1914-18 : The Great Slaughter - Challenging A Year Of Myth Making.

[8ball]

Yes its an iconic image.

So is the one of Kennedy's head exploding but I can't see the Yanks having that on their stamps.

 

[8ball]

Are there plans to do this as well as portraying Kitchener?

Yep, portrayed leading the troops valiantly into battle while riding a white stallion with a big horse erection.

 

[toblerone3]

That is fucking ghastly.

Maybe the gharstliness of the image is the point. It is an iconic image, but no-one who looks at that image today can ignore the fact that it was nationalistic propoganda and nationalistic propoganda that had terrible consequences.

Its not as though it is being used to promote self-sacrifice in the name of the common good such as, for example, an explicit link to ideas such as, for example, 'The Big Society'.

It is this context with the lessons of history that have been learnt that makes it not gharstly. I quite like it.

 

[eatmorecheese]

I think a revolutionary Baldrick staring into the middle distance would be much more appropriate, with Melchett looming in the background paternally thrusting a gun against his back.

 

[elbows]

Looking out for criticism of the coin choice in the media. Found something in the Express so far:

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world-war-1/451298/Royal-Mint-unveils-new-coins-for-2014

The decision is likely to raise eyebrows as the slogan is now associated by some with the devastation that followed – the deaths of millions of young men who had signed up for the Army as hopeful volunteers.

The choice of Lord Kitchener's famous image may prove controversial with those who see the poppy as a more enduring and fitting image to commemorate the start of the deadly conflict, sparked on July 28, 1914.

 

[Sasaferrato]

In 1978 I did a geriatric nursing module at the Royal Hospital Chelsea. Because I was in the army, I had the perk of membership of the Pensioner's Club (something I still have).

At that time there were still a goodly number of Pensioners who had fought in WWI. It is a deep regret that I didn't record their reminiscences, it focussed the horror in a way that writing cannot. One bloke told me about the first battle of the Somme, 120 men in his Company went over the top at dawn, by sunset, there were seven not dead or wounded. The carnage was unimaginable.

I've seen war, not big war like WWI or WWII, just a little one. That was more than enough for me. I have never felt as helpless as being on a ship that was bombed, and nothing that you could do to stop it. Funnily enough, at the time I wasn't really frightened, I was trying to help those who were injured, with bugger all really to do it with. After I got off, and was relatively safe, I shook for a couple of hours.

Whether it is age in general, giving a wider view, or merely late onset common sense, I am now of the view that resolution, where possible, is better than violence.

I do not think that WWI is something to be celebrated. 2014 is not the time to commemorate the centenary, 2018 is the time to remember, not the 'victory', but all of those, on all sides, who died in the fighting. A time to remember those displaced by the war, a time to remember all those who were 'collateral damage'.

WWII was a direct result of Versailles, and a stark reminder that whereas you may not forget, you must forgive. To a large extent, the aftermath of WWII was handled much better.

 

[8ball]

Looking out for criticism of the coin choice in the media. Found something in the Express so far:

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world-war-1/451298/Royal-Mint-unveils-new-coins-for-2014

See the comments for added facepalm.

 

[Pickman's model]

You mean over and above the notion of a few million of them not being killed?

no, i mean you seem to be identifying the cause of workers with the cause of bosses.

 

[Pickman's model]

Surely, it's self-evident that their interests did not lay in a war for empire which left almost 40,000,000 of them dead, wounded or missing, and from which they received no great part of the spoils. Not to mention the historical consequences.

Are you suggesting that WWI was in the interests of the working class? If so, on what basis?

if it is so self-evident then you'll doubtless tell me why so many workers joined up without coercion

e2a1: i have to challenge your claim that the war left 40 million british and german workers killed, wounded or missing. can you produce some evidence to support your assertion?

e2a2: i am remaining silent on the issue of whether i think the war was in the interests of the working class, because i am asking you to support your assertion that peace was in the interests of the working class. asking you to justify your position is not necessarily taking up an opposing position.

 

[brogdale]

no, i mean you seem to be identifying the cause of workers with the cause of bosses.

Do I?
Maybe it's just me being dopey, but I don't see where that's come from?

 

[Pickman's model]

Do I?
Maybe it's just me being dopey, but I don't see where that's come from?

let's take this stage by stage. whose interests do you think were served by war in the summer of 1914?

 

[stowpirate]

 

[toblerone3]

let's take this stage by stage. whose interests do you think were served by war in the summer of 1914?

It was in the interests of US industrial capital. Perhaps they were able to manipulate events from the sidelines.

 

[Pickman's model]

It was in the interests of US industrial capital. Perhaps they were able to manipulate events from the sidelines.

how was it in the interests of us industrial capital in the summer and autumn of 1914?

 

[Pickman's model]

where in britain is columbus?

 

[toblerone3]

how was it in the interests of us industrial capital in the summer and autumn of 1914?

Economically

 

[brogdale]

let's take this stage by stage. whose interests do you think were served by war in the summer of 1914?

Stage by stage, OK...but my response followed your request, of Athos, to justify his assertion that peace would have been in the interests of the workers. That peace would have averted the death of millions of workers seems valid enough to me. What was inadequate about that?

 

[Pickman's model]

Economically

and approximately how much money did the yankee military industrial complex make from the conflict between august 1914 and december 1914?

 

[Pickman's model]

Stage by stage, OK...but my response followed your request, of Athos, to justify his assertion that peace would have been in the interests of the workers. That peace would have averted the death of millions of workers seems valid enough to me. What was inadequate about that?

that doesn't answer the question 'in whose interests was war in the summer of 1914?'

 

[Athos]

if it is so self-evident then you'll doubtless tell me why so many workers joined up without coercion

e2a1: i have to challenge your claim that the war left 40 million british and german workers killed, wounded or missing. can you produce some evidence to support your assertion?

e2a2: i am remaining silent on the issue of whether i think the war was in the interests of the working class, because i am asking you to support your assertion that peace was in the interests of the working class. asking you to justify your position is not necessarily taking up an opposing position.

I'm sure people joined for a number of reasons, including propaganda and enormous social pressure. And a mistaken belief that their interests were more closely aligned with their political masters', than those of their class in foreign lands. But, whatever they thought at the time, it's clear now that the whole affair was a disaster for working class people.

40m, 20, 10? We can argue all day about precise figures. But it's a distraction. Lets agree on 'lots.' The point remains the same.

Whether or not you agree with it, I've ser my position out. What's yours? Do you believe WWI was in the interests of workers on the opposing sides?

 

[brogdale]

that doesn't answer the question 'in whose interests was war in the summer of 1914?'

Correct, and principally so because we were engaged on this point;

it would be good if you could expand on your claim that the interests of british and german workers lay in peace.

..and not your subsequent question.

 

[Pickman's model]

Correct, and principally so because we were engaged on this point;

we were dealing with that point stage by stage, as you agreed.

 

[gridban]

See the comments for added facepalm.

I just did - now I wish I hadn't. About what I'd expect from the Express I guess.

 

[Pickman's model]

I'm sure people joined for a number of reasons, including propaganda and enormous social pressure. And a mistaken belief that their interests were more closely aligned with their political masters', than those of their class in foreign lands. But, whatever they thought at the time, it's clear now that the whole affair was a disaster for working class people.

40m, 20, 10? We can argue all day about precise figures. But it's a distraction. Lets agree on 'lots.' The point remains the same.

Whether or not you agree with it, I've ser my position out. What's yours? Do you believe WWI was in the interests of workers on the opposing sides?

you have made some bold claims - for example that all of the socialist parties which ended up supporting the war were in fact only purportedly socialist. i suppose you consider kropotkin only a purported anarchist because of his support for the allied cause. you have claimed that war was not in the interests of the working class and that peace was, not because peace advanced their interests, but because fewer people would have suffered an early death. to my mind, the interests of the middle class could be described in much the same way, that due to the large numbers of middle class men who were killed the war was not in their interests. indeed, if we're going to go down that path the war was not in fact in the interests of the ruling class, not least because numbers of them lost their heads - among the monarchs notably the russian royal family - and others their thrones. so, if the war was against the interests of the whole of society - on the terms you've laid out - then in whose interests was it?

 

[brogdale]

we were dealing with that point stage by stage, as you agreed.

Agreed; so starting with Athos' assertion that the slaughter of millions of proletarians demonstrates that war was not in their interest. What is about that argument that you take issue with?

 

[Pickman's model]

Agreed; so starting with Athos' assertion that the slaughter of millions of proletarians demonstrates that war was not in their interest. What is about that argument that you take issue with?

that it is a facile analysis tbh.

 

[brogdale]

I just did - now I wish I hadn't. About what I'd expect from the Express I guess.

Reads like some sort of stream of conciousness ranting from a UKIP fringe meeting.

 

[brogdale]

that it is a facile analysis tbh.

And would you care to justify that?

 

[Pickman's model]

And would you care to justify that?

i have done.

 

[gridban]

Time for the BBC to show The monocled mutineer again (no, i don't care if not every detail was correct). As if. Rights issues my anus.

Ah I'd love to see that again - would be a very appropriate commemoration I think.