winston churchill
Recently Published Documents

The purpose of this article was to identify how intertextuality in the novel “Small Island” (2004) by the British writer Andrea Levy (1956–2019) contributes to the representation of postcolonial issues. To solve the research problems, we applied cultural-historical, comparative, biographical methods of literary analysis. The article considers how to appeal to the poem “Daffodils” by William Wordsworth allows the contemporary writer to criticise the anglicised system and the content of education in the colonies, which becomes the conductor of the dominant, Western discourse. The reference to “Gone with the Wind” helps Levy demonstrate how the stereotyping of images of blacks in cultural texts is pointedly acutely perceived by her dark-skinned heroine. An appeal to the poem “The Charge of the Light Brigade” by the Lord Tennyson and, through it, to Rudyard Kipling's poem “The Last of the Light Brigade”, to the speech of Winston Churchill, serves in “Small Island” to recall the undeservedly, according to Levy, forgotten contribution of the indigenous inhabitants of the colonies to the protection of British territory in World War II and the post-war reconstruction of the country.

The wars of 1914–1918 and 1939–1945 are without parallel in the expansive stretch of decades of the pan-European conquest and occupation of Africa in creating such profound opportunity to study the very entrenched desire by the European conqueror-states in Africa to perpetuate their control on the continent and its peoples indefinitely. The two principal protagonists in each conflict, Britain and Germany, were the lead powers of these conqueror-states that had formally occupied Africa since 1885. Against this cataclysmic background of history, Africans found themselves conscripted by both sides of the confrontation line in 1914–1918 to at once fight wars for and against their aggressors during which 1 million Africans were killed. Clearly, this was a case of double-jeopardy of conquered and occupied peoples fighting for their enemy-occupiers. In the follow-up 1939–1945 war, when Germany indeed no longer occupied any African land (having been defeated in the 1914–1918 encounter), Britain and allies France and Belgium (all continuing occupying powers in Africa) conscripted Africans, yet again, to fight for these powers in their new confrontation against Germany, and Japan, a country that was in no way an aggressor force in Africa. Hundreds of thousands of Africans were killed in this second war. In neither of these conflicts, as this study demonstrates, do the leaders of these warring countries who occupied (or hitherto occupied) Africa ever view their enforced presence in Africa as precisely the scenario or outcome they wished their own homeland was not subjected to by their enemies. On the contrary, just as it was their position in the aftermath of the 1914–1918 war, Britain, France, Belgium, Spain and Portugal in 1945 each envisaged the continuing occupation of the states and peoples of Africa they had seized by force prior to these conflicts. Winston Churchill, the British prime minster at the time, was adamant: ‘I had not become the king’s first minister in order to preside over the liquidation of the British Empire’. Charles de Gaulle, leader of the anti-German ‘free French forces’, was no less categorical on this score: ‘Self-government [in French-occupied Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, South America, the Pacific and elsewhere in the world] must be rejected – even in the more distant future’.

Once Winston Churchill rightly said and I quote: “Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” History is not just a past to remember but history is an opportunity to explore new things and learn from it. With a great vision and mission-heart, Finnish missionaries came in the Himalayan belt in the early nineteenth century. They had a vision of entering Tibet as soon as they set foot on Indian territory. They stayed and lived difficult lives since India is riven by caste, creed, and regional backwardness, which a few of them (missionaries) correctly termed as "darkness." The Himalayan people are living considerably more comfortable lives after several decades, yet the efforts and services of Finnish missionaries are still mostly unknown among Himalayan natives. Few of numbers of published articles and books are here to describe their major contributions and chronological evidences of Finnish missionaries’ arrival to India. In this article, a thorough analysis of the socio-economic repercussions of Finnish missionaries in the Himalayan belts and Buxaduars regions of Indian states West Bengal and Sikkim was conducted using collected primary and secondary data. Therefore, this article carry out this study by collecting data (qualitative and quantitative) and information from various sources viz. Published and unpublished articles and notes, collection of primary data/information from various sources remained in India and Finland and through analysis of historical documents of Finnish Mission History. KEYWORDS:Finnish missionaries, Himalayas, Socio-economic, mission history, education, community, Scandinavian Alliance Mission, Education, Livelihood, Darjeeling, Sikkim, Buxaduars.

It is, indeed, a privilege to stand here before you this morning to give the annual Flege Lecture.  Dr. Sande Starnes has kindly supplied me with a list of prior visiting professors, who previously have had the honor to deliver this talk. When we examine the names of those who have been so honored, and note their many accomplishments, I cannot help but remember the words of Winston Churchill, who, when speaking of another person, could well have been speaking of me, when he described “a modest little person, with much to be modest about.”

Winston Churchill fue sin duda uno de los líderes más carismáticos del siglo XX. Lo fue en vida, y su mito se consagró tras su muerte. El presente trabajo estudia el tratamiento audiovisual de este personaje en el cine y la televisión hasta nuestros días. Se pretende identificar los rasgos del mito de Churchill, tal y como los medios los han venido transmitiendo a la sociedad en las últimas décadas, para contrastar la imagen resultante con el Churchill histórico. El objetivo final es intentar calibrar hasta que punto los medios audiovisuales, en su condición de transmisores del conocimiento histórico, están reinterpretando o no al personaje, al margen de las biografías convencionales publicadas.

Winston Churchill had once said that ‘Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy; its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.’ This was the belief that was once upheld staunchly in all its rigidity amongst the majority of the people in the neoliberal world; who believed in their own gospel of free markets and worshipped the deity of deregulation. However, when Covid-19 struck society with ruthlessness, the common people and even the high priests of global capitalism were willing to scrap decades of neoliberal orthodoxy to alleviate the catastrophic effects of the pandemic and the subsequent economic crisis. A conversion was vehemently demanded and socialism was to be their baptism. This paper analyses the journey of socialism from a Pre-Covid-19 society, a Covid-19 riddled society and then its emergence into an internationally observed economic order in a Post-Covid-19 world. For contrary to what Churchill believed, the Covid-19 catalyst, as captured in this paper, resulted in the revelation of the shroud of neoliberalism and the failure of the philosophy of laissez faire, the awakening of ‘class consciousness’ from its slumber of ignorance, and a gospel of collectivism and communal spirit that the working-class were going to take with, moving forward into a socialism oriented Post-Covid-19 society.

‘The night Stalin and Churchill divided Europe’ discusses the important meeting between Josef Stalin and Winston Churchill in Moscow on 9 October 1944, when they agreed a plan for the Balkan region. The diplomatic efforts of the latter stages of World War II are described with the negotiations between the Three Powers — Stalin's Russia, Churchill's Great Britain, and Franklin .D. Roosevelt's United States. FDR and Churchill understood that the needed Soviet victories would come with a price. They never contested the Soviet annexations under the Nazi–Soviet Pact. Nor did Roosevelt ever seriously challenge the personal diplomacy of Churchill and Stalin to divide Eastern Europe into spheres of influence.