Wearing Poppies - A serious question

[StraferJack]

so we're talking specifically about the nephew in question?

Fair enough and good if you don't judge people for not wearing them but you do accept that many people do judge others, right?

And that that judgement is becoming more public and more shrill?

I'm curious as to why it's becoming more that way

[Huguenot]

Oh, that one's easy peasy.

The democratisation, pervasiveness and anonymity of interweb communications have liberated the silent majority to explore the most unpleasant of human emotional barf as if it were acceptable social behaviour.

The thing about populist hate movements such as those mobilised against the bankers, is that they don't stop once they get going - first the bankers, then the immigrants, and now the poppy non-wearers*.

It's a foolish person who looses the bonds of polite society restraining the British psyche. It gets ugly.

*Sorry for the confusion I meant non-wearers.

[Loz]

I still think there is huge amount of irony in a school forcing students to wear a poppy.

[StraferJack]

I'm sorry, you are saying poopy WEARERS are under attack H?

Is that what you are saying or have I missed something?

[silverfox]

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Fair enough and good if you don't judge people for

> not wearing them but you do accept that many

> people do judge others, right?

>

> And that that judgement is becoming more public

> and more shrill?

I'm curious as to why it's becoming more that way

Yes, SJ, I agree. more and more we seem to be witnessing forms of consensus intolerance. maybe it's a new media thing.

[StraferJack]

It's what Huguenot seems to be saying silverfox, but he's apparently saying that it's driving intolerance of people who do choose to wear poppies. Which is just... weird

New media probably plays a part in facilitating things but the emotion has to be there

McCarthyism, yellow ribbons in US, grief at Diana's wedding - all preceeded new media. The Diana thing in particular still troubles me to this day

[Huguenot]

Sorry my mistake - the poppy non-wearers are being targeted by the same mobs who see fit to level abuse at other perceived minorities.

That's the Brits for you, once they get going they can't stop.

[StraferJack]

you do talk rot sometimes H

mobs have existed long before current communications - see my previous post

and as for people being targeted, at the moment the person doing the targeting on here is you, not anyone else

[Otta]

It's no win argument anyway. If the RBL

did a campaign slogan that said 'never

again' you'd have millions of people asking

why you'd undermine the sacrifice and

commitment of the armed forces.

I strongly suspect this is a nonsense. If however it was true, then those millions of people would be millions of idiotic people!

To say "never again" is surely the biggest respect and recognition you could possibly give.

[DaveR]

The argument on one side is a simple one. Not wearing a poppy need not convey any particular message or opinion. It has never been 'taboo' not to wear one. In those circumstances it is no business of anybody but the individual.

The counter-argument is based entirely on ascribing a particular motive/opinion or calling for an explanation or justification. Or now H appears to be saying its because we have no choice but to give in to mob rule (an argument I don't find particularly attractive).

[BB100]

david_carnell Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Out of interest, why won't your nephew wear one?

> Is it now a matter of principle?

I'm so glad you asked that question David because everyone has drawn their own conclusions without even asking. However, at this point it now seems irrelevant and I'm not sure I want a young person's thoughts and conscience to be chewed up and spat out here. My question though wasn't about whether he should wear one or not, but the school's right to force him wearing it.

After giving a lot of thought to the matter, I've reflected on how private and meaningful thoughts of respect are worth more than an empty showy outward display of rememberance pinned on an empty-headed boy's jacket.

[Huguenot]

I'm not saying anything of the sort DaveR.

This argument was about the actions of a schoolchild rejecting the commitment of a shcool to an act of group remembrance. The focus of this complaint hinged on the fact that he didn't like to be told what to do, and it was turning us into a nation of brainwashed drones. (An argument BB100 has just repeated and reinforced as the primary motivation behind this protest).

Several other arguments were since dredged up - but they clearly weren't the most important ones initially.

I felt that argument was trite, pertulant and unconvincing - and that it was part of his education to learn to make concesssions to a frankly unthreatening demonstration of shared empathy.

Regardless of that the argument was misguided - the poppy is not a glorification of war, quite the opposite.

Regarding a TV presenter I pointed out that as an employee of the broadcaster, he was not really in a psoition to make his own choices unless his employer granted him the option, and that he was wrong about poppys being worn outside Rememberance Sunday as a recent thing - my school doing it almost 40 years ago.

I finally pointed out that if you deliberately snubbed an act of social respect as sensitive as this one it was likely that you were going to draw unwelcome attention from a particularly pugnacious and noisy minority - so it doesn't really do to be surprised by this.

If you did this to 'make a point' then you simply brought it upon yourself.

So I don't agree poppies should be compulsory, but if a school has made that choice it's within their remit, and not for some little oik to start strutting around talking about his 'rights'. He should grow up and learn to get along with other people.

[Otta]

Personally, I often put some coins in the box in the pub, but rarely wear a poppy, as I seem unable to get through 2 hours without it being totally ruined!

[DaveR]

Freeforming again H?

You attributed the motive to the individual - 'doesn't like being told what to do' and castigated him for his various undesirable qualities

You set up arguments for and against and then decide that you are not convinced.

You assert that not wearing a poppy is 'rejecting an act of group remembrance' - which is b@llocks

SJ specifically referred to Jon Snow complaining about accusations that he was dishonouring the dead, a point which you continue to ignore by pretending that it wasn't made.

And you suggest that not wearing a poppy has somehow become taboo and therefore likely to encounter the disapproval of the mob, whilst disdaining any connection with that ill-informed minority.

My argument is simple - none of your business whether anyone else wears a poppy or not. Have you got a straight answer?

[BB100]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> This argument was about the actions of a

> schoolchild rejecting the commitment of a shcool

> to an act of group remembrance. The focus of this

> complaint hinged on the fact that he didn't like

> to be told what to do, and it was turning us into

> a nation of brainwashed drones. (An argument BB100

> has just repeated and reinforced as the primary

> motivation behind this protest).

>

Were you a politician in a previous life Huguenot, because you have a great capacity for twisting what people say to your own ends? What you are suggesting is that it's ok for an adult to make a choice but a child has no such rights and should just do as he is told. The assumption is that all children are rude little squirts that don't know any better. Showing respect for the living is obviously not in your remit Huge.

[Huguenot]

BB100, no I don't think that children call the shots. Nowhere else to go with that one. They don't have adult rights for good reason. Whether he is a squirt or not remains unresolved.

DaveR, there's a good reason why you're not quoting me chap, because you know that I'm not doing any of the things you're accusing me of.

Go for your life - I suspect you're still smarting about some previous disagreement, and you're now pursuing me over several threads for revenge.

I care about schools and education, and about keeping well meaning, highly motivated but poorly informed gormless adults out of that environment. I respect that parents need to keep an eye on this as part of the social contract, but poppies to assembly don't merit the degree of interference being displayed here.

[Huguenot]

For DaveyR:

SJ:

"he merely pointed out that it's only recently that wearing them outside Remembrance Sunday (when he himself wears one) has become ubiquitous, and an inflation has set in. because of that inflation he was accused of "dishonouring the dead" which is pretty fatuous and an example of why some people bristle around the poppy"

H:

"Only 'recently' must mean at least 40 years, because I used to wear one at school, and I didn't go to school on a Sunday."

So snuggle up old chap. I was as clear as clear can be - I even quoted SJ to make clear what I was talking about.

Relax.

[Otta]

I remember wearing one, but probably only in the few days leading to the 11th, not for weeks, which seems to be the trend with lots of people these days.

[DaveR]

"because of that inflation he was accused of "dishonouring the dead"

H?

[Huguenot]

DaveR, feller - for some sort of prattish reason, despite my clear reference to SJ's post, you insist that I was talking about something else.

I quoted it, right?

I've made it clear a number of times what I was referring to, you can tell from my response right? Let's analyse:

It's the fact that I say :"I used to wear one at school, and I didn't go to school on a Sunday."

Only to a bizarre moron could that be a response to "because of that inflation he was accused of "dishonouring the dead"

It doesn't work does it? It would be a nonsensical answer? Right?

However, it would work as an answer to : "he merely pointed out that it's only recently that wearing them outside Remembrance Sunday (when he himself wears one) has become ubiquitous."

Now, even to your whacky interpretations "I used to wear one at school, and I didn't go to school on a Sunday." would make sense right?

So really, taking into account your demonstrable intelligence, which one of those two statements do you think I was responding to?

Or, you can carry on being a prat.

[BB100]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> BB100, no I don't think that children call the

> shots. Nowhere else to go with that one. They

> don't have adult rights for good reason. Whether

> he is a squirt or not remains unresolved.

>

Ah, this is where the problem lies there. Your arguement is not really based on poppies/respect/rememberance but on your view-of-the-child. Actually children have extra rights to adults and they need them to stop adults from abusing their power over them!

[Huguenot]

Oh get off with this ridiculous immature proselytizing. This is a complete abdication of your responsiblities as an adult.

It's a school. For children.

If we mistake kids for adults we'd all be sat around eating chocolates and scribbling stick figures with big hands.

Your own agenda is becoming clear here - it's probably well intended, but it's a clear inability to distinguish between maturity and the cocksure braggadocio of a teenager.

[DaveR]

My argument is simple - none of your business whether anyone else wears a poppy or not. Have you got a straight answer?

H?

[Huguenot]

What is the matter with you? How many times do I have to say it?

I'll just copy and paste my previous answer shall I? On this thread, responding to your previous ridiculous comments 7 posts ago:

"So I don't agree poppies should be compulsory, but if a school has made that choice it's within their remit, and not for some little oik to start strutting around talking about his 'rights'. He should grow up and learn to get along with other people."

[StraferJack]

I love how you post that and think you are being reasonable. It's almost endearing