This year, I will wear a poppy for the last time(theguardian.com)
theguardian.com
This year, I will wear a poppy for the last time
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/08/poppy-last-time-remembrance-harry-leslie-smith
9 comments
Wow, 90 years old and sharp as a tack! It is remarkable what past lessons we can learn from our elders. Hopefully the younger generations can avoid making the same mistakes.
Mistakes? For who?
Sure, from a general population "pleb" POV, yes, mistakes. Plebs die, get tortured, imprisoned with out due process, and so on. But for those making these mistakes? Do they lose out? Or do they gain? Recently, Bush had his two terms. Obama has his two terms. Even the "plebs" didn't punish them. I take is Bush, family, and friends are doing fine right now, and I bet Obama doesn't fare too badly either after he's done. I take it that all their political and business friends are and will do fine too.
Im struggling to see the mistake from the POV of the powers that be.
Not just wart and so on, look at the banking collapse. Same thing. Same with any disaster that hits the mass population.
Right now, dont I see a younger generation making any head way in to politics based on any historical knowledge of the past mistakes. No. What I see right now is so much weight of imposed responsibility loaded on them that they simple cant. And, in the case of the UK, when students take to the streets in protest the authorities treat them like rioters and abuse them, legally. And that's leaving out the people who think such protesters should face the military on the streets. See, protesting causes poor business people to lose money, some how. Disruption costs. And that is apparently really, really important.
All we ever get is scraps thrown at us in the sure knowledge that most people dont want to make any real effort and are happy to accept any thing that they can cling to that means they can say the government did something and they can get on with their loaded stressful lives. But over all, it'll just be the same old, same old.
Mean while, most are missing a fundamental ruling class mentality that exists in both the US and UK, and probably many, many other "democracies". Namely that they can and will do what ever they like until caught out. And when they are caught out, they face little consequence of any worth, let alone consequence that ensures nobody after them do it again. Oh, and of course they blame the people who expose them, rather than take responsibility for their own actions.
We can muck around all we like, but until the people in power face real consequence, nothing fundamental will chance.
Sad truth is, "we" accept it.
Sure, from a general population "pleb" POV, yes, mistakes. Plebs die, get tortured, imprisoned with out due process, and so on. But for those making these mistakes? Do they lose out? Or do they gain? Recently, Bush had his two terms. Obama has his two terms. Even the "plebs" didn't punish them. I take is Bush, family, and friends are doing fine right now, and I bet Obama doesn't fare too badly either after he's done. I take it that all their political and business friends are and will do fine too.
Im struggling to see the mistake from the POV of the powers that be.
Not just wart and so on, look at the banking collapse. Same thing. Same with any disaster that hits the mass population.
Right now, dont I see a younger generation making any head way in to politics based on any historical knowledge of the past mistakes. No. What I see right now is so much weight of imposed responsibility loaded on them that they simple cant. And, in the case of the UK, when students take to the streets in protest the authorities treat them like rioters and abuse them, legally. And that's leaving out the people who think such protesters should face the military on the streets. See, protesting causes poor business people to lose money, some how. Disruption costs. And that is apparently really, really important.
All we ever get is scraps thrown at us in the sure knowledge that most people dont want to make any real effort and are happy to accept any thing that they can cling to that means they can say the government did something and they can get on with their loaded stressful lives. But over all, it'll just be the same old, same old.
Mean while, most are missing a fundamental ruling class mentality that exists in both the US and UK, and probably many, many other "democracies". Namely that they can and will do what ever they like until caught out. And when they are caught out, they face little consequence of any worth, let alone consequence that ensures nobody after them do it again. Oh, and of course they blame the people who expose them, rather than take responsibility for their own actions.
We can muck around all we like, but until the people in power face real consequence, nothing fundamental will chance.
Sad truth is, "we" accept it.
Well I very much doubt that. Mostly the same shit happens over and over dressed slightly differently each time so the average pleb who may have only read about it in a history book (if that) doesn't recognise it as being much the same thing.
Truer words have never been spoken. I wish those who send the "Tommies" of today, realize what war is like. They do not call it the Ultimate sacrifice for nothing. Let us make sure that sacrifice was not for trivial and hollow matters.
But whilst we remember, let us not forget our returning veterans need help, both financial, medical and with integrating back into the norms of civilian life after two brutal conflicts.
I believe Wilfred Owen summed it up best, with his poem Dulce et Decorum http://www.warpoetry.co.uk/owen1.html
But whilst we remember, let us not forget our returning veterans need help, both financial, medical and with integrating back into the norms of civilian life after two brutal conflicts.
I believe Wilfred Owen summed it up best, with his poem Dulce et Decorum http://www.warpoetry.co.uk/owen1.html
The topic that's sort of ignored is how incredibly wrong it was to impose conscription on the British public. A lot of people still see no problem with making people 'serve their country,' even with the horrific example of WW1.
I personally find this deeply offensive. This polemic is featured in the Guardian practically every year and its just more of the same sanctimonious bullshit we're becoming accustomed to from them. There is a lot of good feeling toward the guardian here because of their involvement with the Snowden affair, but I'd warn you all to treat them with the cynicism that you treat any other news agency with. This individual, who by all means is entitled to his view, is no better than the politicians he is complaining about by further politicising d deliberately misrepresenting what the appeal represents. That he served in the WWII is merely an example of an appeal to authority fallacy. The Poppy Appeal is a charitable fund that is operated by the Royal British Legion (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Royal_British_Legion) and exists to help veterans and the dependants of service men and women that are injured or killed in action. Wear a poppy is showing support for those affected, not existing troops nor the wars that they fight in. It isn't showing any kind of agreement with any kind of foreign policy. Conflating the two is disingenuous to say the least and does nothing other than harming families that care for or have lost members to military action.
EDIT: Not wearing a poppy is an individuals right in the UK. It's a right that I absolutely stand by. I have no issue with anyone choosing not to partake in the act of remembrance. I take issue with it being misrepresented by both sides of the political spectrum. The irony of course is that the people who they are choosing not to remember gave their life for that right.
EDIT: Not wearing a poppy is an individuals right in the UK. It's a right that I absolutely stand by. I have no issue with anyone choosing not to partake in the act of remembrance. I take issue with it being misrepresented by both sides of the political spectrum. The irony of course is that the people who they are choosing not to remember gave their life for that right.
The history is more complex than a few paragraphs can convey. For instance, The Royal British Legion was founded by Field Marshal Douglas Haig, commander of British Expeditionary Forces and commander at the Battle of the Somme where over one million men were killed or injured. As a result there have been periods of controversy over Remembrance Day given the role that governments and the ruling elites play in formenting conflicts while the bulk of the cost and consequences is carried by the lower classes. It has certainly nothing to do with the political spectrum. The UK's recent foray into Iraq was brought to you by Prime Minister Tony Blair (Labour).
The controversy has parallels with the debate about the Vietnam War in the United States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Haig,_1st_Earl_Haig
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Somme_%281916%29
UPDATE: The comedy series, Blackadder Goes Fourth, written by Richard Curtis and Ben Elton covers the subject rather well, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackadder_Goes_Forth
The controversy has parallels with the debate about the Vietnam War in the United States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Haig,_1st_Earl_Haig
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Somme_%281916%29
UPDATE: The comedy series, Blackadder Goes Fourth, written by Richard Curtis and Ben Elton covers the subject rather well, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackadder_Goes_Forth
Haig was a founder of the RBL. In fact the OP linked to a wiki entry about the RBL, which spells out the RBLs formation. The whole point of remembrance is to recognise "the bulk of the cost and consequences" that is carried by all classes who are maimed or killed in combat. War isn't selective about your background and weapons maim and kill indiscriminately. Are you suggesting that because Haig was a founder, we should offer less credence to the RBL for the subsequent work that they do?
I believe the OP was referring to the politicising of the act of remembrance for political gain. Mr Smith has politicised this by writing an inflammatory piece bemoaning the current wars, which as you rightly point out were brought forward by Blair and the (Guardian supported) Labour Party. As a result, Smith is asking us to besmirch the act of remembrance of soldiers who have fought in these conflicts. Why? Because we don't agree with the wars? That seems rather churlish to me. I don't agree with either of the conflicts that the US has started and that Blair blindly followed, but it won't stop me remembering the combatants whose lives have lost or irrecoverably changed. If anything the act of buying a poppy is reminding us just how vile war is an how we should all stand against the politicians and corporations that lobby for it. The poppy should be a symbol of peace, albeit a sombre reminder of what it can cost.
I believe the OP was referring to the politicising of the act of remembrance for political gain. Mr Smith has politicised this by writing an inflammatory piece bemoaning the current wars, which as you rightly point out were brought forward by Blair and the (Guardian supported) Labour Party. As a result, Smith is asking us to besmirch the act of remembrance of soldiers who have fought in these conflicts. Why? Because we don't agree with the wars? That seems rather churlish to me. I don't agree with either of the conflicts that the US has started and that Blair blindly followed, but it won't stop me remembering the combatants whose lives have lost or irrecoverably changed. If anything the act of buying a poppy is reminding us just how vile war is an how we should all stand against the politicians and corporations that lobby for it. The poppy should be a symbol of peace, albeit a sombre reminder of what it can cost.
Pinning this on The Guardian is a little strong. It's in CommentIsFree, where they'll allow even the most right wing a platform, if they think it's interesting.
Come 2014 when the government marks the beginning of the
first world war with quotes from Rupert Brooke, Rudyard
Kipling and other great jingoists from our past empire, I
will declare myself a conscientious objector.
It's that Kipling, according to many people, even in that times, effectively did imperialistic propaganda, even if he was aware that the reality didn't match the myth, didn't match in a sense which the article author wants to point out also concerning the WW I.
http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/kipling/rkimperialism.ht...
http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5478/
Thanks for the "Tommy" poem, it also shows something important.
http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/kipling/rkimperialism.ht...
http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5478/
Thanks for the "Tommy" poem, it also shows something important.
It's worth pointing out that Kiplin lost his only son, Jack, to the Great War.
Interesting, thanks. I don't understand how this:
Take up the White Man’s burden—
Send forth the best ye breed—
Go send your sons to exile
To serve your captives' need
A couple other relevant poems:
http://www.kipling.org.uk/poems_recess.htm
http://www.kipling.org.uk/poems_epitaphs.htm
http://www.kipling.org.uk/poems_recess.htm
http://www.kipling.org.uk/poems_epitaphs.htm
For those who don't know the context of the reference to the poppy, it's from the poem "In Flanders Fields"
>In Flanders fields the poppies blow
> Between the crosses, row on row,
> That mark our place; and in the sky
> The larks, still bravely singing, fly
> Scarce heard amid the guns below.
> We are the Dead. Short days ago
> We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
> Loved and were loved, and now we lie
> In Flanders fields.
> Take up our quarrel with the foe:
> To you from failing hands we throw
> The torch; be yours to hold it high.
> If ye break faith with us who die
> We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
> In Flanders fields.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Flanders_Fields
>In Flanders fields the poppies blow
> Between the crosses, row on row,
> That mark our place; and in the sky
> The larks, still bravely singing, fly
> Scarce heard amid the guns below.
> We are the Dead. Short days ago
> We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
> Loved and were loved, and now we lie
> In Flanders fields.
> Take up our quarrel with the foe:
> To you from failing hands we throw
> The torch; be yours to hold it high.
> If ye break faith with us who die
> We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
> In Flanders fields.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Flanders_Fields
And for those still left clueless: in Britain, around this time of the year, it is common to see people wear a "remembrance poppy" pin, to commemorate soldiers who have died in war.
One way of getting it is by donation to the British Legion.
As with most symbols with time, its meaning now also very much depends on the observer (nostalgic-imperialistic, pro-war, gratitude, sacrifice, etc).
One way of getting it is by donation to the British Legion.
As with most symbols with time, its meaning now also very much depends on the observer (nostalgic-imperialistic, pro-war, gratitude, sacrifice, etc).
...to commemorate soldiers who have died in war...
It's to commemorate British soldiers. And therein lies my problem. It implies that British soldiers are worth commemorating, and any others (Russian, German, Austrian, South African, you name it, it was a world war after all) not.
It's like visiting the holocaust museum in Jerusalem. Everywhere you turn you hear how the museum is there to make sure it doesn't happen again to Israelis.
9/11 is another fine anti-example. You only hear about that one every year because it's American.
Meanwhile Rwanda happens, and Burma, Kosovo, and Iraq, and Afghanistan, and so on. Nationalism gnaws at my arse. Badly.
It's to commemorate British soldiers. And therein lies my problem. It implies that British soldiers are worth commemorating, and any others (Russian, German, Austrian, South African, you name it, it was a world war after all) not.
It's like visiting the holocaust museum in Jerusalem. Everywhere you turn you hear how the museum is there to make sure it doesn't happen again to Israelis.
9/11 is another fine anti-example. You only hear about that one every year because it's American.
Meanwhile Rwanda happens, and Burma, Kosovo, and Iraq, and Afghanistan, and so on. Nationalism gnaws at my arse. Badly.
I'm currently watching the commemorations from London live on BBC1, and the ambassadors from the various countries of the ex-British empire countries (including Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, South Africa, various Caribbean countries etc) are laying wreaths of poppies at the Cenotaph (the war memorial in the centre of london).
In order of precedence they lay their wreaths after the royals and the heads of the UK political parties, but before the heads of the UK armed forces.
I've seen Polish, Irish, and Dutch ex-soldiers today and probably other nations march in the past as well. Oh and the Gurkhas obviously (who are Nepalese, but part of the British Army).
So not only British soldiers get commemorated, maybe many people only remember the soldiers of their own country but that certainly doesn't lead to the conclusion that others aren't worth commemorating, only that people think of things that are close to home first.
In order of precedence they lay their wreaths after the royals and the heads of the UK political parties, but before the heads of the UK armed forces.
I've seen Polish, Irish, and Dutch ex-soldiers today and probably other nations march in the past as well. Oh and the Gurkhas obviously (who are Nepalese, but part of the British Army).
So not only British soldiers get commemorated, maybe many people only remember the soldiers of their own country but that certainly doesn't lead to the conclusion that others aren't worth commemorating, only that people think of things that are close to home first.
The Royal British Legion certainly don't prescribe who you are meant to remember. This exact issue was discussed in depth on this week's Moral Maze on Radio 4 by the Legions' Head of Remembrance.
In Australia, they have a similar 'Rememberence Day' as well as a bigger "ANZAC Day".
In the ANZAC instance, they pay respect to all sides of the specific conflicts (Gallipoli being the main one) Australian, British, New Zealand, and Turkish.
I doubt (though don't know for sure) Remembrance day in Britain is not intended for ALL soldiers...
In the ANZAC instance, they pay respect to all sides of the specific conflicts (Gallipoli being the main one) Australian, British, New Zealand, and Turkish.
I doubt (though don't know for sure) Remembrance day in Britain is not intended for ALL soldiers...
[deleted]
> One way of getting it is by donation to the British Legion.
It the only way.
It the only way.
> It the only way.
Not at all! Today at a Remembrance Service my wife and I wore brooches produced by a local veterans' charity; a poppy superimposed over a local landmark. No connection with RBL.
You could also make your own, wear a real poppy or buy a diamond-encrusted brooch from the likes of Bradford Exchange, if you're into bling.
The RBL have a trademark on one particular pattern of poppy emblem ( two-petal, with leaf ); that's all.
Not at all! Today at a Remembrance Service my wife and I wore brooches produced by a local veterans' charity; a poppy superimposed over a local landmark. No connection with RBL.
You could also make your own, wear a real poppy or buy a diamond-encrusted brooch from the likes of Bradford Exchange, if you're into bling.
The RBL have a trademark on one particular pattern of poppy emblem ( two-petal, with leaf ); that's all.
[deleted]
It is also worth noting that wearing a poppy pin for Rememberance Day is also done across much of Canada. In fact the poem Flanders Field quoted above was written by a Canadian.
In the past, the real deal-breaker for me has been the involvement of massive arms manufacturer British Aerospace. Not sure if that's still going on.
The motto of the Royal British Legion is Service not Self. Perhaps Mr Smith would be well served in remembering this.
The idea that poppies, Remembrance Day, and general military pageant used to be some kind of non-propaganda event that's recently been co-opted is fantasy. Military nations have been instilling their young men with the glory of war since forever. Circa 23BC we have Horace saying "It's sweet and right to die for your country"[1], then parodied by Wilfred Owen[2] from his experiences in the "Great" war.
This feels a great deal like "we used to fight just wars, and recent wars aren't just", which is so misguided[3], I don't even know where to begin. The whole thing feels like "my war was better than your war".
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dulce_et_decorum_est_pro_patria... [2] http://www.warpoetry.co.uk/owen1.html [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Empire