“We must reclaim the poppy as a symbol of peace, not a symbol of war.”

Too late. It’s become a symbol of mawkish jingoish for armchair warmongers, with the full connivance of the British Legion. It’s an insult to the memory of the dead.

Nicely written article, but I’m afraid the pacifists amongst us will never reclaim the poppy.

The white poppy is a longstanding symbol for these objections, but unfortunately, due to the politicisation and the nationalism you mention, wearing one tends to be seen as insulting soldiers, rather than protesting war.

http://www.ppu.org.uk/whitepoppy/ (background music warning)

Well seeing as the original intention was the first world war, and there is not a single survivor from that war left.

It is interesting that as the wars get more controversial there is an attempt by the establishment to push the poppy even more than it was 25-40-60 years ago. The BBC, ever terrified of the Daily Mail, and so wanting to appease the right wing has in recent years become almost manic in its insistence that everyone must wear a poppy. Hardly voluntary when it gets to that stage of pressure.

Also, it was supposed to be held on the 11th hour on the 11th day of the 11th month. But it has now expanded to numerous days and numerous sporting events. Personally I think the politicians should be made to wear ever bigger poppy’s. Perhaps the Prime Minister should wear an 8 foot high one.

The BBC, ever terrified of the Daily Mail, and so wanting to appease the right wing has in recent years become almost manic in its insistence that everyone must wear a poppy. Hardly voluntary when it gets to that stage of pressure.

Unfortunately it does seem to have become one of the few legitimate examples of pc gone mad.

Wear the poppy or don’t, donate to the RBL or don’t but England shouldn’t be allowed to wear the poppy symbol on their kit this Saturday. When FIFA say it compromises the neutrality of football they’re absolutely right. Suppose another country wanted to wear a symbol on their shirts commemorating their losses in a very controversial war – what could FIFA say now they’ve allowed this?

Sunny – The poppy is a symbol of remembrance to those of our countrymen who died in war. It’s not a symbol of peace or of war – rather it commemorates personal, individual, and human tragedy and grief. That’s the whole sum of it.

Your suggestion that those lives were “wasted” is an example of the very politicisation which you seek to condemn.

Sunny – In connection with my previous post, my apologies. I now see that these were not your views. My remarks were directed to the author of the post.

The wearing of a red poppy at this time of year, in the approach to Remembrance Sunday, is a well-established practice in Britain. It is virtually impossible to see anyone on television who is not wearing a poppy, so ingrained has become the convention. Indeed, it seems to me that there is a kind of moral bullying of people, especially if they are appearing on television, to conform to this national ritual.

More http://haringeygreens.blogspot.com/

It’s difficult. I was at a ceremony this morning. There were many elderly people for whom the Ceremony of Remembrance was purely that – remembrance of people they knew and lost. I wore a poppy out of respect for them – I had no desire to cause offence to a generation for whom the ceremony had true meaning.

But I resented the presence of the military, stomping and trooping as though the grief of others gave them legitimacy. I resented the churchmen even more. No mention of the role the church played in encouraging young men to march enthusiastically off to Flanders. In fact, I’ve never been to ceremony where this was acknowledged. As Alan Bennett puts it in The History Boys “It’s not a case of lest we forget, it’s lest we remember.”

Irony alert!!!

It was the Britian hating, national pride loathing Left that made the poppy a political issue when they continuely attack people wearing it, made bulksgit white poppies and just refused to let us wear them without making a big deal out of it!

Your self hate and hate for this non-commie country is the cause!

While I don’t have much time for the semi articulate ranting of poster 10 he does make a valid point – those of us on the Right saw during the Blair years the rise of an anti-patriotic, anti-military and anti-traditionalist Left within the Labour Party and general “left movement”. Therefore symbols that were previously considered neutral because both Right and Left supported them (the poppy, the Union Flag, the Monarchy etc) were believed to be under threat from the Left. I regret the fact that this was happened and don’t believe it is healthy for national pride to be associated only with the Right, which is partly why I am encouraged by the rise of Blue Labour which seems to be an attempt to address this. The 1945-1951 Labour Government was, despite its radicalism, a very patriotic government and it’s a pity more on the Left don’t seek to emulate their example today instead of sneering at patriotism, national traditions etc.

“both Right and Left supported them (the poppy, the Union Flag, the Monarchy etc)”

The left has never supported the monarchy.

Related to this, we have the disgraceful arrests today of 170 people, allegedly EDL supporters, by the Met police. They had committed no crime whatever and this action followed the equally illiberal banning of MAC.

Whether or not you agree with the stance of the EDL or MAC is irrelevant, this was a clear infringement of all of these people’s basic civil rights and is proof, if any were needed, that we are moving inexorably towards a police state.

In my view, unlawful, and utterly shameful.

emulate their example today instead of sneering at patriotism, national traditions etc.

There’s patriotism, and then there’s “patriotism”.
Finding faults with your nation and trying to find ways to fix them and campaigning to change the nation for the better – that’s patriotism through and through. This does require saying some things are wrong and/or shite however, which doesn’t go down well with the ‘if you like it there so much why don’t you go live there’ crowd.

Deciding to bugger off to a tax haven or somewhere sunnier, and continuing to blat on at great length about how the UK is going to the dogs, and how you’re glad you left the place behind, is the opposite of patriotism, and is hardly an activity associated with “the left”.

I may be semi articulate (although, shouldn’t it be hyphenated?) but I do have a sense of history. Left-wing unease with the red poppy began in the 1920s, not the 1990s.

To 99 per cent of the population, Remembrance is a pure, non-political act of gratitude. Unfortunately, they are used as a human shield by those who would conflate anti-militarism with anti-patriotism (as 12 does). Apologies if that’s ranting.

@16 badstephen
If I were to guess, I think he may have meant @11 – Teller of all to all again, when discussing the “semi articulate ranting”.

12 Some of the most idiotic nonsens I have read from a troll.

So according to your rather colonel Blimp view of democracy we must all support the Monarchy,the military,and the Union flag.

Just confirms by long held belief that the Right hates democracy.

By the way Lord moneybags Ashcroft can buy up as many Victoria Crosses that he can get his grubby little hands on. I will never view him as a patriot. A scoundrel yes, but never a patriot.

[16] “To 99 per cent of the population, Remembrance is a pure, non-political act of gratitude” – strongly agree.

The OP claims “The poppy is becoming a symbol of war, a symbol of blindly endorsing the actions of the British military and this is wrong” – I’m sorry but that is absolute tosh.

10 nails it.

I have no desire to offend those , particularly elderly people who fought and lived through the first 2 world wars.

However they fought for our freedom. Our freedom to not wear a poppy, or be lectured at by sanctimonious clerics,politicians, and Newspaper editors fond of calling their staff cunts.

War has become perpetual. It has changed from an acute to a chronic sickness.

@17 Cylux

Looking at it, you may be right. If so, I apologise for an over-sensitive response to @12 Richard. He should learn to count though.

This really shows how far the left has separated from working class support . Don`t worry Nation haters .On remembrance day, no-one really thinks Labour representatives really care. They say the right things of course but its all a bit like a Vicar having a half in the pub.”Look I can do this, its ok ..just like a normal person…”

We know they are going through the motions

@24. Here we go. If you question Government foreign policy, you are apparently out of touch with working class sentiments. As I said, genuine popular feeling is being used as a human shield for pro-militarism. Support for the fallen is being deliberately confused with support for the reasons why they fell.

Let’s not kid ourselves, any of us on here. Most people at those services today will regard this whole debate as irrelevant, if not downright offensive, and probably wish both sides would shut up. The only difference is, we on the left are not claiming that people turned out at the cenotaphs to support our position.

I largely agree with the a&e nurse. I wore a poppy today, and it simply didn’t occur to me that anyone might construe this as a symbol of support for e.g. the invasion of Iraq.

So I think the OP overstates the case. And to the extent that it is true that the nationalistic right are trying to hijack the poppy as a militaristic symbol – rather than a commemoration of the dead – they should simply be told to get stuffed.

BBC Breaking

“British Army memo seen by Daily Telegraph suggests 16,500 soldiers could be made redundant in next few years, double previous MoD estimate.”

I guess Camerons poppy was not big enough.

If the Poppy merely laments death then the Axis powers should be more commemorated than the allies. More of them died, they lost.

@ 26 Larry

“So I think the OP overstates the case. And to the extent that it is true that the nationalistic right are trying to hijack the poppy as a militaristic symbol – rather than a commemoration of the dead – they should simply be told to get stuffed.”

Yeah, agreed. As far as I’m aware the poppy is neither a symbol of war or peace, and generally isn’t sold on those terms. It’s a symbol of respect for people who have died in battle, and both hawks and doves can get behind that. Much more to the point, it’s also a way of raising money for veterans who need support.

Personally, I think FIFA’s original decision was wrong, for precisely those reasons. It’s not political, unless people think that the idea of people voluntarily donating money to those in need is something that has to be politicised. And honestly, I suspect that FIFA had the wrong idea about the poppy (is it an international thing, or only done in Britain?). They probably realised that it wasn’t a political thing, and backed down for that reason.

@ 28 Paul

“If the Poppy merely laments death then the Axis powers should be more commemorated than the allies. More of them died, they lost.”

The Russians won, and I’m pretty sure that they lost the most troops. But yes, of course Axis troops should be remembered, and their deaths regretted. People don’t choose their nation’s politics.

29. Chaise Guevara

” Yeah, agreed. As far as I’m aware the poppy is neither a symbol of war or peace, and generally isn’t sold on those terms. It’s a symbol of respect for people who have died in battle, and both hawks and doves can get behind that. Much more to the point, it’s also a way of raising money for veterans who need support. ”

Completely agree. Whether from the right trying to badger people to conform. The left and their contoured logic against a symbol of British militarism. A poppy should stand as something above ideology. Young people died because politicians round a table could not come to an agreement, even when it was inevitable that they would end up eventually coming to an agreement about what they went to war about it the first place. We can honour those who paid the ultimate sacrifice, whilst holding those in contempt that sent them to pay the ultimate sacrifice.

@ 28 Paul

“If the Poppy merely laments death then the Axis powers should be more commemorated than the allies. More of them died, they lost.”

@ 30. Chaise Guevara

The Russians won, and I’m pretty sure that they lost the most troops. But yes, of course Axis troops should be remembered, and their deaths regretted. People don’t choose their nation’s politics.

This depends on what war you are talking about. I would have thought that the Poppy represented World War One deaths originally. Which the Russians most definitely did not win. Although they may have lost the most soldiers in that war too.

If the lessons of the two World Wars are anything to go by, the rule seems to be that invading countries is relatively bloodless. Surrendering early to them is even more bloodless – even if they are mass murderers like the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany. While the worst thing is to fight on your own soil for a prolonged time. The biggest proportion of losses in both wars were in countries like Serbia (which may have lost 10% of its population in both wars) or Poland in WW2. People like the Czechs got off easy. So did the Germans and Italians to be honest.

Young people died because politicians round a table could not come to an agreement, even when it was inevitable that they would end up eventually coming to an agreement about what they went to war about it the first place.

That is to say what was done was a pointless waste which it was not. The wars were the fault of our adversaries not ours. We did not invade anyone, we were threatened and it was not the fault of British politicians. The cause of the troops was a just one, not a con trick perpetrated by some shadowy elite.
The Poppy celebrates heroes not dupes and as we see the left would rather anything than see the good in their own country
They went on to prove this by traitorously allying with an aggressive militarist dictatorship until the 70s atthe least. Michael Foot was paid by the KGB Green peace was financed by the KGB, numerous Union leaders had and continue to have close relationships with our enemies and they, of course, buy the Labour Party.
In the day before the alliance of Fabian and Union fell apart the vile scientific anti human instincts of the “intellectuals “was carefully hidden. Not any more and they form the world in their image
In the multicultural heaven that is London , the condition to which we must all aspire, Remembrance is scarcely observed and
This is what they want. The end of remembering , the perpetual day 1.The destruction of loyalty with the weapon of “prejudice” and that is what the white Poppy means .

Whatever, Paul Newman.

The 20th century was a very bloody one. Some of the wars were just and necessary, WW2 being a pretty clear-cut case of good versus evil.

WW1 was an epic clusterfuck on every level – which isn’t to say that it was all Britain’s fault.

And no doubt commenters here will disagree on the merits of the more recent wars.

But what all these wars had in common is that a very large number of young people – who had nothing to do with the causes of the war – were removed from their families and sent overseas to meet horrifying deaths. It’s in tribute to their bravery that I wear a poppy, and am proud to do so.

If you want to wear one as a way of waggling your middle finger at the hun, that’s your right. But you can’t expect everyone to share your perspective.

The poppy is a symbol of remembrance.

It is not a symbol of peace, nor is it a symbol of war.

We don’t need to reclaim it; we just need to respect it.

“But yes, of course Axis troops should be remembered, and their deaths regretted.”

Well yes and no. Remember that a lot of those troops were fighting to defend the automated extermination of the Jews and by fighting ensured that millions of lives were fed into that grinder.

I think the red poppy campaign has become a bit shrill (why on earth should we have to wear a poppy when we play football – are we going to get ‘revelations that David Cameron has been seen taking a poppy-less shower?) but otherwise the OP does overstate the case.

The white poppy, though, is truly offensive to any anti-fascist, I should have thought, a real insult to all those allied troops that died defeating it.

I am amazed, by the way, that we haven’t had a mirthless LC article lamenting the carbon cost of manufacturing the poppies. Is there no green alternative? Wake up everyone!

World war 1 was a good example of what happens when everybody slavishly supports Monarchies, patriotism, and militarism.

“The poppy is being increasingly nationalised and politicised by elements of our society. Sections of the media compete doggedly to be seen as the most pro-forces, leading to the poppy becoming synonymous with nationalism.”

But it has from the very start been linked with a political position of militaristic nationalism: I remember being told by an elderly relative about the objections to it from pacifists. It claims inspiration from a poem in which the third verse promotes the idea that failing to fight to victory is a betrayal of those already dead (“In Flanders Fields”). I appreciate many commenters on here would find that sentiment entirely laudable, but the poem was used at the time to argue that any negotiated settlement would be traitorous – a sentiment which shared by both sides led to many millions of deaths and another world war.

The poppy also (until 1994) carried the name of Field Marshal Haig, who personally signed the death warrants of hundreds of men who refused to fight, and was lionised at the time by nationalist militarists. Wearing a badge with his name on could obviously be seen as an endorsement their views – i.e. that every Briton has a duty to unconditionally support all past and future actions of the British Armed Forces, in the name of the King/Queen. It is this perception of the meaning of the poppy that means it continues to be extremely controversial in Northern Ireland.

Given that history, it is hardly surprising that pacifists and those more generally against war (traditionally associated with the left) have long been sceptical of the poppy. Also, the enforced requirement to wear a poppy is nothing new either, and if anything has got less intense as time passes; people were sacked from their jobs for wearing the alternative pacifist white poppy in the 1930s.

Personally I wear a poppy because I don’t want people to think I disrespect the war dead, or that I don’t appreciate their sacrifice. What a symbol means is really what the majority take it to mean here and now, regardless of the history (or what it means when worn in Northern Ireland). These days, it would seem unlikely that someone would take the poppy to mean I unconditionally support all British wars.

13 – you think Attlee, Wilson and Callaghan were republicans?

18 – Sally, you are a Tory wind-up merchant and have been since you started posting here in 2009. There are those of us on the Right who actually enjoy engaging with the Left and reading alternative points of view. Try doing so yourself instead of maintaining this OTT fake Trotskyite persona. I know it’s fake because if I wanted to troll on a left-wing forum I would do exactly what you are doing. It’s not hard to pretend to be the SWP on crack.

23 – apologies, I did indeed mean 11

Oh how I agree with you that the poppy should be seen as a symbol of peace and not conflict. I have written in these pages previously about how I feel, as a pacifist, that by wearing a red poppy nowadays it can be seen to be a glorification of war so I wear a white poppy. But what so many do not understand – and despite my trying to make it very clear – is that by doing so I am not dishonouring all those who died, all nationalities and civilians and military personnel, but honouring their memory whilst also working and asking for peace in the future. Believing that there are better ways than conflict.

I am sad to feel that I can’t wear a red poppy. I don’t want to tell others not to wear one, in the same way that I would hate anyone to feel they MUST wear one. I contribute to the British Legion collecting tins. But the collector who rudely shook a tin in my friend’s face and demanded that she buy a poppy got a shock when she refused because her father was shot down whilst serving ['press-ganged'/conscripted] in the Luftwaffe. Many lives on all sides are lost in conflicts, what a shame that she cannot feel that a poppy represents her loss. The poppy should represent all blood shed, surely?

I know many will disagree with me. You can insult me personally on my blog, please discuss rationally on this page.

Thousands and thousands of young people actually did fight fascism in 39-45 and died doing it. Two of my father’s mates died, he survived the war in a prison camp and a long march to Berlin while many others didn’t. Our generation of keyboard soldiers can just about manage to try and appear more outraged at the EDL than the next man, while wondering whether they should wear a poppy or not and what it could be construed as supporting.

Whether you agree with current conflicts etc or not, it’s still worth wearing one to remember all of those people who died in the air, on the land and in the water to defeat a horrific enemy during WW2 and preserve our freedom.

There’s an interesting comment piece in today’s Guardian on this topic: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/12/armistice-day-first-world-war?INTCMP=SRCH

Notably the funereal silences and mawkish death-obsessions have won out over earlier ideas that Remembrance Day should be a public holiday and a time of celebration. Now there’s an idea…

Oh look, a white poppy pacifist.
So you don’t agree that some things are worth fighting for, or that some things are worth fighting against!

So Hitler could just stroll through the world conquering it then?
As pacifism don’t work of the other fella isn’t practising it!!

I bet your happy then we are indeed just handing our country over to fascism then this time, the fascism that carries a Quran.

34. Larry

The 20th century was a very bloody one. Some of the wars were just and necessary, WW2 being a pretty clear-cut case of good versus evil.

No it wasn’t. We fought World War Two in alliance with Stalin. You can argue about a lot of things, but you cannot claim the war was a clear cut case of good versus evil. It was only good in so far as the West was not defeated and Western Europe was saved for the Marshall Plan. If we had fought the war in alliance with the Germans against the Soviet Union, the outcome would have been morally no different and maybe even better. Fewer Jews in the world, but more landlords and rich peasants.

WW1 was an epic clusterfuck on every level – which isn’t to say that it was all Britain’s fault.

I am having trouble seeing why it was Britain’s fault at all.

But what all these wars had in common is that a very large number of young people – who had nothing to do with the causes of the war – were removed from their families and sent overseas to meet horrifying deaths. It’s in tribute to their bravery that I wear a poppy, and am proud to do so.

Europe was a collection of democracies and so those young men had something to do with the causes of the war. I remember when the Guardian used to be full of people arguing that because Israel is a democracy suicide bombings were fine. The argument for sanctions against that other ally in WW2 too come to think of it – Apartheid-era South Africa.

Me, I think the saner folk in the poppy “debate” are those who don’t “debate” at all. They just go about their lives with or without one and pay their respects however they’re inclined. It’s people who (a) whine about the people who don’t wear one or (b), yes, whine about the people who do wear one that expose their own silliness.

SMFS -

If we had fought the war in alliance with the Germans against the Soviet Union, the outcome would have been morally no different and maybe even better. Fewer Jews in the world, but more landlords and rich peasants.

There are many reasons why that’s a disgusting and preposterous notion but, hell, I’ll put them to one side for a moment ’cause I think that this could make a great alternative history novel.

Maybe it could be combined with the CND symbol because the symbolism of the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month suggests that we are close to midnight and cannot afford wars on a scale that would destroy humanity.

Harry Patch (The Last Tommy) suggested that we should remember the German dead as well, so perhaps delegations from the countries that we have fought against (including civilians who suffered) should be invited to the ceremonies.

Focusing on our own losses is too narrow. We could make it a European event of reconcilliation and hope for the future. Then the meaning of the poppy as the flower that gave hope as it recolonised the battlefields in the spring after the armistice could be rediscovered.

46. BenSix

There are many reasons why that’s a disgusting and preposterous notion but, hell, I’ll put them to one side for a moment ’cause I think that this could make a great alternative history novel.

This is not the time or place for a genuine discussion of the issue, but one day I would like to hear why you think it is either disgusting or preposterous.

But as an alternative history novel it would never work. The pro-Soviet left was too strong and the pro-Nazi right too weak. It meant that the moral debate about the Fascists, even before the war, was dominated by people who thought Stalin’s methods and aims were justifiable.

Raymond Kelly

Focusing on our own losses is too narrow. We could make it a European event of reconcilliation and hope for the future. Then the meaning of the poppy as the flower that gave hope as it recolonised the battlefields in the spring after the armistice could be rediscovered.

People made a fuss when Reagan went to Bitberg. I can imagine the response of the Left to anyone who tried to make the poppy a symbol of the SS dead. Even if it was confined to the Waffen SS. Or the Right for that matter. Look at the fuss the Guardian makes when the Baltic states try to make the smallest nod in the direction of their anti-Soviet veterans.

SMFS -

This is not the time or place for a genuine discussion of the issue, but one day I would like to hear why you think it is either disgusting or preposterous.

Well, jeez, where to start? There is, of course, the fact that Stalin never posed a threat to us, and Hitler did, so we’d have no reason to declare such a deranged war. Thus, while an alliance with Stalinism was necessary to survive, an alliance with fascism would be necessary for, er – well, it wouldn’t be. Then there’s the fact that Hitler, who’d placed the Slavs quite near the Jews on his list of ethnic hatreds, would have brought the Russians to new depths of misery. Then there’s the fact that, by the 1940s, Stalin had, as far I’m aware, reached “peak” purging whereas Hitler was just getting started on his butchery. Then…

…well, there’s the fact that these alternative histories – playing, as they’re bound to, with millions of lives – carry an innate seediness.

I wouldn’t rise to the bait but I’m annoyed and bored after Cain/JDS ended so quickly. So, naturally, I’m arguing about a possible alliance with Hitler against the Soviet Union. I need a new hobby.

49. BenSix

There is, of course, the fact that Stalin never posed a threat to us, and Hitler did, so we’d have no reason to declare such a deranged war. Thus, while an alliance with Stalinism was necessary to survive, an alliance with fascism would be necessary for, er – well, it wouldn’t be.

OK, I really don’t think this is the time or place and I should just go to sleep….

I don’t know where you spent the Cold War, but I spent it in a West that was under constant threat of Soviet nuclear attack and/or invasion. From the start the Soviet Union intended to invade Britain. They worked hard to create a loyal group of Quislings to help them as well. How can you have not noticed that during the past 50 years?

It was Hitler who did not want to invade the UK and probably would have accepted some compromise peace.

But I agree as long as we had an alliance with the US, we would not have needed to ally with either.

Then there’s the fact that Hitler, who’d placed the Slavs quite near the Jews on his list of ethnic hatreds, would have brought the Russians to new depths of misery.