8ball
Decolonise colons!
This is just a statement about your grasp of what politics is.
what no annual poppy bunfight thread?
- Thread starter Pingu
- Start date
This is just a statement about your grasp of what politics is.
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
Really? I was 24 when I joined the army. I was married and had a child, not a naive 16 year old. I well understood the political process, having been interested in politics since my early teens.
8ball
Decolonise colons!
And yet you still say no part of your military training was of a political nature.
dylanredefined
Not a house elf a tiger
Nearest thing to indoctrination is value and standards and equal opportunities lecture you have to sit through yearly.
coley
Well-Known Member
Apart from the usual moans in the NAFFI or pub, politics was never a burning issue in my lot and I was certainly not indoctrinated in any shape form or fashion by the Army itself, though I can see the belief in ''military indoctrination' would be attractive to a certain mindset.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
perhaps Sasaferrato could outline what happened in training.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
I think this discussion of the political nature of armed forces has gone slightly awry.
My original point was to do specifically with the British Legion, which plays a political role in linking past conflicts with present ones while never questioning any aspect of any conflict's motivation, execution or consequences. It is an 'our role is but to serve, and that is how it has ever been and ever should be' attitude that is itself not politically neutral.
The military and the police are both arms of the state, the means of maintaining the state's monopoly on violence. As such, both serve power. The military's violence is nominally aimed squarely at an external 'enemy' - from outside the 'in-group' that is the nation. It can be and is in extremis aimed inward at 'enemies within', and certainly their associated secret services are directed in this way all the time. Luckily in the UK, the military has not interfered too much with the 'in group' matters [exception below], but it can and does in whatever country when order is threatened. We shouldn't pretend otherwise - people who command men with guns and bombs will always have that power, the power to impose martial law as a last resort.
[The glaring exception here is Northern Ireland - big and glaring, and you might see rather a lot of raised eyebrows among the nationalist community there at the idea that the British army is not political, or aimed solely at an 'out-group'.]
The police are more overtly political in that their violence is aimed at the 'in-group' and maintenance of order. All police forces are thus political in their very nature. But the military is too, in practice, especially the British military. Few would even pretend that the various conflicts the UK has been involved in recently have been undertaken in order to protect us in the UK, and in the more distant past, conflicts of conquest have been overtly undertaken and praised - hence the building of an empire. Things are more hypocritical now. Instead of conquest, talk is about establishing 'democracy'. Today's liberal interventionists do exactly the same thing as imperialist conquerors did - invade and impose regimes that serve their ends - but do so in the name of peace and democracy. That is political - and if you're in the British army, that is the project you are carrying out.
My original point was to do specifically with the British Legion, which plays a political role in linking past conflicts with present ones while never questioning any aspect of any conflict's motivation, execution or consequences. It is an 'our role is but to serve, and that is how it has ever been and ever should be' attitude that is itself not politically neutral.
The military and the police are both arms of the state, the means of maintaining the state's monopoly on violence. As such, both serve power. The military's violence is nominally aimed squarely at an external 'enemy' - from outside the 'in-group' that is the nation. It can be and is in extremis aimed inward at 'enemies within', and certainly their associated secret services are directed in this way all the time. Luckily in the UK, the military has not interfered too much with the 'in group' matters [exception below], but it can and does in whatever country when order is threatened. We shouldn't pretend otherwise - people who command men with guns and bombs will always have that power, the power to impose martial law as a last resort.
[The glaring exception here is Northern Ireland - big and glaring, and you might see rather a lot of raised eyebrows among the nationalist community there at the idea that the British army is not political, or aimed solely at an 'out-group'.]
The police are more overtly political in that their violence is aimed at the 'in-group' and maintenance of order. All police forces are thus political in their very nature. But the military is too, in practice, especially the British military. Few would even pretend that the various conflicts the UK has been involved in recently have been undertaken in order to protect us in the UK, and in the more distant past, conflicts of conquest have been overtly undertaken and praised - hence the building of an empire. Things are more hypocritical now. Instead of conquest, talk is about establishing 'democracy'. Today's liberal interventionists do exactly the same thing as imperialist conquerors did - invade and impose regimes that serve their ends - but do so in the name of peace and democracy. That is political - and if you're in the British army, that is the project you are carrying out.
coley
Well-Known Member
Nope, keeping it simple, the army carries out policies,it does not create them or in any meaningful way have a hand in creating them.
Isn't that quite political in itself?
coley
Well-Known Member
In what way?
Dunno. The idea that the army is there to unquestioningly carry out policies.
I would have thought each soldier and the army should question what they are doing?
8ball
Decolonise colons!
Just following orders...
coley
Well-Known Member
We did, and those who don't agree with what they are asked to do leave.
But there are no elective procedures in the Army, no unions,that is why it's a bit odd to describe the armed forces as 'political'
I thought the idea was that being in the armed forces might have a polarising effect on some people's politics.
I think that's true, fwiw.
coley
Well-Known Member
No, why do you think that? I've always been to the centre left as have my two sons, most of those I was in the army with, in my regt, at least, were of a similar political mindset, found when I mixed with other regts on courses etc that those from the South were slightly more inclined to the right.
A reflection on the political hue of the UK and boringly normal.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
ffs it- not about whether you individually are left wing or wing, or about the forces trying to persuade you to be right wing - it's about the political role and function of the military existing regardless of whatever political opinions the people in it hold. Pages of utter drivel on this thread.
coley
Well-Known Member
And I'm arguing that in the broad sense the armed forces don't have a political role, if we had a choice of what we did and didn't do depending on on the party in power than that would be different
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
And you still ignore the point i make above. You can only make that point if you totally ignore the above. It's not about you or your political choices.
coley
Well-Known Member
"The political role and function" ? Didn't ignore it just stated I don't think they have oneIMO.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Why would you think that it had? being a member of a non-political body and all.
coley
Well-Known Member
Ex member, have , had? Where you going with this, Peterloo?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
I don''t have to go anywhere with it. The british army weighs fifteen hundred tons regardless of the views of its members. That is a whacking great series of political elephants in the living room. You might have motivations for ignoring it - not many others though.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
motivation, belief in the righteousness of the cause, loyalty to crown and country. I've heard some shocking cold war propaganda from the mouths of old soldiers, decontextualised shit like food queus in 50s russia like that was unusual for that era. Wether it comes from the BBC or the prevailing military culture- it is there. With the caveat obviously that individuals are susceptible to soft propaganda in varying degrees from arch skeptic to total gullible.
coley
Well-Known Member
Should didn't have to be in the military to have that kind of stuff chucked at you it was the prevailing mind set during practically the whole Cold War era.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
But all non-political. All of it. There are no politics in this world.
8ball
Decolonise colons!
Politics is Labour vs. Tory vs. <insert minor player>.
Did you miss that meeting?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Very little politics at Amritsar. Oh for those politics free days.
I think we should have less wars personally
coley
Well-Known Member
Me too.
ska invita
back on the other side
Probably been posted before, but then so has everything in the thread, every year!
This year, I will wear a poppy for the last time (article from last year)
I will remember friends and comrades in private next year, as the solemnity of remembrance has been twisted into a justification for conflict
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/08/poppy-last-time-remembrance-harry-leslie-smith
...
Over the last 10 years the sepia tone of November has become blood-soaked with paper poppies festooning the lapels of our politicians, newsreaders and business leaders. The most fortunate in our society have turned the solemnity of remembrance for fallen soldiers in ancient wars into a justification for our most recent armed conflicts. The American civil war's General Sherman once said that "war is hell", but unfortunately today's politicians in Britain use past wars to bolster our flagging belief in national austerity or to compel us to surrender our rights as citizens, in the name of the public good.
Still, this year I shall wear the poppy as I have done for many years. I wear it because I am from that last generation who remember a war that encompassed the entire world. I wear the poppy because I can recall when Britain was actually threatened with a real invasion and how its citizens stood at the ready to defend her shores. But most importantly, I wear the poppy to commemorate those of my childhood friends and comrades who did not survive the second world war and those who came home physically and emotionally wounded from horrific battles that no poet or journalist could describe.
However, I am afraid it will be the last time that I will bear witness to those soldiers, airmen and sailors who are no more, at my local cenotaph. From now on, I will lament their passing in private because my despair is for those who live in this present world. I will no longer allow my obligation as a veteran to remember those who died in the great wars to be co-opted by current or former politicians to justify our folly in Iraq, our morally dubious war on terror and our elimination of one's right to privacy.
...
This year, I will wear a poppy for the last time (article from last year)
I will remember friends and comrades in private next year, as the solemnity of remembrance has been twisted into a justification for conflict
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/08/poppy-last-time-remembrance-harry-leslie-smith
...
Over the last 10 years the sepia tone of November has become blood-soaked with paper poppies festooning the lapels of our politicians, newsreaders and business leaders. The most fortunate in our society have turned the solemnity of remembrance for fallen soldiers in ancient wars into a justification for our most recent armed conflicts. The American civil war's General Sherman once said that "war is hell", but unfortunately today's politicians in Britain use past wars to bolster our flagging belief in national austerity or to compel us to surrender our rights as citizens, in the name of the public good.
Still, this year I shall wear the poppy as I have done for many years. I wear it because I am from that last generation who remember a war that encompassed the entire world. I wear the poppy because I can recall when Britain was actually threatened with a real invasion and how its citizens stood at the ready to defend her shores. But most importantly, I wear the poppy to commemorate those of my childhood friends and comrades who did not survive the second world war and those who came home physically and emotionally wounded from horrific battles that no poet or journalist could describe.
However, I am afraid it will be the last time that I will bear witness to those soldiers, airmen and sailors who are no more, at my local cenotaph. From now on, I will lament their passing in private because my despair is for those who live in this present world. I will no longer allow my obligation as a veteran to remember those who died in the great wars to be co-opted by current or former politicians to justify our folly in Iraq, our morally dubious war on terror and our elimination of one's right to privacy.
...
Similar threads
- Poll
