Was Kipling racist?

[Derek Smith]

TooMany2cvs said:

Derek Smith said:

Wellum a misty-eyed twit, eh? Not sure I totally agree with that.

I have absolutely no idea about his life at all, bar that he had zero choice but to be conscripted when he was a teenager, three-quarters of a century ago - and acquitted himself well at that, not least by "not dying".

Well that's told him.

Perhaps you should familiarise yourself with his story.

I think you will find that he did indeed have a choice. Quite a number chose options other than those the government suggested.

I was brought up surrounded by men who had become soldiers and sailors at the demand of the government. Their stories suggested to me that many did indeed acquit themselves well. Just along the road from where I used to live was a chap who boarded a German submarine in the Mediterranean to secure an Enigma machine. The first I knew about it, despite meeting him a few times, was when I read the obit in the local papers. He acquitted himself well by not dying, didn't he.

[TooMany2cvs]

Derek Smith said:

Perhaps you should familiarise yourself with his story.

Thanks, but I don't think it's actually relevant to the point about misty eyes.

The vast majority of eyes which are misty over the whole "glory" of the BoB etc are eyes which simply weren't around at the time. Those eyes which were actually involved are mostly far less sentimental.

[Crackie]

FN2TypeR said:

irocfan said:

Roofless Toothless said:

And, of course, Shakespeare is no longer welcome on my bookshelves after that Shylock play.

nah that's still fine in Labour, required reading in fact. I men it's a twofer:
The evils of money being lent by the wealthy (read bankers)
The devious Jew

[Crackie]

TooMany2cvs said:

Derek Smith said:

Wellum a misty-eyed twit, eh? Not sure I totally agree with that.

I have absolutely no idea about his life at all, bar that he had zero choice but to be conscripted when he was a teenager, three-quarters of a century ago - and acquitted himself well at that, not least by "not dying".

That's an interesting dismissive and disrespectful viewpoint.

[foxbody-87]

I suspect quite a few admired historical figures would be considered racist today. Times were very different and those attitudes were ingrained in most of the population. Things have moved on and although we should judge ourselves by today’s standards I don’t think it’s always fair to vilify someone for not confirming to societal norms a hundred years in advance.

[WinstonWolf]

James_B said:

WinstonWolf said:

Where does it mention white supremacy?

It doesn’t.

You are corresponding with someone who I think must wake up each day hoping to find something to be offended by.

It must be very wearing.

We must be superior to him...

[jjlynn27]

foxbody-87 said:

I suspect quite a few admired historical figures would be considered racist today. Times were very different and those attitudes were ingrained in most of the population. Things have moved on and although we should judge ourselves by today’s standards I don’t think it’s always fair to vilify someone for not confirming to societal norms a hundred years in advance.

If you remove 'always', I'd completely agree with that. Not a big fan of 'IF', but a fan of Kipling.

[dandarez]

Crackie said:

TooMany2cvs said:

Derek Smith said:

Wellum a misty-eyed twit, eh? Not sure I totally agree with that.

I have absolutely no idea about his life at all, bar that he had zero choice but to be conscripted when he was a teenager, three-quarters of a century ago - and acquitted himself well at that, not least by "not dying".

That's an interesting dismissive and disrespectful viewpoint.

I would have to agree with that, and add disgraceful. But unsurprising.

Zero choice but to be conscripted, eh?

Wellum did the same as my late father, signed up on a short-service commission to the RAF as he turned 18 yrs old in August 39.
My father signed up in May 39.
Note the dates!
ie: 'before' war was declared while limited conscription was in force, which if you didn't know applied only to single men aged between 20 and 22 as given parliamentary approval in the Military Training Act of May 1939.

Full conscription - National Service (Armed Forces) Act - which applied to 18-41 yr old males came on the declaration of war and the first intakes were absorbed into the army (not the RAF - they luckily had plenty of 'volunteers' already!).

As one PH'r on here regularly and snidely used to remark 'read some history'.
I'd add to that read some of your own history!