Gransnet forums

TV, radio, film, Arts

Churchill's Secret Apartheid

(119 Posts)
Deedaa Sat 19-Oct-24 22:56:06

Did anyone watch this programme tonight? Channel 4 I think. Churchill and the government had secretly agreed not to interfere with America's treatment of their coloured GIs for fear of damaging the war effort. There were fights between white and coloured GIs which were kept quiet at the time. I was interested because my mother was in the ATS, working with radar, at the time. She and her friend were asked to train the Americans to use it and got used to working and socialising with GIs of all colours. When the CO went on leave his replacement put out an order that the ATS girls were not to fraternise with the coloured boys. It was not a popular order and when the CO returned he made it clear that "No one tells my girls who they can fraternise with!" The programme had some shocking letters home from GIs saying how they had lost all respect for Britain because white girls were socialising - with a big buck N ----- as one letter put it. You can see why the US still has such problems today.

theworriedwell Sun 20-Oct-24 21:37:02

TerriBull

I saw the Raiway Children and agree some of the scenes relating to the treatment of the black soldiers was horrible. I'd read about that prejudice before, I think some of those men felt that they got better treatment from the locals where they were stationed in England than their own compatriots. Churchill, like many world leaders had his flaws, find me one that hasn't. Some decisions taken during wartime in retrospect would have been the wrong ones, that would be inevitable there was so much to balance. He nevertheless was the man who got this country through an incredibly difficult time. My mother spent those years working in London when incendiary bombs were dropping all over the place, never knowing whether there would be a home, or family to come back to. I remember her telling me "the war destroyed relationships and people and there was absolutely no certainty or ability to project forward just to get through the day and hopefully the next one" My father was in North Africa most of the time. They were both teens at the outset in 1939. I think they felt that he was the right leader for the time, even if they later thought there was a need for change post war. Later generations can give their opinions, but none of us were there on the ground living through it and what was needed a then was strong leadership.

My late MIL married her black north American soldier husband during WWII and my husband was the result. Actually I think he has a right to have a view of how they were treated and how he was treated. It isn't ancient history and a child who was spat on in the street because he was a different colour to his mother is evidence of how disgracefully people behaved. A child hearing his mother being called a whore because her child was a different colour is entitled to be judgemental. Remember my late FIL was here fighting

Granmarderby10 Sun 20-Oct-24 22:17:05

My paternal grandmother -she died long before I was born, ran a “parlour” type pub during the war and there were I was told “incidents” such as mentioned above.
She told the white American soldiers - in no uncertain terms, my pub, my rules so ‘accept it or leave’ -to rounds of applause!

Does anyone remember the rather good tv adaptation of Andrea Levys’ novel Small Island ? The story centres on the experiences of black people coming to England during and just after WW2.

Allira Sun 20-Oct-24 22:45:10

I have Irish relations who still spit when his name is mentioned

Many Irish people volunteered to serve in the British Forces during WW2 to fight Hitler and is Nazis, for which we should all be thankful.

So, of course, did the patriotic Scots.

David49 Mon 21-Oct-24 07:32:21

I bused those that hate Churchill would have preferred to be ruled by Hitler, after Dunkirk it was a straight choice.

It’s a strange world

David49 Mon 21-Oct-24 07:33:06

Bloody autocorrect “guess”

Iam64 Mon 21-Oct-24 08:11:45

Exactly David49. I’ve seen no posts that deny many of Churchill’s attitudes and actions were abhorrent. They did reflect attitudes at that time in history, that were shared by many. Acknowledging that does not mean posters support racism

theworriedwell Mon 21-Oct-24 08:16:53

David49

I bused those that hate Churchill would have preferred to be ruled by Hitler, after Dunkirk it was a straight choice.

It’s a strange world

Yes that was obviously what people would have preferred. What a ridiculous thing to say, do you think those black GIs would have had a great time with Hitler? That doesn't make accepting racism here OK or necessary.

Nannarose Mon 21-Oct-24 08:29:27

David49

I bused those that hate Churchill would have preferred to be ruled by Hitler, after Dunkirk it was a straight choice.

It’s a strange world

I don't think it was a straight choice. The emphasis on Churchill ignores all of the other members of the cabinet. It is true that they thought he would be the best war-time leader, and it worked.
That doesn't mean that a government without Churchill wouldn't have worked, and it doesn't mean that he is an unqualified hero.
I don't think that the comparison with Shakespeare is at all fair. I also don't think that Churchill's views were 'mainstream' at all. It is possible that they may have been the prevailing views of the small section of society he came from (although I'm not sure that was actually the case).
I am very interested in the variety of views on Churchill and the feelings it provokes so many years on. I also think we should remember who writes the history books - mostly white, mostly men, and above all, the literate.

Doodledog Mon 21-Oct-24 08:38:51

David49

I bused those that hate Churchill would have preferred to be ruled by Hitler, after Dunkirk it was a straight choice.

It’s a strange world

What a reductive comment. It is perfectly possible to respect and be grateful for the leadership that got us through the war, and simultaneously acknowledge that he was racist, sexist and classist. So was my grandfather, born in 1905, but he was also kind, funny and loved his family.

It was more usual in those days, and whereas it makes sense to make allowances for upbringing and education it is dishonest to pretend it wasn’t part of someone’s personality. The difference is that my grandfather didn’t make policies and confines his prejudices to negative comments about foreigners, unions and women.

How far do you take the ignoring of aspects of a personality that make you uncomfortable? If a serial killer invented a cure for cancer should we write off his murderous behaviour and be concentrate on gratitude?

Alan Turing arguably had as much to do with winning the war as Churchill, but the prejudices of the time had him jailed anyway for his homosexuality, and he was castrated in 1952, when Churchill was PM. What happened to gratitude towards him? Does Churchill’s inaction to stop the persecution of Turing mean he would prefer to have lived under the jackboot?

David49 Mon 21-Oct-24 13:03:25

Doodledog

David49

I bused those that hate Churchill would have preferred to be ruled by Hitler, after Dunkirk it was a straight choice.

It’s a strange world

What a reductive comment. It is perfectly possible to respect and be grateful for the leadership that got us through the war, and simultaneously acknowledge that he was racist, sexist and classist. So was my grandfather, born in 1905, but he was also kind, funny and loved his family.

It was more usual in those days, and whereas it makes sense to make allowances for upbringing and education it is dishonest to pretend it wasn’t part of someone’s personality. The difference is that my grandfather didn’t make policies and confines his prejudices to negative comments about foreigners, unions and women.

How far do you take the ignoring of aspects of a personality that make you uncomfortable? If a serial killer invented a cure for cancer should we write off his murderous behaviour and be concentrate on gratitude?

Alan Turing arguably had as much to do with winning the war as Churchill, but the prejudices of the time had him jailed anyway for his homosexuality, and he was castrated in 1952, when Churchill was PM. What happened to gratitude towards him? Does Churchill’s inaction to stop the persecution of Turing mean he would prefer to have lived under the jackboot?

In June 1940 after Dunkirk there were no black GIs in the UK, nor was Truing breaking codes, it was the most important decision of the war.
If we had chosen to join Hitler we would have had Jackboot's in the street within weeks and a great many minorities would have suffered.

Never underestimate Churchills leadership.

Doodledog Mon 21-Oct-24 13:33:24

Again, David, I can’t see what I may have said that suggests I do. Perhaps you could explain?

theworriedwell Sun 27-Oct-24 10:38:01

David49

Doodledog

David49

I bused those that hate Churchill would have preferred to be ruled by Hitler, after Dunkirk it was a straight choice.

It’s a strange world

What a reductive comment. It is perfectly possible to respect and be grateful for the leadership that got us through the war, and simultaneously acknowledge that he was racist, sexist and classist. So was my grandfather, born in 1905, but he was also kind, funny and loved his family.

It was more usual in those days, and whereas it makes sense to make allowances for upbringing and education it is dishonest to pretend it wasn’t part of someone’s personality. The difference is that my grandfather didn’t make policies and confines his prejudices to negative comments about foreigners, unions and women.

How far do you take the ignoring of aspects of a personality that make you uncomfortable? If a serial killer invented a cure for cancer should we write off his murderous behaviour and be concentrate on gratitude?

Alan Turing arguably had as much to do with winning the war as Churchill, but the prejudices of the time had him jailed anyway for his homosexuality, and he was castrated in 1952, when Churchill was PM. What happened to gratitude towards him? Does Churchill’s inaction to stop the persecution of Turing mean he would prefer to have lived under the jackboot?

In June 1940 after Dunkirk there were no black GIs in the UK, nor was Truing breaking codes, it was the most important decision of the war.
If we had chosen to join Hitler we would have had Jackboot's in the street within weeks and a great many minorities would have suffered.

Never underestimate Churchills leadership.

There were black troops in the UK even if they weren't GIs. I don't suppose Churchills racism was restricted to those born in the USA.

You do realise Churchill didn't win the war singlehanded?

Nannarose Sun 27-Oct-24 10:49:00

There were definitely Black UK members of the Services. A good number were UK born (including friends of my dad) and many were from the Commonwealth.
The Army & Navy still operated a 'colour bar' at Officer level, which is one reason Black British Servicemen (and women) and Black Commonwealth volunteers wanted to join the RAF. According to my dad & his friends, there was very little racism in the RAF, but they did sometimes come across some teasing or taunting, which they dealt with very quickly!
Not sure when the colour bar was lifted, not long after the War I think.

Allira Sun 27-Oct-24 11:05:36

Tall Poppy Syndrome began in Australia and New Zealsnd but seems to have spread here.

Is it now a part of the British psyche to demonise those who were regarded as heroes or saviours of the nation after their deaths? Not just Churchill, but many others.
It seems to be done with relish.

Do people think through the alternatives of what life would be like now were it not for these people?

theworriedwell Sun 27-Oct-24 11:23:47

Allira

Tall Poppy Syndrome began in Australia and New Zealsnd but seems to have spread here.

Is it now a part of the British psyche to demonise those who were regarded as heroes or saviours of the nation after their deaths? Not just Churchill, but many others.
It seems to be done with relish.

Do people think through the alternatives of what life would be like now were it not for these people?

I think more about the people like my late father and late father in law who were actually out there fighting and risking their lives. As far as I'm concerned their contribution was every bit as important as Churchill's and without the racism.

Caleo Sun 27-Oct-24 11:56:16

DeeDa, I am impressed by the balance of views as set out in the programme. Churchill did right as a politician despite the nasty American apartheid being wrong on principle. It was Churchill's job to stop the Nazis but it was not his job to preach morality to Americans.

It was also heart warming to see archive material that demonstrated British hospitality and freedom of speech and assembly.

Doodledog Sun 27-Oct-24 12:09:40

I don't understand how criticising Churchill's racism, sexism and classism is remotely conflicted with appreciating his leadership or being grateful to those who fought to save us from the far right nightmare of Nazism. Can someone please explain, as I have asked twice to no avail?

Allira Sun 27-Oct-24 12:10:48

theworriedwell

Allira

Tall Poppy Syndrome began in Australia and New Zealsnd but seems to have spread here.

Is it now a part of the British psyche to demonise those who were regarded as heroes or saviours of the nation after their deaths? Not just Churchill, but many others.
It seems to be done with relish.

Do people think through the alternatives of what life would be like now were it not for these people?

I think more about the people like my late father and late father in law who were actually out there fighting and risking their lives. As far as I'm concerned their contribution was every bit as important as Churchill's and without the racism.

You don't have to point that out to me.
Some never came back.

Thst is a red herring anyway.

Allira Sun 27-Oct-24 12:11:36

Doodledog

I don't understand how criticising Churchill's racism, sexism and classism is remotely conflicted with appreciating his leadership or being grateful to those who fought to save us from the far right nightmare of Nazism. Can someone please explain, as I have asked twice to no avail?

If you don't understand therd is no other way of explaining.

Caleo Sun 27-Oct-24 12:16:27

Doodledog, I think it's because some can't understand that doing the right thing depends on what the aims and intentions are.
Churchill's aims were political and his personality may have happened to suit the job the Allies required him to do.

Doodledog Sun 27-Oct-24 12:23:51

Allira

Doodledog

I don't understand how criticising Churchill's racism, sexism and classism is remotely conflicted with appreciating his leadership or being grateful to those who fought to save us from the far right nightmare of Nazism. Can someone please explain, as I have asked twice to no avail?

If you don't understand therd is no other way of explaining.

Why not? I'm not an idiot. If someone tries to explain I will try to understand - I usually do understand what is explained in English, even if I don't agree with it.

If you don't understand that people can be a mixture of good and bad traits, and we can admire the good ones whilst criticising the bad, am I wasting my time trying to explain that to you?

Allira Sun 27-Oct-24 12:44:15

🤷‍♀️
Whatever

Doodledog Sun 27-Oct-24 12:55:18

I asked a simple question. You said you couldn't explain as you can only think of one way of doing so (and presumably don't want to do that, for some reason). I ask why, and get a teenage response.

I'm sure many posters are capable of more nuanced thought, and can understand that people are rarely all good or all bad, but 'Whatever 🤷‍♀️'

Allira Sun 27-Oct-24 12:56:18

Allira

Tall Poppy Syndrome began in Australia and New Zealsnd but seems to have spread here.

Is it now a part of the British psyche to demonise those who were regarded as heroes or saviours of the nation after their deaths? Not just Churchill, but many others.
It seems to be done with relish.

Do people think through the alternatives of what life would be like now were it not for these people?

Here.

theworriedwell Sun 27-Oct-24 13:57:40

Caleo

DeeDa, I am impressed by the balance of views as set out in the programme. Churchill did right as a politician despite the nasty American apartheid being wrong on principle. It was Churchill's job to stop the Nazis but it was not his job to preach morality to Americans.

It was also heart warming to see archive material that demonstrated British hospitality and freedom of speech and assembly.

When my late MIL and FIL married in 1943 they had a weekend together before he was shipped off overseas, he was black she was white. The hospitality they experienced was being thrown out of a church on the Sunday morning as the locals were affronted to see a mixed race couple. British hospitality at it's finest.