|
|
|
|
|
|
by shenman
1116 days ago
|
|
|
It might not be wise to accuse people of having an "agenda", when the only source cited is a Guardian article (which is known to have a bias). The debate around culpability is vast, nuanced and cannot be settled with reductionist claims like "Churchill was the reason millions died". |
|
|
It would be wise to read the comment more carefully before replying. I explicitly did not accuse or suggest anyone of having an agenda, unlike the person I responded to.
> The debate around culpability is vast, nuanced and cannot be settled with reductionist claims like "Churchill was the reason millions died".
I had stated "Churchill's active role in causing the famine" and linked to a guardian article headlined "Churchill's policies contributed to 1943 Bengal famine". There is plenty of supporting evidence supporting both statements in the linked article. If you disagree, I'd be happy to see your supporting evidence, as opposed to unsubstantiated accusations of reductionism.