Poppymas

[ProfessorDavey]

The reason for the joint commemoration is simple. The date marks the time when the victims of the Barony colliery disaster were finally bricked up in the collapsed seam. My father was one of those who laid the bricks at the spot where their remains still lie, being beyond recovery. In 1973, on the unveiling of the cross, a miner who had also served in the army )a D-Day veteran) suggested both sets of dead should be commemorated at the same time. We have done so, each remembrance Sunday. The reason for the joint commemoration is simple. The date marks the time when the victims of the Barony colliery disaster were finally bricked up in the collapsed seam. My father was one of those who laid the bricks at the spot where their remains still lie, being beyond recovery. In 1973, on the unveiling of the cross, a miner who had also served in the army )a D-Day veteran) suggested both sets of dead should be commemorated at the same time. We have done so, each remembrance Sunday.

Fair enough - so there is a specific reason why this date makes sense for a commemoration that isn't related to remembrance in its traditional sense as being related to those that died in wars. So this is effectively two distinct sets of commemoration, which happen to be on the same day.

[ProfessorDavey]

Surely it's no business of your's if a community chooses to remember different groups at this time?

I'm entitled to an opinion.

But as you'll have seen AM has explained why it makes sense to have these two commemorations on the same day as the minors commemoration marks a particular even which happened to have occurred at this time.

But I think there is a broader issue - the remembrance event has always been about commemorating those that died in war (originally specific wars) - my person opinion is that this should be defended against 'mission creep' and the mission creep I'm most concerned about is shifting from remembering those that died to a kind of 'armed forces day' where we big up 'our boys and girls in the military'. This isn't what remembrance day should be about, in my opinion.

[Nearly Sane]

I'm entitled to an opinion.

But as you'll have seen AM has explained why it makes sense to have these two commemorations on the same day as the minors commemoration marks a particular even which happened to have occurred at this time.

But I think there is a broader issue - the remembrance event has always been about commemorating those that died in war (originally specific wars) - my person opinion is that this should be defended against 'mission creep' and the mission creep I'm most concerned about is shifting from remembering those that died to a kind of 'armed forces day' where we big up 'our boys and girls in the military'. This isn't what remembrance day should be about, in my opinion.

That you are entitled to your opinion doesn't make it any of your business. There might be any number of reasons why a community might do something on Remembrance Sunday, such as here, and that's surely up to them.

[ProfessorDavey]

That you are entitled to your opinion doesn't make it any of your business. There might be any number of reasons why a community might do something on Remembrance Sunday, such as here, and that's surely up to them.

Firstly I only expressed an opinion, and actually only in a very soft manner - 'Now I'm beginning to struggle ...'.

But actually I'm not sure it isn't anyone else's business. The concept of remembrance is broadly defined and I don't think that a community has any right to take it way outside of that definition. A community can, of course, choose to commemorate anything they wish, I don't believe however they have the right to insist that that commemoration is part of a remembrance event, with its symbolism etc, unless it fits that broad definition. And I think it is perfectly reasonably for the broader community to take a view - it is, as it were, their business.

[Nearly Sane]

Firstly I only expressed an opinion, and actually only in a very soft manner - 'Now I'm beginning to struggle ...'.

But actually I'm not sure it isn't anyone else's business. The concept of remembrance is broadly defined and I don't think that a community has any right to take it way outside of that definition. A community can, of course, choose to commemorate anything they wish, I don't believe however they have the right to insist that that commemoration is part of a remembrance event, with its symbolism etc, unless it fits that broad definition. And I think it is perfectly reasonably for the broader community to take a view - it is, as it were, their business.

And I accepted that you had a right to that opinion. You seem to struggle with the idea that it is ok to hold an opinion and it not be about something that is your business.

As to you then wanting to dictate to a local mining community what they do remembrance Sunday that seems laughably self imporatant, which is then underlined by you portraying your opinion as equivalent to the broader community.

[Anchorman]

Fair enough - so there is a specific reason why this date makes sense for a commemoration that isn't related to remembrance in its traditional sense as being related to those that died in wars. So this is effectively two distinct sets of commemoration, which happen to be on the same day.

   #




I'll aye remember that ex soldier-cum-miner's response when someone raised the subject with him....
"Aye, son. They're a' jist as deid, whether doon the pit or in France."
Says it all, really.

[ProfessorDavey]

I'll aye remember that ex soldier-cum-miner's response when someone raised the subject with him....
"Aye, son. They're a' jist as deid, whether doon the pit or in France."
Says it all, really.

I agree - I think there are many people who died because of their support for the war effort who get forgotten because they weren't in the military.

Miners are one group - another being merchant seamen, who often suffered appalling conditions on ships with no defence themselves from u-boats etc, totally reliant for defence on the Royal Navy who may, or may not, have been present.

[ProfessorDavey]

And I accepted that you had a right to that opinion. You seem to struggle with the idea that it is ok to hold an opinion and it not be about something that is your business.

As to you then wanting to dictate to a local mining community what they do remembrance Sunday that seems laughably self imporatant, which is then underlined by you portraying your opinion as equivalent to the broader community.

Actually NS - I never dictated to anyone. My issue was to understand why AM's community were commemorating miners who didn't die due to war on remembrance day. He's explained this to me on the basis of the date of a disaster.

But I'm sorry NS - you are wrong. The use of the remembrance symbolism isn't a free for all that isn't anyone else's business. As AM has pointed out the poppy symbolism of remembrance is in fact a trade mark so you cannot use it for any or all purposes you might wish. If you did so, then it would very much be, someone else's business.

[Nearly Sane]

Actually NS - I never dictated to anyone. My issue was to understand why AM's community were commemorating miners who didn't die due to war on remembrance day. He's explained this to me on the basis of the date of a disaster.

But I'm sorry NS - you are wrong. The use of the remembrance symbolism isn't a free for all that isn't anyone else's business. As AM has pointed out the poppy symbolism of remembrance is in fact a trade mark so you cannot use it for any or all purposes you might wish. If you did so, then it would very much be, someone else's business.

You seemed in the post that I replied to being taken issue with Anchorman's community actions, and suggesting that it was your business what they did as part of their temembrance service - was that not your intention?


The use of a trademarked symbol is an irrelevant strawman to this.

[ProfessorDavey]

You seemed in the post that I replied to being taken issue with Anchorman's community actions, and suggesting that it was your business what they did as part of their temembrance service - was that not your intention?

Actually I was trying to understand why commemoration of miners whose deaths wasn't linked to war was happening on this day. AM explained this to me.

But if I strongly disapproved, so what. That would be my opinion and I'd be perfectly entitled to in. And in most cases the community in question would also be entitled to say - 'sod you, none of your business, we are doing it anyway'.

But the use of remembrance symbols such as the poppy isn't like that - see below.

The use of a trademarked symbol is an irrelevant strawman to this.

It isn't a straw man at all. The fact that the poppy is trademarked means that it isn't the case that a community can just decide to use the symbol for whatever purpose they choose and 'it is no-one else's business'. If the poppy is being used for purposes that contravene trade mark it is someone else's business - the holder of the trademark. And the Royal British Legion has taken action against people and organisations whose use of the poppy they felt was not appropriate, and actually that has actually included remembrance events. I suspect if the RBL thought the poppy was being used outside the context of remembrance of people who had died in war they would take a view and potentially take action.

So here is a hypothetical example - imagine a group of anti abortion campaigners decided to run a campaign during the remembrance period that highlighted the numbers of abortions and compared it to the numbers of people killed in war and used the poppy as a symbol in remembrance of all those 'dead babies'. Would this be OK, would this be 'none of our business' and the 'our' includes the holders of the trademark for use of the poppy.

In that example my opinion would be that the use of the poppy would be deeply inappropriate and I'd consider it my business to bring it to the attention of the RBL and their business to prevent further use of the poppy in that context.

AM's example, by the way, is very different to this as it would appear they are holding two separate events, which are on the same day for completely legitimate reasons. And as AM points out there is a legitimate remembrance for miners whose deaths were due to the war effort.

[jeremyp]

Nope. I'm perfectly happy with the British Legion poppy and Saltire badge, thanks.

What message is that supposed to convey? Are you remembering the soldiers who gave their lives in wars, but only the Scottish ones? Because that is what it looks like.

[Nearly Sane]

Actually I was trying to understand why commemoration of miners whose deaths wasn't linked to war was happening on this day. AM explained this to me.

But if I strongly disapproved, so what. That would be my opinion and I'd be perfectly entitled to in. And in most cases the community in question would also be entitled to say - 'sod you, none of your business, we are doing it anyway'.

But the use of remembrance symbols such as the poppy isn't like that - see below.
It isn't a straw man at all. The fact that the poppy is trademarked means that it isn't the case that a community can just decide to use the symbol for whatever purpose they choose and 'it is no-one else's business'. If the poppy is being used for purposes that contravene trade mark it is someone else's business - the holder of the trademark. And the Royal British Legion has taken action against people and organisations whose use of the poppy they felt was not appropriate, and actually that has actually included remembrance events. I suspect if the RBL thought the poppy was being used outside the context of remembrance of people who had died in war they would take a view and potentially take action.

So here is a hypothetical example - imagine a group of anti abortion campaigners decided to run a campaign during the remembrance period that highlighted the numbers of abortions and compared it to the numbers of people killed in war and used the poppy as a symbol in remembrance of all those 'dead babies'. Would this be OK, would this be 'none of our business' and the 'our' includes the holders of the trademark for use of the poppy.

In that example my opinion would be that the use of the poppy would be deeply inappropriate and I'd consider it my business to bring it to the attention of the RBL and their business to prevent further use of the poppy in that context.

AM's example, by the way, is very different to this as it would appear they are holding two separate events, which are on the same day for completely legitimate reasons. And as AM points out there is a legitimate remembrance for miners whose deaths were due to the war effort.

And I said your entitled to your opinion but that it's really none of your business if the community links it to mining deaths outside of the war effort.

Creating a hypothetical example of something not being discussed or suggested on the thread is pretty much the defitnition of a strawman.

[Nearly Sane]

At the memorial service in George Sq in Glasgow, there was an interesting reference to the change in the meaning of the words 'front line' over the last 2 and a half years. I fear that some might have committed thought crime in Prof D's eyes and spared some thoughts for relatives who might have died while working in the NHS over Covid.

[ProfessorDavey]

What message is that supposed to convey? Are you remembering the soldiers who gave their lives in wars, but only the Scottish ones? Because that is what it looks like.

Exactly. I fail to see how this cannot give an impression other than that the wearer considers Scottish deaths to be somehow more worthy of remembrance than the deaths of other people.

[ProfessorDavey]

And I said your entitled to your opinion but that it's really none of your business if the community links it to mining deaths outside of the war effort.

It is someone else's business if they include trademarked poppy symbolism in that event as the trademarked poppy (and a bunch of stuff around it) is only supposed to be used in the context of remembrance of those who died/were injured due to war.

Creating a hypothetical example of something not being discussed or suggested on the thread is pretty much the defitnition of a strawman.

You claimed strawman before I gave a hypothetical example so you really cannot link your straw man claim to my example. Your claim was that the fact that then poppy is a trademarked symbol was a straw man. That isn't correct as the notion of its trademark is absolutely relevant to a discussion as to when and how the poppy symbolism can be legitimately used.

So perhaps you'd like to actually address my hypothetical example. Given your view that the use of the poppy is no-one else's business except those making that decision, I'd sure you'd be perfectly fine with the anti-abortion group using the poppy in this context as how that community chooses to use it is 'none of our business'.

[Nearly Sane]

It is someone else's business if they include trademarked poppy symbolism in that event as the trademarked poppy (and a bunch of stuff around it) is only supposed to be used in the context of remembrance of those who died/were injured due to war.
You claimed strawman before I gave a hypothetical example. Your claim was that the fact that then poppy is a trademarked symbol was a straw man. That isn't correct as the notion of its trademark is absolutely relevant to a discussion as to when and how the poppy symbolism can be legitimately used.

So perhaps you'd like to actually address my hypothetical example. Given your view that the use of the poppy is no-one else's business except those making that decision, I'd sure you'd be perfectly fine with the anti-abortion group using the poppy in this context as how that community chooses to use it is 'none of our business'.

Why would I have any interest in addressing your strawman which has nothing to do with what was being discussed? Just writing lots of words, just means more straw, still irrelevant.

[ProfessorDavey]

Why would I have any interest in addressing your strawman which has nothing to do with what was being discussed? Just writing lots of words, just means more straw, still irrelevant.

How odd, you are usually very opinionated NS - surely you have an opinion on my example.

All the odder given that you have spent much of this thread posting images of inappropriate use of the poppy. Your OP even includes the following:

'This, and many other such, are not about remembering the fallen but about self veneration.'

Why have you been posting these images if, as you appear to think, the use of poppy symbolism in whatever manner is none of your business.

[Nearly Sane]

How odd, you are usually very opinionated NS - surely you have an opinion on my example.

All the odder given that you have spent much of this thread posting images of inappropriate use of the poppy. Your OP even includes the following:

'This, and many other such, are not about remembering the fallen but about self veneration.'

Why have you been posting these images if, as you appear to think, the use of poppy symbolism in whatever manner is none of your business.

My opinion is it's an irrelevant strawman.

[ProfessorDavey]

Why would I have any interest in addressing your strawman which has nothing to do with what was being discussed?

It is absolutely relevant to what is being discussed as we are discussing appropriate and inappropriate use of poppy symbolism and whether a decision as to whether the use is appropriate or not rests purely with a private individual (or community of individuals), and hence none of our business. Or alternatively whether someone other that that individual or community can legitimately argue that it is their business to determine whether that use is appropriate or not. In the case of the poppy the latter is that case. And not just in theory - the RBL have taken action on a number of occasions against what they deem inappropriate use of the poppy by individuals and groups.

[ProfessorDavey]

My opinion is it's an irrelevant strawman.

But you started the thread NS - which is about appropriate and inappropriate use of the poppy. Why on earth would you do this if you felt use, however inappropriate, was none of your business.

[Nearly Sane]

But you started the thread NS - which is about appropriate and inappropriate use of the poppy. Why on earth would you do this if you felt use, however inappropriate, was none of your business.

You are getting yourself confused here. The trademark discussion is what I said was an irrelevant strawman. Thos is not the same as saying that how a community mourns its dead is essentially none of your business.

If you now want to make the point that my take on Poppymas is a purely personal one, then knock yourself out. I agree.

[Nearly Sane]

It is absolutely relevant to what is being discussed as we are discussing appropriate and inappropriate use of poppy symbolism and whether a decision as to whether the use is appropriate or not rests purely with a private individual (or community of individuals), and hence none of our business. Or alternatively whether someone other that that individual or community can legitimately argue that it is their business to determine whether that use is appropriate or not. In the case of the poppy the latter is that case. And not just in theory - the RBL have taken action on a number of occasions against what they deem inappropriate use of the poppy by individuals and groups.

No, the trademark poppy had nothing to do with the service in Anchorman's community. That's why your maundering on is irrelevant to it.

[ProfessorDavey]

No, the trademark poppy had nothing to do with the service in Anchorman's community. That's why your maundering on is irrelevant to it.

Well that wasn't clear from his initial description, which is why I asked him about it, and he explained.

So that bit has been done and dusted.

Now perhaps you would like to address the broader issue - do you think that the use of the poppy symbol by an individual or community is none of anyone else's business, however inappropriate the use. Perhaps you might want to use my hypothetical example, or even some of the examples you have posted - if the use isn't anyone else's business why would you post photos with a comment such as:

'This, and many other such, are not about remembering the fallen but about self veneration.'

I suspect you agree with me that the use of the poppy is our business, and specifically is the business of the RBL who have a responsibility to protect the integrity of its use.

[Nearly Sane]

Well that wasn't clear from his initial description, which is why I asked him about it, and he explained.

So that bit has been done and dusted.

Now perhaps you would like to address the broader issue - do you think that the use of the poppy symbol by an individual or community is none of anyone else's business, however inappropriate the use. Perhaps you might want to use my hypothetical example, or even some of the examples you have posted - if the use isn't anyone else's business why would you post photos with a comment such as:

'This, and many other such, are not about remembering the fallen but about self veneration.'

I suspect you agree with me that the use of the poppy is our business, and specifically is the business of the RBL who have a responsibility to protect the integrity of its use.

There was no question in what he said of trademark abuse, and you didn't raise it as that.

And as I have already said, I've expressed my own opinion here.

[ProfessorDavey]

The trademark discussion is what I said was an irrelevant strawman.

No it isn't on a thread about the appropriateness of the use of remembrance symbolism of the poppy.

Thos is not the same as saying that how a community mourns its dead is essentially none of your business.

But this was brought up on a thread about remembrance symbolism and commemoration on remembrance Sunday - hardly rocket science to conclude that the miners commemoration might be seen by the community as part of the remembrance events using the remembrance symbolism of the poppy. That's why I asked for clarification, which AM kindly provided.

If you now want to make the point that my take on Poppymas is a purely personal one, then knock yourself out. I agree.

But apparently my 'opinion' is irrelevant and none of my business if a community chooses to commemorate dead using the poppy in whatever manner. SO I come back to my example - firstly what is your 'opinion' on the anti-abortion groups using the poppy for remembrance of the dead babies. Secondly even if you personally disapprove do you think it is no-one's business except for the anti-abortion group how they choose to remember those dead babies, even if that involves using poppy symbolism during the remembrance period?