(TL-191) Is Winston Churchill allying with far-right individuals plausible?

[A Piece of History]

I know as well as anyone that Winston Churchill was not a perfect human being. He was a diehard imperialist, he was a eugenicist (Yes, seriously. Look it up), he held somewhat racist views, etc, but the idea that Winston Churchill would side with the far-right and even form a coalition with them seems implausible to me.

It might because Churchill, in our history, is viewed as a hero, specifically because he led his country in a war against Germany and Italy, but I have a hard time believing that the Old Bulldog would be willing to stomach a coalition with of all people, Oswald Mosely. Because of the focus on North America, we never learn why Churchill decided to make this coalition with him.

Does this development in TL-191 have a basis in history? Did Churchill ever express sentiments that wouldn't be anathema to the likes of Hitler or Mussolini?

 

[lukedalton]

Maybe he tryied to do what the enstablisment tryied to do in Germany and Italy aka using Mosley thinking he can control it to avoid socialist takeover or a coup. He can't like him very much but he think to not have any other better choice and believe that he can keep him on a short leash

 

[Odinson]

Perhaps he saw the coalition as a means to an end to restore Great Britain's place in the world and her empire

 

[Tiro]

My guess is that Churchill simply couldn't put together enough support from the Respectable political parties (between the World Wars he was an ideological bugbear of the Labour Party and a much-loathed defector from the Tories, leaving him only the Liberals - who would have found themselves absolutely dismembered after first getting Britain & the Empire dragged into the Great War, then leading them to a costly defeat), which may well have forced him to deal with the lunatic fringe to put together a working Parliamentary Majority.

I doubt he'd particularly enjoy dealing with the Silver Shirts, but if Sir Winston could work with Stalin then one can certainly imagine him cutting a deal with Oswald Mosley in the course of Timeline-191.

 

[Trotsky]

It sounded like the Tories only named him leader because it was either that, or their place gets taken by Mosley's crowd and they end up like the Liberals.

 

[REDrake]

My biggest issue with Winston Churchill in that timeline is that he shouldn't have existed in the first place. He was by his mother half-american. His mother was from Brooklyn tracing her ancestry to George Washington. A union between a British lord with an North American lady in the context of USA after the Civil War was won by the South seems unlikely.

It would have been far better if Harry Turtledove created another British statesman called Churchill. He had no issues doing exactly that with MacArthur.

 

[Odinson]

My biggest issue with Winston Churchill in that timeline is that he shouldn't have existed in the first place. He was by his mother half-american. His mother was from Brooklyn tracing her ancestry to George Washington. A union between a British lord with an North American lady in the context of USA after the Civil War was won by the South seems unlikely.

It would have been far better if Harry Turtledove created another British statesman called Churchill. He had no issues doing exactly that with MacArthur.

Well Churchill is born OTL during the 1870s, when Samuel J. Tilden is in office. The early post War of Succession Democratic Party was rather conciliatory towards the Confederates. It's possible that they also attempted to ease tensions with CSA's European allies.

 

[nepcotevalley]

My biggest issue with Winston Churchill in that timeline is that he shouldn't have existed in the first place. He was by his mother half-american. His mother was from Brooklyn tracing her ancestry to George Washington. A union between a British lord with an North American lady in the context of USA after the Civil War was won by the South seems unlikely.

It would have been far better if Harry Turtledove created another British statesman called Churchill. He had no issues doing exactly that with MacArthur.

Its possible TL 191s Churchill was not the same Winston as our one. He may have still been the son of Randolph Churchill. But by another woman for the reasons mentioned above. This would help to explain his different actions and behaviour. Another oversight by Turtledove I fear.