|
Post by twoheadedragon on Nov 11, 2009 6:16:11 GMT
On this day, 91 years ago, a horrible war that claimed over 20 million human lives was finally ended. Ironic that it only led up to an even more horrible war, but for this day, let us celebrate the peace that ended World War I. War is horrible! People die, property is destroyed, land ruined... But, let us remember the poor men who had to fight and die in miserable conditions for/against the pride and greed of some power-hungry nations/politicians.
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Nov 11, 2009 18:45:40 GMT
The First World War literally made my nation go from a British Colony to its own nation. I feel for the soldiers who died for King and Empire.
However War is a natural part of the world. War is horrible, people die. But people die regardless.
Still, all the same. Its Remembrance day here in Canada, and we salute the 150,000 Soldiers (rough) we have had die in the last 100 years in conflicts around the world.
|
|
|
Post by kitty on Nov 11, 2009 20:13:57 GMT
I'm a bit gross towards that day.
It was celebrated in Nazi Germany as "Hero Rememberance Day" and had nothing to do with the former idea of remembering the dead but celebrating the heroic deaths of marytrs...
When Germany was parted into East and West, the communistic East celebrated the holiday with the probably longest name ever: "International Rememberance Day for the victims of fashistic terrors and fighting day against fashism and imperalistic war". In the West it was what it is today (in Germany), the Volk Rememberance Day, which is about remembering the victims of both wars, for all dictatorships, in all nations. On this day the cancelor, the president and the cabinet come together, hold speeches and, well, remember... the song "Der gute Kamerad" (The good Comrade) is played.
Why I'm sceptical against this day, is because it, in a way, glorifies war. I'm a pacifist, I see no use in celebrating peoples (voluntary) deaths.
But that's just me.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Nov 11, 2009 21:06:38 GMT
I see it more as remembering those people who gave their lives so that the rest of us can be pacifists, Kit
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Nov 12, 2009 11:14:46 GMT
The difference in which how this day is celebrated still is remarkable.
While in France there traditionally still is a military parade and the lighting of the eternal flame on the grave of the unknown soldier combined (to date still) with the presence of surviving veterans) no such public military fuss seems to be made in the other victorious nations.
In Germany the 11. Nov as such is not a holiday (safe informally in the Carnival capitals, where the campaign season starts that day at 11:11 o'clock).
Kitty is correct about how it was celebrated during the 3rd Reich some of the rest, but please allow me some additional remarks:
Volkstrauertag (German: national day of mourning) is a public holiday in Germany. It is observed two Sundays before the first of Advent, and commemorates those who died in war and the victims of violent oppression. In its modern form, it was first observed in 1952. {A 'holiday' that always falls on a Sunday!}
A Volkstrauertag was proposed in 1919 by the German War Graves Commission as a commemoration for German soldiers killed in the First World War. It was first held in 1922 in the Reichstag and in 1926, it was decided to observe Volkstrauertag regularly on Reminiscere (the second Sunday of Lent.)
In the Weimar Republic, Volkstrauertag was not a legal holiday for several reasons:
* It was not clearly defined in the Weimar constitution whether the authority to define legal holidays lay with the Reich or the states. Over the years this led to local differences in regulations, dates and interpretations.
* The two largest Christian churches were in conflict over a suitable date for remembrance. Both already had a day of mourning the dead in November: the Catholic All Souls' Day, and the Protestant Totensonntag (Dead's Sunday - or Sunday of the Dead? Anyway a rather horribly sounding name, especially in English). A proposed date in spring, Invocavit (the first Sunday in Lent) or Reminiscere (the second Sunday in Lent), was in Passiontide. This was also important for both churches, since confirmation services take place at this time in many Protestant parishes.
* The political instability of the Weimar Republic obstructed some attempts to regulate the Volkstrauertag day through legislation, since the Reichstag was suspended several times mid-term.
After the end of World War Two, Volkstrauertag was observed in its original form in West Germany, beginning in 1948. The first central meeting of the German War Graves Commission took place in 1950 in the Bundestag in Bonn. In 1952, in an effort to distinguish Volkstrauertag from Heldengedenktag {Hero Memorial Day, the 3rd Reich version}, its date was changed to the end of the ecclesiastical year, a time traditionally devoted to thoughts of death, time, and eternity. Its scope was also broadened to include those who died due to the violence of an oppressive government, not just those who died in war.
An official observation of Volkstrauertag takes place in the German Bundestag (Parliament). The German Bundespräsident (Federal President = Head of State) traditionally gives a speech with the Chancellor, the cabinet and the diplomatic corps present. The national anthem and the song "Ich hatt' einen Kameraden" are then played. Most federal states also hold their own ceremonies.
Because of the relation to Advent, the date is the Sunday nearest 16 November, i.e. in the period from 13 November to 19 November.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Nov 12, 2009 13:03:32 GMT
Britain's Remembrance Day is about mourning the dead and remembering their sacrifice. There's no triumphalism or military strutting to it (Though there is plenty of ceremony), just a sober reflection on all the people who died so that others can live in peace.
It's a very sombre, very solemn occasion.
|
|
|
Post by twoheadedragon on Nov 13, 2009 7:35:55 GMT
I see it more as remembering those people who gave their lives so that the rest of us can be pacifists, Kit @ Kitty: What he said. Also, it's more of a solemn reminder of the horrors of war. I think it's best celebrated in Britain. And the French celebration, I wouldn't say it glorifies war at all Kit. It just pays homage and is a way of showing gratitude to the men who fought and died for freedom. Peace is worth fighting for.As for Indonesia, most Indonesians (about 99.5% of them) have no idea what WWI even was. They know a bit more about WWII, since the Japanese came here too.
|
|
|
Post by kitty on Nov 13, 2009 12:23:56 GMT
fought and died for freedom. Peace is worth fighting for.I disagree. How I said I am a pacifist, War and Peace are not things working together at all, they are opposites. I'm not pragmatic here, I don't think compromising as in "in some cases..." is right. I see the topic deontological. Even if trying to solve a dispute fails, it was still the right thing to do. In Nazi Germany, some people (for example the neighbours of my grandparents..) tried to hide jews from deportation. Some (for example my grandparents neighbours ) failed and were taking away (and probably executed) - it was still the right thing to do, even though it failed. That is some kind of "fighting" too, two - but without violence.
|
|
|
Post by twoheadedragon on Nov 13, 2009 13:39:08 GMT
fought and died for freedom. Peace is worth fighting for.I disagree. How I said I am a pacifist, War and Peace are not things working together at all, they are opposites. I'm not pragmatic here, I don't think compromising as in "in some cases..." is right. I see the topic deontological. Even if trying to solve a dispute fails, it was still the right thing to do. In Nazi Germany, some people (for example the neighbours of my grandparents..) tried to hide jews from deportation. Some (for example my grandparents neighbours ) failed and were taking away (and probably executed) - it was still the right thing to do, even though it failed. That is some kind of "fighting" too, two - but without violence. I think you may have missed my point there: my point wasn't that war is right, but that sometimes, we have to fight to protect that which is precious to us. Take Ireland being attacked by the Vikings for example: did they just lie down and let them all keep burning down their monasteries, raping their women, and mass-butchering the people while eventually founding their own settlements? That did happen to a certain extent; but because the Irish fought back, they were able to drive out/subdue the Vikings eventually. Of course it is wrong to go out and pick fights, but to defend yourself: sometimes you must. Of course, if things can be settled peacefully, that is the best (like the French did, they gave Normandy to the Vikings). But if it comes down to a fight, and there is no alternative (because the other guy won't settle it peacefully), don't take it lying down. As Sir Winston Churchill said "It is better to die, than to live as slaves."
|
|