4 ms·
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 Bri
by smackay 13y ago
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/Douglas_Haig,_1st_Earl_Haig
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Somme_%281916%29 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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackadder_Goes_Forth
- sbuk 13y agoHaig 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.