Comments on: The Anti-Semite was Diston, Not Churchill

By: Richard M. Langworth

Richard M. Langworth — Sun, 02 Aug 2020 16:56:10 +0000

In reply to M Bouvard. Thanks for the kind words. Kind words are always hard to come by. The essay "Zionism versus Bolshevism" is as you say authentic Churchill. The problem is that his hyper-critics regularly extract quotations out of context from it to "prove" he was anti-Semitic. Please see my 2011 post, "Enemies of Civilization: Not Churchill's."

By: M Bouvard

M Bouvard — Sun, 02 Aug 2020 16:42:51 +0000

This may be one of the most important articles you have or will ever write. It clarifies everything vital to make a considered judgement about Churchill's genuine thoughts concerning the Jewish people. Now as much as in the past the Jews occupy a central place in national & world affairs. Churchill's political wisdom & prudence can help us Jews think about that place. Now as much as in the past political wisdom & prudence is lacking, or almost nowhere to be found. Churchill was a great friend to the Jewish people, perhaps most in the resources of political knowledge which he left behind for future generations, in his speeches & books. It is therefore very important to know what were his genuine thoughts, writings, speeches and sayings and which were not. I end with a question. I have always believed the piece on Bolshevism & Zionism to be authentically Churchill's. Is this a mistaken opinion? What are the facts?

By: Richard Langworth

Richard Langworth — Sun, 26 Aug 2018 14:13:35 +0000

In reply to Kev Richards. The point is that the words in the draft "How the Jews Can Escape Persecution" were not Churchill's words. We may differ about whether the words were anti-Semitic, (though "Hebrew bloodsuckers" sounds fairly definitive). But as Sir Martin Gilbert pointed out, this was drafted by a writer as the basis for an article Churchill never published or even tried to edit. Yet they are frequently rolled out as proof of Churchill's anti-Semitism. That's too easy to be good.

By: Kev Richards

Kev Richards — Sat, 25 Aug 2018 18:55:28 +0000

Re “How the Jews Can Combat Persecution,” Why are the phrases and comments singled out anti-Semitic? I presume he was making a valid criticism. The question should be, are the comments true? The fact that we may not like a truth is not a good reason for rejecting it.

By: Cita Stelzer

Cita Stelzer — Mon, 19 Jun 2017 22:29:52 +0000

Bravo, Richard. This needs to be pointed out and clarified.

By: Richard Munro

Richard Munro — Sat, 17 Jun 2017 20:49:56 +0000

Wonderful piece. The so-called quotation is so out of character I would find it very hard to believe Churchill expressed such prejudices. I think you are write to think it was a vetoed ghost-written pot-boiler. In any case res non verba….Churchill’s deeds speak for themselves.

By: Richard Langworth

Richard Langworth — Sat, 17 Jun 2017 19:49:42 +0000

In reply to Richard Munro. Thank-you for the kind words, always hard to come by.

By: Richard Munro

Richard Munro — Sat, 17 Jun 2017 19:11:41 +0000

Wonderful piece. The so-called quotation is so out of character I would find it very hard to believe Churchill expressed such prejudices. I think you are right to think it was a vetoed ghost-written pot-boiler. In any case res non verba - deeds not words. And Churchill's deeds speak for themselves.