Power to Truth in the House of Lords

I had access to a printed Wall Street Journal this morn. In it was a "Review" piece by some Lord Andrew Roberts, about Churchill's legacy and those who oppose it. The Lord couched the piece as an explainer: why do certain people, clearly not the Lord's sort of people, drag down this hero.

In it was a side-swipe at David Irving as a "neo-nazi historian". Which you can just... say, in the Yookay; because Lipstadt won her libel case. The nuances don't matter, you can say things and dare anyone to come to this man's defence.

With that in mind, Roberts goes on to say the reason people "hate" Churchill on the "far" right is because they like authoritarianism. Theodor Adorno lives!

If you actually listen to the antiChurchill / altRight intersection, they aren't shy on telling everyone the real reason. It is because they feel like they've been cheated. Moldbug Yarvin used to talk about feeling "jobbed"; hoe_math is lately talking about how we tried MORE than you. hoe_math for one feels bitter about this; that his kinfolk have given over their cities to those who say you are sad, worthless individuals destined for the hellfire; unless you embrace Islam.

People like that, like William Golding's avatar in Free Fall, stuck on the outs, will ask how they lost their freedom. One answer offered to them is - Churchill took it from them. Or maybe the Jews did; whatever. That isn't the focus of this post.

The focus of this post is what should have been Roberts' focus, why Rightists out on the fringe reject Churchill to the point they feel hatred. Roberts did not answer that question. And his non-answer went to its own extreme, as a refusal. Lord Andrew Roberts is the mirror image to a Holocaust denier. Roberts is even more far gone than an Occidental Observer editor.

The question one might pose is, why does Andrew Roberts hate the Right so much. Although I suspect the real emotion he holds is fear.

BACKDATE 8/10