McRainy Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 2 hours ago, HantsRam said: Great grandpa hants refused to fight in the Great War. I doubt it was out of any great set of principles. He was scared stiff. My grandpa was a marksman and ordered to be a sniper. He deliberately concocted some situation so he wouldn’t have to do it. I remember him saying, no one should ever look down the barrel of a gun at another human being. My great uncle was a Japanese prisoner of war and he returned with the same sentiment. Those two kindly, gentle men, who had seen great suffering, made a lasting impression on me as a child. You do what you think is right, not what you are told. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highgate Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 17 minutes ago, CornwallRam said: Interestingly, many suffragettes busied themselves giving out white feathers to men that didn't serve during WW1. Yeah, the objector, conscientious or otherwise, faced a considerable abuse from the public in general. Some of those women accusing them of not doing their duty were bound to be suffragettes. But it wasn't just suffragettes handing out the feathers was it? It was women and the population in general. I guess, women who had men serving in the army were more likely to be dispensing feathers, accusing the objectors of cowardice. At the time there seems to have been, among the general population, industrial levels of communal reinforcement and group-think regarding WWI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van der MoodHoover Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 10 minutes ago, Lambchop said: My grandpa was a marksman and ordered to be a sniper. He deliberately concocted some situation so he wouldn’t have to do it. I remember him saying, no one should ever look down the barrel of a gun at another human being. My great uncle was a Japanese prisoner of war and he returned with the same sentiment. Those two kindly, gentle men, who had seen great suffering, made a lasting impression on me as a child. You do what you think is right, not what you are told. Caused a lot of grief to the family as he was hauled off and, I think, imprisoned for a short while. Grandpa Hants, who would have been about 9 or 10 at the time noted it all. When he was called up in ww2 he didn't fight against being drafted but insisted on being in the medical corps so he didn't have to use a gun. These were not cowards but ordinary family men just trying to look out for their families. Bear in mind that in the time of ww1 the family unit wholly depended on the man's earnings. So as they saw it, putting themselves in harm's way potentially messed up the lives of wives and children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted February 9, 2018 Author Share Posted February 9, 2018 My wife has always said that her Grandfather steadfastly refused to discuss what happened to him during the war. Her and her mum (his daughter) take this to mean that he saw some horrors. I mentioned it to my father-in-law once and he confided that before he died they'd been drinking one night and he admitted to him that he spent most of the war in military detention for refusing to fight. He was basically too ashamed to tell his wife and children this, but found that preferable to dying in action and never seeing them again. So sad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CornwallRam Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 14 minutes ago, Highgate said: Yeah, the objector, conscientious or otherwise, faced a considerable abuse from the public in general. Some of those women accusing them of not doing their duty were bound to be suffragettes. But it wasn't just suffragettes handing out the feathers was it? It was women and the population in general. I guess, women who had men serving in the army were more likely to be dispensing feathers, accusing the objectors of cowardice. At the time there seems to have been, among the general population, industrial levels of communal reinforcement and group-think regarding WWI. Although it wasn't an exclusive suffragette campaign, it was largely organised by them. They didn't just target conscientious objectors. It was any man considered to be of serving age and not in uniform. That meant that most recipients were either in reserved occupations, too young to serve, too ill to serve, servicemen home on leave or men discharged through illness/injury. They even pinned a white feather onto Petty Officer George Samson who was due to receive his Victoria Cross later that day. On a slightly different topic - having studied military history it screams out that many ordinary men (and quite a few women) are capable of amazing acts of bravery. The politicians that put them in those situations generally deserve to be castigated, but the troops usually acquitted themselves exceptionally well. Of course not every serviceman was or is perfect, but given the often hell-like conditions of warfare, it never ceases to amaze me just how well the average man did under fire. Yet I wonder if the world would be a better place if they were all 'cowards' and decided not to actually fight. OK, it would take both sides to to refuse to fight for it to work - it doesn't bare thinking about what would have happened if the British Army would have run away in 1940 and the Germans not done. However, if both sides in 1914 had said, 'sod off mate, I'm not leaving this trench, there's blokes with machine guns trying to put holes in me out there', then millions of people don't die needlessly. It appears to me that bravery is often overrated and it is frequently abused by the powerful to gain more wealth and power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highgate Posted February 9, 2018 Share Posted February 9, 2018 13 minutes ago, CornwallRam said: It appears to me that bravery is often overrated and it is frequently abused by the powerful to gain more wealth and power. I couldn't agree more. Bravery is a wonderful thing at times of course, it enables people to do what needs to be done. But more important is whether that something is right or wrong. A person can bravely do the right thing, but they can also bravely do the wrong thing. Either way, governments can sometimes manipulate their own populations by labeling those who do as they as instruct 'brave' and those who disobey as 'cowards'. And this classification can get picked up by the population in general. Even today, the worst insult we seem to be able to throw at anyone, no matter how evil or inhumane, is that they are 'cowardly'. I don't understand that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteHorseRam Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 On 2/9/2018 at 16:23, CornwallRam said: However, if both sides in 1914 had said, 'sod off mate, I'm not leaving this trench, there's blokes with machine guns trying to put holes in me out there', then millions of people don't die needlessly. Check this out if you get the chance - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Trench-Warfare-1914-1918-System-Strategy/dp/0330480685 Interesting anecdotes regarding live and let live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.