But Churchill is also responsible for somewhere in the region of 1 million deaths due to treating another group as less than human. Which means any portrayal of him as the "good guy" is choosing to ignore, discredit, or diminish the value of those lives. Murder by imperialism and bureaucracy is still murder, just apparently easier to get away with.