Kudos to Clay for sticking to your beliefs!

To quote Public Enemy and Moby,
"Make Love, F**K War".
To quote Monty Python's Flying Circus,
"Make Tea, Not War".

It would surely be great day if we could get rid of all the weapons in the world (from nuclear weapons to pointy sticks)!
However, understanding irony (and the Simpsons) we would probably be invaded by hostile aliens as soon we did this!

"Peace Rocks, War Sucks !"

Kevan Hudson

People like you make me angry.

You are using the symbol and the efforts of another group and another time to promote your own views. Self promotion at the expense of many, many others.

This is similar to the story about "Why I'm Not Donating to the Tsunami Victims." Which I believe was posted here as well. A chance to comment on personal preferences for charity in light of the situation.

Good for you, you have your cute little symbol, but I feel you are oblivious to your own exploitaton of the situation.

Your efforts should be able to stand alone. They do not appear to and you are using November 11th as a means of self-aggrandizement.

To quote John McCrae again,

"We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields."

The poppy does not symbolize war. It is not a medal or a flag. Not everyone who died on the battlefield believed in what they were dying for. The poppy stands alone, away from the political and economic justifications for war. It is a symbol of remembrance.

We do need to be reminded, from time to time, that war is not glorious. Without the poppy, Hollywood’s recollection of events will stand out in our minds above all else.

I never had to fight in a war, but I can wear one to show that I remember those who sacrificed the best years of their lives.

Moat can quote, but cannot read.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch, be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields

Translation: AVENGE US!!!

What you won't hear read on Rememberance Day is

Dulce Et Decorum Est

[/I]Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs
And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots
But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of disappointed shells that dropped behind.

GAS! Gas! Quick, boys!-- An ecstasy of fumbling,
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time;
But someone still was yelling out and stumbling
And floundering like a man in fire or lime.--
Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.

In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.

If in some smothering dreams you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,--
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori.[I]

writen by Wilfred Owen, a British soldier in WWI who died on Nov. 4 for the political symbolism of an Armistice on 11am 11/11/1918

Jesus, McLeod have you ever got it wrong.

War is not the fault of the combatants it is a tragedy imposed on the people by those in power.

It is important to remember the loss and sacrifice of those who fought for their country. They may not have known why they were fighting or the reality of the situation. They fought, they suffered and we owe them recognition of their sacrifice.

Selective history is all good fun. Try giving the reason for the "Boer" war. Was this fought for "King and Country," "Freedom and Democracy," or what? The invention of the "Consentration Camp" by the Brits was one of the outcomes. What symbol reflects this hiccup in human history? Hmm?
Wearing a Poppy on this day will re-kindle the fire of memories that will not be forgotten by me. For good or ill the "Poppy" will be the symbol for 11/11/11.

"Sadly, the poppy acts more as a rallying cry to support military solutions to the world's problems, instead of a heart-felt and genuine plea for an end to the suffering of war."

A rallying cry? Hardly. Do you have Remembrance Day ceremony at your school? Do you boycott that as well? It is shocking to me that you cannot seem to comprehend what the poppy means. That you have twisted its meaning to fulfill your needs is fine with me, but I hope you don't tell your students that wearing a poppy is support of war. That would be a lie.

My great-uncle died during the battle of Vimy Ridge. My grandfather survived (shell-shocked though) the battle of the Somme. My uncle lies in a military graveyard after crashing his Spitfire in a training exercise. My cousin spend four months behind Japanese lines with his commando unit--only 4 out of 16 made it out. My other uncle flew the dangerous China supply route from India over the Himalayas. My father almost died of dysentery during the Italian campaign. I wear the poppy for them.
Chris Kempling

I strongly suspect that if the Nazis had won you most certainly would be wearing a swastika on your lapel, whether you wanted to or not. You have a choice with the poppy only because those it commemorates died. Ironic, your choice, isn't it?

Good piece, Clay.

I have no problem at all with real veterans wearing the poppy. They certainly have their own reasons.

As for the rest of the hoi polloi, it's just another mawkish roadside attraction. Everyone reads history in their own way. Before WWII, who allowed the National Socialists to come to power? Who benefitted from trade with Germany even after the outbreak of war?

Now I wouldn't mind so much if all those red poppies squirted water.

Ghandi succeeded partly because the British were not willing to commit genocide in India, and because he was accorded some freedom of movement.

A power that's far more repressive and willing to slaughter the innocent en masse, like Nazi Germany, would not have been moved by non-violent Ghandi-style resistance.

The two words which might describe WWII are not "freedom" and "democracy" ... words which have become tainted and meaningless as copyrighted by George W. Bush.

War is the final, absolute failure of a society. War is the meat grinder into which kings and prime ministers -- and now presidents -- have fed generations of their brightest and best youth. My god, I thought we knew that.

War is what happens when world leaders blunder headlong into crises. This is why a free press is so vitally important to a free and enlightened society -- to peace.

The blood red poppy is a cry of anguish for what was lost -- not a howl of triumph for something supposedly gained. I observe Remembrance Day each year, and wear the poppy, to remember that lesson. You know: "Lest We Forget."

When we deplore the lack of brains, courage, conviction, and leadership in today's world, we should think again of the thousands killed and thousands maimed in two World Wars. How do we measure such a loss? Only by remembering, and swearing "Never again!"

Did Clay McLeod grow up in Canada? I hope he isn't teaching History!

"War does not determine who is right - only who is left"

Bertrand Russell

Where's the symbol that represents war's civilian casualties, or should I call them collateral damage?

Fighting for peace is like f*cking for virginity.

Great post BC Mary. I think that one's belief that the poppy symbolizes some romanticized version of war is quite misplaced. I like to think that most rational people understand that there are no winners in war, in spite of ticket tape parades and photos of strangers kissing strangers. The celebrations at the end of war, in some way, symbolize that the killing has stopped - at least for a while.

We rely heavily on symbolism, and what better symbol of war do we, the average citizen, have? For Clay McLead, unfortunately, he seems to believe that the poppy symbolizes a misplaced trust that war equals democracy and freedoms. It's too bad that he doesn't see the poppy as a symbol of innocence lost and an misunderstood sacrifice of one's life. I wear a poppy because I feel that it's important that we never forget what war really brings - death! Young soldiers lying in a field of poppies with there last thought: why?

I am a member of our local branch of the Royal Canadian Legion, and believe you me, NEVER have I heard any of our veterans glorify war.

I was torn for a while about the wearing of the poppy.

I had served 9 years in RCAF, paraded every Nov 11 as a Cadet and Regular Force Officer. The meaning of the event was regularly and routinely drilled into me.

Two years after retiring, I was so disgusted at the Federal Liberals for gutting the military, then having the forked tongue to speak of remembering the 'sacrifice' of generations past, that I took my poppy off.

I discarded it for three years.

It was a discussion I had with my grandfather, a veteran of Italy, near the end of that 3 years. He was of the opinion that whether you wore the poppy or not was immaterial. The poppy was just a means of support for the legion, he had been an active legion member for 20 years (now much more difficult due to poor health). He considered the donation more important than the wearing of the device. He was not so impressed by the 'parades' either, his advice to me was to keep the memory of my actions (during the cold war, thus not mentioned ever), my comrades and opponents alive in my mind, and; when possible, to share that with family and friends.

For Nov 11, he advocated the much older practice of 2 minutes of silence, let the politicoes speak, parade, jump about and otherwise disgrace themselves. Display grace and respect for the dead (of both sides and any others - my grandfather was at the time part of the writing campaign to get the merchant marine proper pensions), by remaining silent in thier memory for two minutes, starting at 11:10 am on Nov 11 and endign at 11:12 am.

Since the conversation I have had children, and I have started buying poppies again, for only my eldest son ever even met my grandfather and children can come to grips better with this subject by having 'something' to hold on to.

We do not attend large gatherings, but have a private 2 minutes to be silent, think and thank our military and civil forebears that were willing to make such a sacrifice in the past.

What an odd interpretation. I have been going to Rememberance Day Services since I was a young boy in Ottawa (mid-70's). I have never understood the symbolism and activities to represent anything other than a gesture of respect for those who lost their lives and a challenge to us to remember the who, what, where, and most importantly why of the wars.

The poppy is a symbol of peace. To remember the circumstances of how it came to be worn is to understand the horrible machinery of war and oppression that murdered millions of young men and women who, rightly or wrongly, believed they were doing something noble and heroic.

There is a crucial lesson in how soldiers were convinced to participate in these wars. By bringing other concerns into the mix McLeod distorts and degrades one of the most important lessons free people need to learn about the nature of freedom and oppression.

As for the jingoistic ending of McRae's Poem that too is a lesson and it is important to understand the context in which it was written. I have always chosen to believe that the "foe" is now war itself. It certainly is not read in 2005 with the intention of taking up arms against the hun!

I guess Mr. McLeod either never understood or was never taught the true meaning of the poppy. Sad really. I will always wear a poppy on November 11th and I will always remember the destroyed youth of our nation and of the world that it represents.

I'm really glad to see this piece, as I have struggled with the same issues all my life. My parents always told me that Rememberance Day Ceremonies and the poppy were glorifications of war, and were just another example of our misguided society trying to oppress us with war and violence, even under the guise of promoting peace. I've struggled with this, thinking it was an oversimplification of the situation, and had recently decided that what really matters is that we refuse to forget the impact of war (on veterans, civilians alike), without "honouring" the final outcomes of a specific war. That we remember, and have a day to remember, without buzz words like "freedom" and "democracy" undermining the real point of remembering - so that we don't do it again. I won't wear a poppy either - not because it glorifies war, but because it has become wrapped up in glorifying war, because it has become wrapped up in remembering wars like the Korean War, and because it has become wrapped up in my own struggle to remember the dead the way I want to. Why get mad at Clay because he doesn't want to wear a poppy? He's not advocating no one wearing a poppy, and he's not advocating not remembering. He is, like me, advocating remembering in your own way, whether that be a poppy or a peace sign, or nothing at all. I remember.

A key question: Who benefits?

A PM Margaret Thatcher, facing defeat, went to war against Argentina and won re-election.

Many wars have been contrived for political purposes.

With Cruise missiles at a million bucks apiece, plus delivery costs, the opening salvos of G.W.'s war also delivered Shock and Awe to the U.S. public purse but oh, how handsomely the arms industry benefitted.

What will we wear for the thousands of innocent Iraqis who died in that criminal, terrorist attack?

@Ubiquitous - I think the common wisdom that there are no winners in war is not a sign of rationality, but is a symptom of the commitment to continue to pass down such wisdom. And the poppy has been our repository.

"The blood red poppy is a cry of anguish for what was lost "
-BC Mary

We have set aside a calendar day to ponder what war is. I fail to see how acknowledging this by wearing a poppy is any sort of support for war.

Obviously written for shock value.
What next, shall we start treating Rememberance Day like CHRISTMAS. Public Schools banning students from wearing poppies ?
I hope at least the writer undersatnds that war brings the freedom for him to publish this dribble.

stories like this piss me off.the tyee loses credibility with this dribble

I am actaully surprised the tyee would print something like this. What a joke. This article is disrespectful to all people who lost their lives so you can spout off like you are now. If you don't want to wear a poppy fine but don't rub it in the faces of the people who committed the ultimate sacrifice for you. You’re a joke and a disgrace to this country.

Many commentators here profess to know the "one true meaning" of the wearing of the poppy.

Symbolic meaning is what the world makes of it. I suggest you look around you first. Observe those wearing poppies and attending . Do you identify with them? Do you wish to strengthen their position? If so, wear one as well.

But if you believe the meaning has become twisted, if you believe the politicians have their own special agenda attached to the symbolism, if you don't like the vitriol coming from the pro-poppy people commenting on this story, then by all means, "opt out"!

Mr. McLeod, wearing the poppy isn't about nationalism, it's about remembering and honouring sacrifice. Your Ghandi example is foolhardy, because while the sacrifice of the Jewish people was mighty, the sacrifice of voluntary soldiers who died was greater still. They went willingingly to the fight and their death, to win freedom for those who couldn't. You can be certain, Mr. McLeod, that had no one opposed the Nazis with the warfare you disdain, that today the European Jew would be as rare as the snow leopard.

I wear the poppy for http://www.darrenbarefoot.com/archives/001362.html my great-uncle, whose http://www.darrenbarefoot.com/images/albums/Travels/Hamburg%20and%20Kiel,%20March,%202002/kiel_uncle_ross.jpg grave is in Kiel, Germany. I also wear it for http://www.darrenbarefoot.com/images/albums/Travels/Hamburg%20and%20Kiel,%20March,%202002/kiel_graves.jpg the three or four hundred men lying next to him. Most of all, I wear it because I'm free to do so, just as you are free not to. My great uncle and millions of men like him helped win us those rights, and they deserve your respect.

Teachers like this are an advertisement for private education.

Wow, what a schmuck. It's not about glorifying war, it's just about taking time out to recognize the horrors young people went through... young people who were drafted and didn't have a choice.

well done clay. You certainly achieved dialogue which I am pretty sure was your intent...way to go teacher

Wearing the poppy, enriches the local Legions and where does that money go.

After my father's (a WW2 naval vet saw service in the North Atlantic) long debilitating disease, I went to the local legion, where he was a member for many years, to ask what services were available to vetrens. A rather drunk, younger official told me in no certain terms that "There was none and don't bother us. What makes you belive he desesrves anything."

I would dearly love to see this beer swilling chap on a Frigate in December, 100 miles from nowhere in the North Atlantic, in a 60 mph gale!

Where does the money go?

And the reason I don't wear a poppy.

I wear my poppy as a statement against the use of military force, to remind people of the blood that was spilled, and that WWII did not 'end all wars'.

Guess historical illiteracy and moral relativism qualify you to teach others in British Columbia. Maybe the writer should read up on the general revulsion against war that resulted from WWI...and contributed to a general movement for peace and banishment of war as a diplomatic option. She's more in tune with the poppy movement than she's educated to understand. Pity.

Yo McLeod,

The difference being that if the efforts of the fallen had proved futile and the Nazis had taken over the wearing of the swastika would have been mandatory
not voluntary.

You are also welcome to your opinion, as abhorrent as it is, because of the sacrifice of those people. We wouldn't imagine that self satisfied moron like your self would appreciate or even understand that sacrifice.

JWL

I agree wholeheartedly with those who've already said (better than I could) that the poppy is the furthest thing from glorifying war. It's true meaning is to not forget what a tragedy war is, and to advocate peace.

And while Mr. NcLeod may have a point somewhere, it's lost in his countercultural drivel. Looks like he (and the editors of the Tyee who though this was worth publishing) could use a few copies of "The Rebel Sell" (Heath & Potter), perhaps with poppy bookmarks.

NAMES CARVED IN STONE

Some etched in bronze,
the white rows of crosses
covering the foreground and into the horizon.
All similar in death as they were different in life.
Once living they marched and sang rude soldiers songs
hardly aware of the freedoms they were defending
both sides assured of the support of the same God.
Lives that were ended before they really began;
Their sacrifice perhaps for a better life,
for justice, for king and country, for liberty
something they were not to see,
dreams of a brighter future for their families
their clan, their tribe, their nation.
Their deaths have no purchase here
and war to end war has been a futile dream
except to commemorate that freedom has a cost
and it's not about battles won and lost.
We remember with poppies
our badge of solidarity
and commiserate with those left behind.
Old men with medals remember the young men,
their friends, who became brothers and then were gone and the tears come easily now.
They cry the tears of mothers and fathers
and sisters and brothers, of friends and lovers,
of wives and the children who never knew their fathers.
The dead are the empty chair at our table of life;
the open wounds that turn to scars but never really heal.
So we put aside this day, November eleventh,
to remember, to honour, and to mourn and know
that they were more than just some
names carved in stone.

JWL

Ironic that the poppy is the cause of wars when it grows in places like Afghanistan.

Frankly I will continue to wear a poppy out of respect for those who died needlessly in previous wars.

November 11th is also the day that Britain sold out Rhodesia to the likes of Robert Mugabwe.

I wear a poppy for the forgotten people of Rhodesia, damned to starvation and terror in a concentration camp called Zimbabwe.

The government of Canada has forgotten Zimbabwe's suffering people. The Americans and British do not care because there is no oil there.

So, I also wear a poppy for the people of Zimbabwe who suffer under a latter day Hitler, unopposed by those countries who brag of past deeds but lack courage to take up arms and oppose tyranny where it presently thrives.

I make a concerted effort to read The Tyee in order to be presented with alternative points of view to my own.

Mission accomplished, Tyee. You've outdone yourself. I will now remove my fingernails from the palms of my hands.

This article, like most articles on the Tyee, is less meaningful than the comments thread that follows.

Yes, the article, like its author, is dribble.

But the folks who have set him straight have made my day.

I like my poppy. It does not glorify war.

Is this guy really a teacher? How embarassing. I guess that's why God made both chocolate and vanilla.

several years after I met my father in law, I noticed he did not wear a poppy nor attend any Remembrance Day ceremonies. I asked my wife if she knew why..."better ask him", she said, "he might tell you." After a couple of months and fortifying him and myself with a couple of scotches I did ask him. Immediately his eyes filled with tears and I thought, criky, what have I done. He then spoke and this is what he said(I paraphrase because it was twenty five years ago) "I do not want to remember the stupid men that created a Europe that spawned a Hitler; I do not want to remember the greedy men who profited from that spawning; I do not want to remember the pompous, stupid generals and commanders that gave the orders that I had to obey. I do not want to remember the faces of the men I had to send to their deaths and the bodies of the enemy that came under my fire, all for so called glorious reasons tainted with greed and stupidity;...we will not speak of this again".
For several years after that, I did not wear a poppy; but then realized I was doing it for a borrowed reason. I decided to wear a poppy to remember why my father in law didn't.
He was a Captain in the Canadian Forces in WW2, decorated at home and in Europe who led his men through Italy, France, and Holland.

Perhaps if you looked at the origins of Remembrance Day Clay, your opinion might change.
Remembrance Day takes place each year on November 11th to mark the armistice ending the First World War, a bloody war of attrition that almost wiped out an entire generation, a war without reason or justification.
The armistice was by no means a victorious day, but one of relief that the bloodletting had stopped. In the years that followed, Armistice Day, as it was known before WW 2, became a day of quiet reverence and remembrance of the terrible cost of war. A moment of silence was observed to remember the dead and the poppy was chosen to represent them. These do not serve to glorify war, but to remember its cost.
So I ask you Chad, is it so wrong for one solider honour the memory of his fallen comrade, his brother? Is it so wrong to remember, for just one day a year, the suffering, the pain, and the horrible human toll that war brings so that we may learn from this great loss and work to prevent it from happening again? And is it so wrong to wear a symbol, a flower as red as the blood spilled upon every battlefield in every war with black, black grief in its center, to remind ourselves of just how precious peace truly is?

This article is appalling. I agree with posters who argue that the writer doesn't understand historical process and that the poppy represents suffering and death from war. I wear a poppy out of respect for family and other Canadian soldiers who made horrific sacrifices to end Nazi totalitarianism.

As other posters have mentioned, the poppy as a symbol grew out of public pacifism and revulsion after the slaughter of WWI.

Although imperialism did play a factor in WWI, I think you need to study the history of German atrocities against civilians in France and Belgium before you can make an argument about the moral equivalency of the combatants.

Your comparison of the swastika to the poppy is disgusting. Ask the French, Dutch, Eastern Europeans and others who suffered under the Nazi yoke what they think of the "moral equivalency" of the axis and allies. You are indulging in postmodern nonsense at its flakiest. Get your head out of the clouds.

Although the foundations of this country are based in the British Empire, I don't think any nation today can claim moral perfection. But Canadians can be proud of their military heritage. Canadians have an illustrious tradition of fighting totalitarianism in Europe and Asia. I think in your attempt to be sophisticated, you have forgotten what is most important.

I am disappointed that the Tyee chose to run this shortly before Remembrance Day -- extremely poor taste.

The Gandhi example is interesting, as I read in a recent Indian Express an interview with the Dalai Lama, in which he recalled carrying a handgun while fleeing from Mao's troops over the mountains, and his company was also armed. He laughed and joked that he threw it into a river once he was over the border into India. I wonder if he would have used it in event of capture? He never did answer that question but doubtless his company would have as the ones who remained behind did attempt to stop the Chinese with armed force.

But I disagree with the contention that the Poppy glorifies war. I've never met a veteran yet who has any fond memories of wartime, and in fact, never yet met one who likes Bush or supports the war in Iraq.

I won't criticize this person's personal choice on wearing the poppy, but I do reject his 'reasoning'.

It is so very politically correct these days to say how terrible all war is, and to then find fault with everything associated with it. But in my opinion, this simplistic rhetoric denies human history and evolution, including today's realities.

First let's be clear that 'War' is just a label we give to 'conflict' whenever it suits us. Some use the term to support the need for action, while others use it as a synonym for evil or failure. But in reality, 'war' is neither good or bad - it is a 'tool' that can be used in equal measure for either.

Some will want to counter that war cannot possibly be 'good', but this is based on a narrow, subjective definition. For example, "peace-keeping" is essentially 'war'. This is especially true these days as 'peace-making' and 'peace-enforcement' blur the distinction even more. Canada's recent report for the UN, The Responsibility to Protect, emphasizes the moral imperative for the powerful nations to use military might when diplomacy and other coersion fails. Some claim there is always 'another way', but this simpy is not so.

The truth is that 'conflict' of all types has shaped not only humanity, but most life on this planet. Perhaps one day mankind will reach a level where all conflict is resolved non-violently, but we are not even remotely near such a Utopia. As you read this, dozens of major wars are being waged around the globe and dozens more will start soon. So for now, 'war' and the soldiers who wage them remain a necessity.

When these men and women are sent forth by their governments, whether to enforce, defend or conquer, we should not denigrate or ignore their efforts just because we happen to disagree with this or that political decision. And when they fall in service to their country, they should be honored for their personal sacrifice, regardless of whether you support the current conflict(s), or even if they fought on 'the wrong side'.

So wear a poppy or not - who cares. But don't tell me that remembering the fallen 'glorifies war', because in my opinion, this only illustrates ignorance of human history and a lack of appreciation for the many warriors who were instumental in shaping it.

again, BRAVO Clay! You certainly got the testorone pumping into the gray matter...my count says 3.5 neo-nazis exposed...thought police here we come!

Disgusting. Utterly disgusting.

I can think of nothing about Remembrance Day intended to glorify war. On the contrary, it is intended as a sombre reminder of the horrific cost of war. Those who forget the lessons of history...

McLeod, pull your head out of your bum.

Heaven help us.

David Beers,

Publishing an essay this tasteless makes the Tyee look downright ridiculous. Stick to provincial politics.

that's 4.5

Hmmmm, some of you sure have some interesting points. It's too bad that many of you are too closed-minded to see what Clay is really saying. Clay is against war, and so should we all be. He's not disrespecting the soldiers who died in the war, he says as much right in his article, if you actually read it. He opposes the greater powers who are the instigators and controllers of war. What could be more admirable in a teacher than one who promotes peace and conflict resolution year round not just on one day, which it seems is all the rest of you do. Every day should be a day to teach and remember what goes on in the rest of the world and think about how to make the world a better place. Someone has to do it why not let it be you, and you and you. Students of today will shape our future and I sure hope that Clay teaches my child that war is not the answer to world problems.
Thanks Clay, for you honesty and for wanting to find another way.
Wear a poppy or not, just make sure you're a kind and caring person to all people all the time....which I might add, many of you have not been to Clay.

peace lady....duck....incoming

Keep that count going "gomer". I'm sure there will be more to come.

Whether you agree or disagree with Clay McLeod it is important to remember that we live in a democracy (well, in theory at least).

To throw insults at the author if you disagree(without using your real name) is so hypocritical! The whole point of a democracy is to listen to points other than your own with respect. If you don't like what you read tell us why using your intellect.

I don't agree with everything in the article (the comparison between Gandhi's situation and Nazi Germany is a little weak). However, at least the article has started a good discussion.
While I respect veterans I don't like how all the politicians use the event for political gain. For me, it ruins the whole reason for having Remembrance day.
Maybe only veterans should wear poppies. What do you think ?

Kevan Hudson

I don't know when the first Poppy Day, or Remembrance Day, occurred to commemorate Armistice day 11 Nov 1918, but with the many wars and the millions killed in the slaughters since that date, those poppies don't seem to be working.

Instead of striving for peace, the Bushes and Blairs will go to Cenotaphs and we are mesmerized by the pomp.

And sanitizing that bloody history, they still send their young men and women to war.

i dunno, bc boy...i think the light bulbs are starting to go on but i'll keep counting.
As far as only veterans wearing poppies, I think there are a lot of people with a connection to a veteran, who will want to continue their symbol of Remembrance.
I agree the attacks on Clay are pretty goofy, especially the linkage to his profession...seems to me his lesson plan gets an A+.
robin holt

I appreciate the discussion. I also no longer wear the poppy although my thinking on the matter is puzzling even to myself. I know the political correctness offends me. Too many people wear the poppy while not understanding its significance. Consider the outrage at a TV talking head without a poppy.

Clay, I couldn't give a fiddlers fock what you wear or won't wear,but I am wondering, were you out with your union brothers and sisters pounding the pavement with a picket sign three weeks ago, or did you exercise your freedom right by not picketing?

While I disagree with the author on a number of points. I'm glad there is a forum for the comment it generates.

The most disagreeable aspect of the whole issue is found in posts like those by Jim. Jim wrote:

I've never thought of free speech as rubbing it in veterans faces. If they died for us and our freedoms then questioning the accepted truth should be seen as honouring the vets.

One of the things that bothers me about this day is the constant, "they died for you. They died for your freedom" claptrap. The author's Simpsons analogy is exactly right things are not that simple. WWII can be justified with the heroic death motif but not many other wars.

As a teacher I see my students attending the yearly ceremony at school where all our wars are wars for freedom. All our boys fought for a just cause, everytime. I sort of understand because how do you tell that aging veteran in the color guard that he and his friends had their lives risked or ended because nations all too often follow narrow self interest long past the point it is actually in their interest.

But if it comes down to my students and the veterans feelings I'll go with what is best for the young ones any day. They need to be told that it is ok to challenge any accepted truth, especially ones like the idea that war serves noble purposes. To do anything else is to support Jim and a world where they will be called to fight for the right to accept only what they are told.

To be honest I did find the poppy/swastika analogy offensive. But we can always just say "Clay that's not right." Jim your narrow minded political correctness is far more frightening.

And if you think an article like this from a teacher is an ad for private school then feel free to send your kids to one where the ideas are as intellectually stunted as your posts. I'll send my kids to public schools where there is less social engineering.

I'll wear a poppy for the reasons others have stated, but keep on thinking and keep on challenging the accepted truth.

hey woody...great handle...does that refer to?...oh never mind
robin holt

Hello all. Interesting reading in here. I not only wear a poppy with pride and sadness but I collect them as well. I find them lying discarded in the hallways of the school and the mall. I find them and keep them.

Morbid? Maybe .... but I am remembering many things ... the sacrifice my grandfathers friends made at Pearl Harbour when it was bombed. My grandfather survived that and went on to fight the great evil some more. It took him close to 50 years to talk about it. I wear it in memory if his youth lost in the trenches.

I also wear it to remember ALL those that were innocents that were killed in wars that they did not have a lot of say in. These innocents were/are women, children, the disabled and those those who were 'sucked in' to fight an enemy they did not know.

This is what the poppy is for, to draw our minds closer, for just a short time, to hurt, fear, bravery and (admit is cowardice) of the past and the present.

The phrase 'lest we forget' seems to have been forgotten in the grand scheme of this world. Maybe we just have to try to remember so that the memories of the lost and dead do not fade away into nothing.

Ok, that is my rant for today.

Remember.

I buy a poppy and then add a white dove. Not to be cute (although it does look kind of cool), but because I think that the symbol has to be more closely tied to working for peace. Too many November school assemblies in which veterans regaled us with the glories of war. So little of the content spoke of the need for peace and the importance of preserving it.

My father fought in WWII, for the "wrong" side. He later joined Veterans Against Nuclear Arms. At the time, the Canadian veterans in this organization who choose to wear their white berets as a symbol of peace were not permitted to march together with other members of their Legion. Perhaps this policy has changed. I can only hope so.

I am saddened to think of the ongoing loss, devastation, and suffering of war. We must indeed remember, but we must channel our sorrow into actions that will help prevent militarization and war!

Gomer, you want to talk about a handle that was dug up from the dirt. Try Clay.

Sir Wilfred,

If you feel it's more important to disrespect all dead and living veterans to further a ideological jihad. Then I guess your comments are warranted.

Maybe the private school arguments are over the top. But the fact is, if Clay does in fact spread this ideological babble on the children of BC, it would be a perfectly valid comment. After reading this article, it wouldn’t be surprising at all.

Just look at some the paragraphs. You would think that they’re written by some ignorant delusional author. You wouldn’t expect those comments to come from a teacher.

Maybe the recent teacher strike has confused him. After all the BC Liberals were often compared to the Nazis. A peaceful protest stopped them. That must mean a peaceful protest would have stopped the Nazi’s. It all makes sense now.

I guess I’m narrow minded. That, or a maybe just a proud Canadian that supports the legacy of our Canadian Armed Forces.

If you feel that writing derogatory pieces about veteran sacrifices two days before a day dedicated to their remembrance is appropriate. I feel sorry for you.

Thank you.

Finally someone has expressed eloquently the conflict I have every time November comes around. I am not even that much of a pacifist.

The thing that usually trumps my stubborness of not wearing a poppy is the men. The men not the country, or the empire. True, Canadians are urged by their leaders to wear one, but it is not a maple leaf, it is not a union jack, and its not stars nor stripes. Indeed, a world without history and remembrance would be the death of us all.

That being said, It was still war of empires, and we are still celebrating something that could have very much been the other way, as the author suggests. I can't say much more than has already been said, but I'm just glad we are having this discussion.

My grandfather was born in Canada. A Canadian citizen, like you and me, he was imprisoned because his last name had a "yama" in it. When they robbed him of his possessions and took him away to an internment camp on the other side of the country, no one stood up to protest. At the end of the war, the Allies flooded into Germany and were absolutely revolted and surprised by what they saw - a genocide had occurred without the German people ever knowing.

I can't help it, but my mind keeps coming back to this one question: What if William Lyon Mackenzie King had been the monster, not Hitler?? I think Buffy St.-Marie said it best:

He's five feet two and he's six feet four
He fights with missiles and with spears
He's all of 31 and he's only 17
He's been a soldier for a thousand years

He's a Catholic, a Hindu, an athiest, a Jain,
a Buddhist and a Baptist and a Jew
and he knows he shouldn't kill
and he knows he always will
kill you for me my friend and me for you

And he's fighting for Canada,
he's fighting for France,
he's fighting for the USA,
and he's fighting for the Russians
and he's fighting for Japan,
and he thinks we'll put an end to war this way

And he's fighting for Democracy
and fighting for the Reds
He says it's for the peace of all
He's the one who must decide
who's to live and who's to die
and he never sees the writing on the walls

But without him how would Hitler have
condemned him at Dachau
Without him Caesar would have stood alone
He's the one who gives his body
as a weapon to a war
and without him all this killing can't go on

He's the universal soldier and he
really is to blame
His orders come from far away no more
They come from him, and you, and me
and brothers can't you see
this is not the way we put an end to war.

Dbarefoot,

If I remember correctly you were the guy promoting your local charities in the midst of the Tsunami relief effort.

You are just as bad as this writer, exploiting the plight of others for your own causes. Parasite.

What would Mahatma Gandhi have done?

I think that we already know what Gandhi would have done. He wrote a letter: http://www.gandhi-manibhavan.org/letters/letter23.htm

And another one to all Britons in 1940:

"'... I want you to fight Nazism without arms. I would like you to lay down the arms you have as being useless for saving you or humanity. You will invite Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini to take what they want of the countries you call your possessions. Let them take possession of your beautiful island, with your many beautiful buildings. You will give all these but neither your souls, nor your minds. If these gentlemen choose to occupy your homes, you will vacate them. If they do not give you free passage out, you will allow yourself, man, woman and child, to be slaughtered, but you will refuse to owe allegiance to them... I am telling His Excellency the Viceroy that my services are at the disposal of His Majesty's Government, should they consider them of any practical use in advancing the object of my appeal.' (Stanley Wolpert's Jinnah of Pakistan, pp. 187-188 as cited on page 144 of Chapter I of Constitutional Law of India, Supplement to Third Edition, 1988, written and published by H M Seervai, a giant in the field of constitutional history.)"

Mr. McLeod is free to write what he likes, thank goodness, and he is free to find people who are silly enough to publish the results. That's what living in a free country is all about, of course.

Sorry Mr. McLeod, you're living in a "wouldn't-it-be-nice" world.

Let me try to get through to you...If you witnessed a crime would you not call the police?

What's your answer to 800,000 Rwandans brutally slaughtered in 100 days? Wrong place at the wrong time? What about Darfur and the state sponsored Janjawid? The Congo? The Balkans? The Falklands? Mozambique? What happens in your "woukldn't-it-be-nice" world without military intervention? Property is stolen, innocent people are brutalized, beaten, murdered and what...you don't care?, 'cuz it's over there somewhere - out of sight, out of mind? Isn't that right?...admit it...it's someone else's problem.

What about the 25 innocent Canadians who died in the Trade Centre - do you believe they had it coming? Do you understand justice? Law and order?

I'm thankful you don't teach my children. Jim Keegstra was fired for a reason. You should be too.

Wow. I'm listening to you on CBC Radio right now in an interview.

A word of advice: stick to print. You suck on radio.

You think "we should have tried other means to stamp out the Nazi menace." My god man, you're disconnected from reality. The Nazis had murdered millions and invaded great swaths of Europe. If ever there was an argument for war, the Germans were it. They had so obviously crossed the line...

Stick to print. You were fairly incoherent on the radio.

Did somebody really have to paste the entire lyrics of Universal Soldier into this thread. Makes the comments section drag on like you wouldn't believe.

As a child of World War II refugees, I cannot disagree more with the author's interpretation of the poppy.

But the dialogue it has generated is the best I have read on the Tyee. There have been thoughtful, measured responses that have not degenerated into the usual "Lefties-are-dumb Right-wingers-are-dumb" dialogue that these threads seem to eventually become (these diatribes are the most unfortunate part of Mr Beers' fine experiment that we all are participating in). The display of calm reasoning is a tribute to the contributors, as this reinterpretation of the poppy and remembrance day into a glorification of war upsets many of us who understand it to be the opposite.

But then I reached these commenters below, (seemingly the usual mud-slingers) who offer vitriol instead of dialogue:

commentor: kengineer
posted: 20 Hours Ago
stories like this piss me off.the tyee loses credibility with this dribble

commentor: JIm
posted: 20 Hours Ago
I am actaully surprised the tyee would print something like this. What a joke. This article is disrespectful to all people who lost their lives so you can spout off like you are now. If you don't want to wear a poppy fine but don't rub it in the faces of the people who committed the ultimate sacrifice for you. You’re a joke and a disgrace to this country.

Pity.

Kory,
On reading darcy.mcgee's last post, I reread Universal Soldier. It was not known to me. Thank you.

Perhaps it was the concluding verse of the lyric that most offended darcy.

Buffy could even have inserted:

And killing for God
The poor, stupid sod

This article seems to be a rerun of the anti-military movements of the past few decades.
Trite and adding nothing to the debate or history of conflict. The arguing above is mostly 'school yard' bickering. It is easy to pick sides. For those who object to wearing the poppy a quick visit to The Neatherlands, Belgium and Northern France and a battlefield tour is in order. Ignorance is bliss and it sure shows in some of the postings above.

I wear a poppy for my uncle, Phillip Chapman, who joined the British Army in 1938 when Hitler invaded Slovakia, against the treaties that Germany had just signed.

My uncle knew that other democratic, freedom-loving peoples were next on Hitler's agenda. When Hitler set his sights on the people of France, uncle Phillip was rushed to the continent, only to be caught near Dunkirk when our forces were overwhelmed.

Uncle Phillip died as a prisoner of the Nazis at a prison camp in Poland in 1943. The cause of death was malnutrition.

Uncle Phillip died defending our democratic way of life. I am proud to wear a poppy every year for the heroes like him.

My father fought in North Africa, across Sicily, and up the Italian peninsula as far as Monte Cassino. He never wore a poppy, either, for similar reasons to some of those posted about other veterans. A couple of years ago, I met an elderly man who'd also fought at Cassino, in the German army. If Nov 11 is truly about the futility of war and 'never again', as some commentators have claimed, why do I never see German or Japanese veterans parading on Nov 11? And why is there never any remembrance or recognition of the untold suffering of all the women forced into prostitution or raped by all the armies of the world?

Clay McLeod writes:

My personal understanding of the poppy is that it expressly symbolises all of the needless and senseless death and suffering (on "both sides") caused by war. This is why I wear a poppy: to acknowledge and remind myself of the ultimate and senseless futility of war.

We must be reminded of this so that the next time we find ourselves on the unstoppable march to war we will be fully aware of what we are committing ourselves to.

The poppy does not glorify war. Instead it strips war of all glory and romanticism and misguided "patriotism" and "nationalism".

Gomer:

Calling posters who were offended by this article neo-Nazis betrays your own ignorance of the Nazi movement.

Nazis fought communists in pitched street battles, shut down ethnic shops, crammed "undesirables" into ghettos before genocidally slaughtering them, and tried to absorb all of civil society into the Party (let alone a host of other evils).

Calling people who aren't pacifists or quite as left-wing as you Nazis or fascists dilutes the meaning of the term, just like when the mainstream media always uses the metaphor of "the war on x" to get headlines. The threat of Nazi and fascist thuggery is very real -- let's apply the term to those who actually are Nazis and fascists, rather than law-abiding Canadians who verbally disagree with your politics.

I'm glad I tracked down this article and was able to take in exactly what it was that Mr. McLeod was trying to express.

I caught his interview this morning on CBC Radio 1 after the introductions had already been made and was very surprised to learn he was a teacher after listening to his halting, ineloquent, generalized and at some points downright infantile responses to the interviewer's questions. I had to that point believed I was listening to the thoughts of someone much younger in years who had not yet studied history to any great depth. No slight is intended towards younger students - I'm one of them myself.

I still disagree completely with Mr. McLeod's views for reasons that have already been expressed far more articulately than I could muster, but am glad I had a chance to better understand what he was trying to say.

I couldn' disagree with you more about the poppy. Although I agree, that many are forgotten on rememberance day that should be remembered (the civilians, the japanese canadians, the victims of genocide, etc), the history of the poppy encompasses a desire for peace. People forget that the traditons came from The first world. That war had a profound social effect on Western European, and especially English (and canadian) society. Although the governments used propaganda like "for king an country" etc, the men at the front soon thought something different. (For example, most men hated their commanders, not the german soldiers) For all the death and carnage for no reason, many were changed forever (read any WWI poetry). Wearing the poppy says "Never forget" what happened, to never let it happen again. Thats why strong pacifist movements came about after the war, and even the original appeasement policy for hitler (to avoid another confrontation like the great war). I agree governments even today use and abuse the poppy or jingoism to glorify war and the soldiers, but those factors shouldn't make one dismiss the poppy. It had a deep personal meaning for many, and still does today, to remember all those who suffered and prevent it from happening again.

A poppy one day a year? Bah! Humbug!

Better at times throughout the year that the media relinquish some ad space to show us the crosses "row on row", the widows and orphans,
the battlefield carnage.

Show the insanity. Take the glory from it.

Two years ago on Remembrance Day I found myself at a gathering which included a young German man, and several Israelis and Palestinians. Over breakfast, the German and I talked about the war of 1914-18 and expressed amazement actually that if we had been alive then we would have been trying to kill each other. Now, in 2003, here we were, actually in tears as we told stories we knew of family members who had fought in that war. Several of the stories were about children...many young people lied about their ages to get to go to war and many many hundreds of 16 and 17 year old child soldiers died on the battlefields of France.

As we continued to talk, the Israelis and Palestinians drew a little closer and listened. My friend Tova from Tel Aviv also started crying. She had no idea how many Canadians and Germans had died in that war. She had no idea that many of them were children.

Our conversation eventually got around to the the possibility that, as generations pass and the memory of war stays alive, it is possible that the descendants of people who want to kill each other now will find themselves shaking their head at the insanity of their parents.

That's why I wear a poppy.

Who am I?

Who am I? To some I am known as a helmet, a sword, a laurel and maple leaves. To others I'm the freckled, dirty blonde boy down the street, that always found a mud pile. To Sarah Johnson, I was a best friend to play with. To my mom, I was her baby in the family.

It is the fall of 1916, and the war has taken over our lives. The town has given all their eligible men to the war. I'm 17, but I feel that I have become a man. I too want to go fight in the war for my country.

I go to the recruiting office and I forge my age as 19. I know that this is a huge step for me to be taking, but I've always been a great fighter. When I get the guts to tell my mom that I am going to fight in the war, she breaks down and cries and begs me not to leave her like this. But it is too late, I have to leave my childhood home behind me and board a boat that leads me to the war. Sarah cries when I leave her standing on the dock. She is not the sweet little girl in pig tails anymore. We have grown up, and she is the love of my life.

I reach France and my eyes are truly opened. No matter how bad it gets, I know Sarah is waiting to celebrate with me, and the neighbours will be there to snoop once again. The fighting continues past Christmas. Then one day as my troop is crossing enemy territory, we are attacked and very few soldiers survive.

Today it is November 11, 2005, many people realize that our war efforts weren't in vain. Some people probably still remember me as the freckled, dirty blond boy, or the apple of my mother's eye. But I don't know what I became in Sarah Johnston's eyes, because I never saw her after that day on the dock. I died that fateful day when my troop was attacked. Today, I am part of the memorial to remember the lives lost at war. It's amazing how many people come to see me where I lie in The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier.

http://www.vac-acc.gc.ca/remembers/sub.cfm?source=collections/prose_poetry/pr_detail&article_id=59

I think Clay McLeod's position is essentially this: war is bad and kills people, so do not engage in it even if others do.

Now take the World War II situation. If all countries had just surrendered to Hitler and the Nazis there would have no major war and far fewer people would have been killed directly.

Mind you more Jews and Gypsies would have been exterminated than in fact were, and over time there would have been a considerable decline in the Slavic population one way or another (e.g. starvation).

And hundreds of millions of people would have come under German domination, many of them to all practical purposes reduced to serfdom or slavery. The remainder would lose any true freedom or independence, personal or national.

You choose the better result for humanity, if not for those individuals who died (fighting or murdered or starved in the war).

Mark
Ottawa

And this from "Small Dead Animals":
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/mt/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=2931

'Clay McLeod, my boy, you're probably a nice enough fellow, and if you want to live down the street it's ok by me.

I have a couple of questions for you.

1. A bunch of enemy combatants have your wife, your daughters up against a wall and they are getting ready to blow their brains out. You have a 9-millimeter.

What are you going to do, Clay, my boy?

You've come to the frontier of choice, Clay. It's now or never. Either you shoot, or your family is dead. Which way are you going to go, Clay baby?

2. Hitler is about to sign the orders that will initiate Auschwitz and the other death camps. You have avoided detection because you're hidden in a closet. Suddenly, you have 5 minutes alone with Hitler.

Which way is it going to go, Clay baby? You say you don't want to pull the trigger? I understand. Who does? But it's all right there in front of you. Do you pop the bastard, or do you let millions of other human beings be tortured to death? It's all in your hands, Clay. It's you or nobody. You don't get to pass this one off onto someone else, Clay. It's up to you. How are you going to jump?

3. Zarqawi and his ghoulish buddies are getting ready to behead your sister. You have an M-16 and are standing in the wings. The sword is coming down. There's no time to philosophize. If you yell stop, the coward will behead your sister and kill you too. What's it going to be, bucko? Paul Martin is not going to help you decide. Pettigrew is not going to help you decide. Gandhi is not going to help you decide. You either kill them and save your sister, or watch her be beheaded and console yourself with childish thoughts about pacifism.

It's all in your hands, Clay, my boy. Where do you go from here?
Posted by Greg (outside Dallas) at November 10, 2005 05:17 PM

John Stewart Mill put it more eloquently than I ever could:"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings, which thinks that nothing is worth war, is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight; nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

Universal soldier didn't offend me, it just seemed redundant to post all the lyrics. It's actually a great tune.

It also violates copyright, but I don't see the editors pulling that. Maybe if I posted the lyrics for Guns & Roses Mr. Browstone they'd stay up too?

Thou shalt not kill. If you do kill, you can't be on the side of good. It's very simple.

I am a free man. Nobody can take away my freedom, only I can give it away. Even under Nazi oppression I could still decide to speak my mind if I thought it was worth the consequences. It would be my choice, and nothing could take away my power to make my own choices. My freedom is fully intact regardless of whatever anyone else does, and I don't believe I owe any thanks to anyone for what is a basic fact of life.

We go to war for reasons only we could hope to understand. Imagine being an alien watching from space as the cancer of war destroys another region of the planet. We put so much time and effort into building up such beautiful things, and then someone disagrees with someone else and all of a sudden in a frenzy of pointless rage we blast it all to pieces. In the long term the propaganda that started it all will fade away. It makes no sense.

I will take the situation I find myself in and I will try to improve it. I will not take up arms and destroy any of the progress our species has made. To honour anyone who does is perverse. Pity is what I feel. Pity for the people tricked into thinking there is any glory in slaughtering each other. Equal pity for them and for all of their victims.

So I don't wear a poppy.

Most Disgusting Article
I was most disgusted to read the rather disjointed article "Why I Don't Wear a Poppy" (Nov 9) by Clay McLeod and surprised that it was written by someone who is also responsible for influencing our youth in matters of respect and honour. It reminded me of someone who had probably been educated beyond their level of intelligence and ability to reason. All countries use cultural symbolism to represent the identity and values of their society Mr McLeod. To preserve and protect us from harm we ask the armed forces and the police to risk their lives in our defence. In return we agree to respect and acknowledge their contribution by wearing a poppy. Simply that ! The freedoms you and your students now enjoy were the result of their sacrifice. Perhaps someone should ask what your contribution has been aside from publishing rather disjointed, convoluted articles in the newspaper.

Veteran and Peacekeeper,
Kelowna

Good lord, are you kidding me???!!! Listen, before you go trying to tear down a

symbol, why don't you try taking some time to understand what it actually means

to people first?

I have never in my life witnessed the poppy being used to glorify nationalism,

or as a rallying cry, or any of the other assertations in your article... Every

Remeberance day that I have every seen has been a time of recounting the

personal stories of the horrors of war, the toll on the peoples that lived

through it. The poppy symbol comes from John MacRae's poem - written in a few

snatched moments in between his exhausting duties at a field hospital, trying

to find some hope within the insanity around him.

The poppy is the symbol of those who returned from that war, many disillusioned

with "glory for country and god", and fresh with the realization of what

happened in the concentration camps of WWII and on all the fields of battle in

both WWI and WWII. It is the symbol of the young lives that were lost in the

mud, because of the "imperialist rivalries and nationalistic competition " that

caused the damn wars, many of them asking "Why?" as their feet slowly developed

trenchfoot or their friends and companions died under machine-gun fire. It is

the symbol of awakening to what war really is to those who live it. It is the

symbol of their wish that their children and grandchildren would never have to

live through the horror of war, that they would instead take the lesson of

history and understand that war is a terrible, not a noble, thing, and there

was no glory to be had in it. This was why they hoped that wars they fought

would be "the war to end all wars"

The poppy is also worn by most Canadians as a symbol of personal respect to the

people they have known - fathers, brothers, grandfathers, uncles, and more -

who went off believing that they were doing the right thing, and came back from

that war with terrible memories to bear, and more often than not, psychological

scars. Buying a poppy financially supports the Legions that help support those

veterans.

It is a testment to all those, soldier or civilian, who suffered in those wars.

To all of those, Jewish, homosexual, gypsie, handicapped, even prisoners of

war, who suffered inhumane treatment, torture and death. It is a symbol that we

hope for peace.

You think that you are saying something profound; you not. You have utterly

failed to grasp what the poppy actually means to the vast majority of

Canadians. And your scenario of "what Ghandhi would have done" is simplistic

and betrays an inabilty to grasp the understanding of what happened to peoples'

psyches in those situations - which we can begin to understand by reading some

of their own words. (for example, the book Slaughterhouse Five)

You aargue for a symbol of peace. You say" I would gladly acknowledge their

suffering by wearing....whatever symbol was chosen to say "never again" to such

atrocities." You say you recognize"the efforts of individual soldiers...who

fought - and died - in these conflicts, believing that they defended and fought

for noble goals. I respect their spirit of duty, sacrifice and dedication to

causes that they saw as greater than themselves"

There is such a symbol. It is the poppy.

I wear mine every year with more pride than I can tell you. It is the most

profound, quietly dignified symbol of peace and hope I have ever known.

Thank you,
k

PS can people please stop using that "fighting for peace is like f**king for

viginity" line? It's crass, it's inane, it's childish, and it's an intellectual

turn-off. Did I mention it's inane?

At a school rememberance day assembly today a veteran dressed in his attire got up to clarify the meaning of the poppy. It is, he said, to remember the soldiers who died in WWI, WWII and the Korean War. That's it. Not for remembering ongoing war, not for remembering the innocent people who die as a result of war and it doesn't symbolize peace..it is for the soldiers who died and the soldiers only. So for all of you out there who insist of criticizing Clay for why he doesn't wear a poppy, it seems a lot of you are wearing it for the wrong reason. You've clearly created something in your mind to make it okay to wear the poppy, but maybe you need to think a bit more about why you wear it.

Wow ... look at what you did. That's a lot of commentary. I read your whole schpeil Clay and I don't like to wear a poppy either. You were able to articulate for me why that is? The sight of a plastic lapel poppy depresses me and I can certainly appreciate your perspective Clay.

PeaceLady:

It is possible that you are right about that, although that is not how it has been expressed to me in the past. My understanding is that it grew from a symbol of the soldier's graves to something bigger, as people reacted to the sensleness of the war. My understanding is that is connected to the movement of renouncing illusions about war in the aftermath of WWI and WWII.

Nevertheless, the poppy still stands for the words 'Never Again.' And that, I think is clear enough.

If the symbol has gained added meaning from what it orginally had (i.e. being about just the soldier's deaths), that meaning is not invalid. Symbols shift meaning over time;, just like language. I am focusing on what the poppy means to most people today. And most people understand it as a symbol, in general, of the horror of war, not the horror of war just as it relates to soldiers. Would you agree?

this must be beyond your wildest dream, clay, congratulations.
before this article fades into netherland, I must say you are the third "teacher" that I have experienced who used this technique to create dialogue in a static "classroom"...WAY TO GO
my apologies to steven, 7 hours ago or so. I should not have used the phrase neo nazis...caught up in the drama...I was actually refering to the posters who were calling for the censorship of clay's article, not to those who disagreed with him...there were and are far more than 4.5 who just disagree with clay.
I'm pretty sure i'm neither lefty or righty, just amused and caustic

People forget that our species has a very popular pastime for the past 3 million years. It is called tribal warfare. We also forget that unfortunately, violence IS the force to which all other forces bow to. What does this have to do with the poppy? How about rememberance? Absolutely nothing. Politics, particularly the lousy politics, are not what the poppy is meant to represent. I find it dreadful that a teacher would use the poppy and rememeberance day as a platform for views on political policy. Shame on you.

MJK:

Gasp! You mean -- Amerika's industrialists?

Clay has it right, in that had the West's industrial "robber" barons refused to deal with the 3rd Reich (it had severe financial problems as late as spring of 1939, and Amerikan industry STILL traded with Germany!), World War II would have not occured. In an easrlier event, had US Admiral Perry not forced industrialization on Japan, there may well have never been a Japanese Empire to ally itself with Germany. Or more recently regarding Japan, had Roosevelt not deliberately interferred with Japan's oil supplies, Japan may well have remained neutral in the late, great, war........

So many maybe's. One thing for sure. SOME people make an awful lot of money out of war. And in the great "tradition" of corporations, the "externalized costs" amounted to a mere few tens of millions of deaths.

McLeod, you can spout all that nonsense BECAUSE of those who gave their lives to protect your freedoms.

But make no mistake, you are a goof!

Calling this article disjointed is being overly generous. This guy is trying to twist an argument to fit his predefined viewpoint.

too many posters are getting upset about this article. just take it for what it is: another flipped out freak has managed to get his two cents worth. period.

kzhazze: Your explanation of the why of the Poppy is one of the most elegant I have ever seen. As a veteran, I thank you.

And for Clay McLeod: You, of course, have a right to your opinion. As I have a right to mine. And my opinion is that if you are one of my grandchildrens' teachers, you will soon find yourself minus a couple of students. Neither I not their parents want them taught your brand of revisionism.

Yes and as if we never hear from elliots $100 dolars worth?
Clay, if your piece does not agree with Ron Erwin and his fellow fascist’s views it must be "dribble"?
Actually Clay, while you need a bit of work on some rationale, you make some excellent points.You do us a great service in getting us to think about what the poopy actually means today. The irony is that fascists have usurped the poppy as grist for their vast propaganda mill, in order to promote their Vietnams, Afghanistans and Irans, but they can never take away the true symbolism of this flower. It will always commemorate the supreme sacrifice of honest working men, willing cannon fodder for causes which are and were perpetrated by their rulers, who conscripted or seduced them to these wars with all their persuasive might. Hence, the glorious war “to save us” from whatever evil one can concoct for the time. Canwest serves at least as well today,as Goebels did for his masters.
I wear my poppy proudly for just such marvelous civilian soldiers as those exemplified by the South Saskatchewan Regiment who gave their lives with incredible bravery. Only four short years before, many of this valiant regiment had been members of a "Bolshevik" union which walked peacefully into Estevan Saskatchewan, in a non violent, but "illegal" demonstration for wages better than the .35 cents an hour, for which they were toiling at the Bienfait coal mines. For their audacity six of them were shot dead by the RCMP, who always Maintain The Right.
My dad survived that "peaceful" march and he went on to also march in the horror of blood letting,which was World War II, as the same boys fought their way across Europe with 1000's of other working man comrades, who also had suffered pain through their mistreatment by their industrial bosses and their political puppets. Many were veterans of hobo jungles and some had survived the massacre at the aborted great labour trek to Ottawa in Regina or the unjust and vicious settling of the Winnpeg General strike.
Most of our guys went to the war to end wars, because McKenzie King promised a better life for them after that war.
On that part his political cronies partly delivered. Unions and the economy thrived following that war. This, mostly because the workers had learned how to cooperate and to take care of one and other during their years of ghastly travail. Unfortunately, the next generations progressively fumbled the metaphorical “torch" of McCrae's poem and today with the collusion of politicians and power mad international conglomerates they are naively and completely "breaking the faith" as they move toward a global domination of an elite ruling class.
So I wear a poppy to commemorate those brave men and women who fought; many dying, and for those who continue the struggle to resist the enemies of freedom and social justice from Campbell’s BC to Bush's America and against all those emulating or in partnership with the Enrons, Exons and Walmarts around the world.

I have to respond to one post.
The points discussed are quite frankly "bunk!".
Life is never this simple!
I have put the original post's comments in parenthesis.

(

)
- How can you be certain that shooting the combatants will solve the problem. What if there are thousands of combatants? You would need a hell of lot of bullets and the aim of a marksmen to boot. If you are in the middle of a war and/or a dictatorship your chances of stopping the execution and escaping are very low!

(2.

)
-The death camps in Nazi Germany were not the work of one man (Hitler). At Wannasee in 1942(I'm sorry but I think the spelling is wrong) the whole death camp system was discussed by high officials in the Nazi Party and the government.
Even if Hitler had been killed there were many others who supported the extermination of the Jews and others. Also, I should add that in 1944 there was an attempt to kill Hitler and it failed. A struck of good luck (I know it's hard to believe) saved Hitler because of where the bomb was placed.

(3.

)
-So unrealistic I can't even comment! Start living in the real world buddy! If life was this simple George W. Bush would be a saint and a saviour!

Kevan Hudson

I read this whole thing again, and it's just lame.
"Sadly, the poppy acts more as a rallying cry to support military solutions to the world's problems, instead of a heart-felt and genuine plea for an end to the suffering of war"
I don't know one person who looks at the poppy as a rallying cry. All those people crying at town cenitaphs on Nov. 11th aren't waving guns in the air and cheering. Many of the them lost brothers, husbands, and even sisters and mothers in war. And they have one common way to not grieve alone, Nov. 11th is it. And it's a day to remember why war is terrible, not why it is a thing of glory.
Plus some of your ideas about WW2 are off and make me wonder if you know your history correctly. Because Hitler at first wanted to share the world with Britian, but the British would not indulge. The second world war WAS about pure evil. I can't believe you could talk about mass extermination of people in one paragraph and in the very next say it was not about good vrs evil. Man.

One Remembrance Day factor not mentioned yet: the music of war, and the conflicting passions they trigger.

The thrilling marches set up a turmoil in my mind and heart. There's a powerful (and unfair) call in the brisk marching songs, and I'm sure that many a young man has joined the parade, marching off to war, not quite sure what took him there. Leave that stuff to the Pied Piper, I say.

There are tears and longing and even an exaggerated sense of belonging in the old wartime love songs ... and I love them as music and hate them for their destructive power.

In the same vein, I find it intolerable to venerate kings and queens whose primary function is IMO to remain on call to lead us into battle. The non-partisan call (ha ha) to battle and bloodshed.

But the poppy? Leave the poppy in peace.

For anyone who's interested, there's a very well written article in today's National Post "Canadians No Longer Remember" p A19 that summarizes the pitiful state of many Canadians' "culture of forgetfulness" and ignorance.

It struck me that the agrument is so intelligent and well-put, it starkly contrasts the pap I read here The Tyee.

The author, Rudyard Griffiths, explains "...studies show that upwards of half of history teachers do not have a university degree in the Arts, let alone history. The perception among schoiol administrators is that anyone can teach Canadian history".

To me, this website is more than a waste of time - it is intellectual poison.

It takes all kinds to make a world, including pacifists.

While I would think that the practice of pure pacifism in a combat situation is pretty much akin to saying, "Don't waste your bullets, I will dig the grave, jump into it, and pull it over myself for you," I appreciate the author's good intentions. Good intentions are nice.

Come clean Clay and admit what this story is really all about, the ideology and indirectly the beliefs of the Jehovah's Witnesses.

My father served throughout the first world war( the war to end all wars)My uncle was the last officer killed in the navy ay Galipoli) Two brothers and a sister served in WW2. My oldest brother had a hole blown in his side so big he was left for dead, but he fooled everyone by living ot a ripe old age, dying last year. My sister served overseas. Our family has a military background. I served 22 post war years anywhere they sent me. Most of my course was killed in the next aircraft over, as we were training on the C130's. ( The same aircraft we were training on, are still thundering around the world as ordered)am I a veteran. NO. Not according to the rules but did show up at a numbner of pretty dangeous spots from time to time.
So we frequent a legion beer hall NO was in one twice and that was enough for me.
Do we attend the poppy event. No. Do the ones in my family still alive attend Nov. 11. Now a all day holiday. No.

At 11 AM we stop for two minutes of silence and go on with our day, just as we did when we were kids.
The Legion now running out of members claim they don't glorify wars but like the parades.
Different strokes for different folks.

My father's helmet hangs on the wall above me, reminding me daily that it is a symbol of protection, of sacrifice, of necessary action in the face of military agression. The symbol is flawed - not every military action is defensible - but the bullet holes in the helmet are real. Also real was the bullet in my father's knee and the shrapnel in his shoulder that he carried with him for 61 years from the age of 21 until his death this January. If the holes in his helmet has been one inch to the left, I would not be writing this reply. Think about it.

But more importantly I think Mr. McLeod misses the point of the poppy as a symbol. My father faught and suffered against an aggressive military and political regime intent on forcing one world view on the world. He faught so that Mr. McLeod would have the freedom to grow up in a peaceloving country, to choose to get an education (or, in his case, skip his history class), and to choose how he wants to live his life and what ideas and opinions he wants to express.

This freedom of choice is what wearing a poppy means to me. And freedom comes at a price - a fact, sadly, that Mr. Mcleod fails to understand.

Many need to simplify matters into black or white, not wanting the deeper questions asked. We remember the sacrificed but do little to seek the reasons.

Following "the war to end all wars" what set nations at each others throats 20 years later?
In the depth of the Depression, did war substitute for useful employment?

The inescapable fact is, that there are war-lovers.

Of great suspicion is the jailing for life, until he died in jail, of one of the lesser Nazis, Rudolf Hess. Could he have saved millions of lives? Did a stubborn Churchill prolong the war? Consider the following:

In one of the most startling events of WWII Rudolf Hess made his famous solo airplane flight in a ME 110 to Scotland and arrived unexpectedly in May 1941. On landing he was immediately taken as a prisoner of war by the British, but he demanded to see the Marquess of Clydesdale, whom he said he had met at the 1936 Berlin Olympics. He claimed his mission was to seek a peace between Germany and Britain so that jointly they could wage war against the Soviet Union. Clydesdale had indeed attended the Olympics, but always claimed he had never met Hess, who by that time was becoming a marginal figure in the Third Reich; although because of personal loyalty based on their early joint struggles in the Nazi Party Hitler kept him in the public eye. Churchill refused to see Hess while the Nazis declared him mental unconscious ...

I won't merely remember. I will ask why.

I’m pretty conflicted about poppies too because a lot of things confuse me.

It’s just not clear to me that “we enjoy the freedom they died to protect” or that “we’d all be wearing swastikas instead of poppies if the Nazis had won.” That sort of sociopolitical armwaving simply isn’t useful thinking.

What is clear to me is that my grandfather went to fight the war at age 40, leaving his wife to raise 4 kids on her own. His contribution to the war effort was pushing pencils in the Quartermasters’ office by day and chasing skirts by night. Certainly repelling fascism has a number of facets, some more glorious than others, but my grandmother was mad as hell every November 11th when my grandfather squeezed into a uniform he was too fat for and demanded thanks for “protecting our freedom.”

It’s also clear to me though that it seems right to think about the people who die in war like we think about the missing girls on the downtown eastside: as people who never managed to become the people they wanted to be because their lives were cut short.

Neville Chamberlain in 1938 attempted the policy of appeasement. The Munich agreement basically gave away a big chunk of Czechowslovakia to Hitler. His reasoning was that because the War Reparations from WW 1 were so severe that they had utterly destroyed the German economy. The cost of a loaf of bread in inflation ravaged Germany was $ 1,000,000 Dmarks. Hitler said thanks very much then took Poland Denmark and of course France.

Hitler wasn't as we all know interested in peace he was building an Empire. One based on Slavery. When it was all said and done 100,000,000 people died in that war. It is thought in some circles that had Neville Chamberlain not tried to negotiotiate with Hitler the West would have armed and gone to confront Hitler far earlier. Hitler had been arming for at least 3 years before the West. Possibly saving countless millions of lives.

By the time Hitler came along peoples sick of War and most western economies devestated themselves by the depression they simply had no stomach for another war.

The Americans kept out of the war for 2 years and only joined after they were attacked by the Japanese at Pearl Harbour.

An ally of the West in this war was the Soviet Union who lost 10's of millions of it's citizens
far more than any other country yet once the war ended the West again retreated and Joseph Stalin went on to exterminate another 50 million of his own Soviet citizens. The West knew what kind of man Stalin was and how big a threat he was to the rest of the world. As evidanced by the cold war that lasted some 35 years.

With the West again unwilling to go after an evil dictator 10's of millions more died. Doing nothing has resulted in the deaths of many millions more than had the West armed and gone to war.

Lest we forget!

I have just returned from the cenotaph in North Burnaby. It was very cold, wet and miserable. I took the opportunity to talk to my daughter about how cold, wet and miserable the soldiers were in the trenches, for months at a time. The ceremony is a trip we make each year and the solemnity brings the horror home. I also listened to the President of the US this morning and I was sickened to hear him rant on again about WMD and the last election to justify the criminal acts currently underway. At a November 11 ceremony for F**K sake. It was a speech that has been given by political "leaders", as spokespersons for whatever economic/military elite is in power and has been given for centuries to justify sending others' children off to die for some relative truth. It disgusts me. But what is not so much disgusting, but truly pathetic, is the response from some of those attacking the story above as a slight on those who fought and died. Try reading the story without the blinders on and get beyond the simplistic reactions. There just may be truth that didn't appear in your history books because narrow knee jerk reactions keep the population docile. Docility will never end the killing.

Speedo:

Does the fact that your gradfather was a loser have to impact the meaning of the day for everyone?

Do you think that the French - who were overrun by the Germans - appreciated being liberated less because your grandfather was trying to cheat on your grandmother?

I doubt it. Don't spoil everyone else's fun. You're as bad as a Christmas Scrooge.

will remembrance now become another 'cause celebre' for the lefty freaks? don't they have enough of them already? what a bunch of clowns. i sometimes wonder what they're all so angry about. or is it just that they're all so stupid they just follow the nearest lead animal?

It seems to me that if men and women died for our freedoms, not wearing a poppy and having your own reasons for doing so is as much an homage to freedom as marching in lockstep with the poppy wearers.

It's merely a symbol. The real challenge is taking what was fought for and extending it to your enemies after the battle. If we had done that after the first world war and not demanded crippling reparations there might not have been such ripe conditions for a second.

I didn't wear a poppy this year. It didn't stop me from thinking about veterans, war, and remembrance in the least. If anything it concentrated my thoughts on the issues.

bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbjjjjjj

You really epitomize the reality hick schoolteacher. A reasoning so steeped in lib/left rhetoric it’s simply laughable. Pathetic. I guess it’s no surprise coming from a union of lawbreakers. Everyone wants peace but your Chamberlainic head in the sand mindset is nothing but a catalyst to the butchers of this world. You aid and abet these people with your weakness. Shame on you.

Darcy and Elliot expose themselves again as the cheap shallow people they are with their pathetic shots at Speedo and compassionate "lefties", particualrly those who think contrarily to their psychopathic, self agrandizement. You guys missed your chance with the SS. You would have loved it.

Wallace you have got it SO Right!

jimjo it looks from your editing job on your comment that you never had a good high school teacher,so how would you know one if you saw one?
Your pathetic name calling does nothing for your case. The issue is about the current significance of the poppy as a symbol, not the character of Mr. McLeod or his colleagues in the profession. You would have trouble figuring that out.
It might be that using the poppy symbol to promote war "heros" is part of the the sullying effect on that great emblem (1921) As for your "shame on you comment" to Mr McLeod, it is clear that you have no shame.

dgb; smoke another fatty.

Such a papery-frail flower yet it stands so strong against all the hideous machinery of war.

It is interesting to read how the vivid red poppy blazes with such different meaning for us all.

As for the wearing of it, I think, (as in everything) it is more about how one lives one's life than about what one wears... that a world of war or one of peace is determined by what as individuals we allow to happen...

That's why I like the small scale of remembrance... and the promise to not forget that this little red flower invokes...it asks not for some grand gesture to be made against war ...but that a simple and yet more difficult promise be kept.

Oh! An Objective View

"But an objective view of history, uncoloured by nationalistic sloganeering, casts a shadow of doubt on that premise."

Well, that's alright then. I had been looking for someone who was not born in a particular place or at a particular time or of a gender or any race, to tell us all how it is.

Thanks for that.

Seems this article is amplified by Bushes use of Rememberance day as a platform to support war, who would have known..........

elliot: Such a brilliant retort!Incapable of cogent discussion?

is that what you call that cliche-laden drivel?

I couldn't agree more. It's the blind leading the blinder. How bankrupt are they (the left) when they have to latch onto some of history's most endearing figures to prop up any argument they make? Gandhi must be rolling in his grave. The teacher's strike was much the same. Any respect I had for them was lost after they compared themselves and their cause to Ms.Parks and others. Give me a break. What an insult to history.

I wore a poppy this year as I do every year. Why? I am eternally grateful for my freedom. Its the sacrifices made by those heroic individuals which allows us to bare witness to this disgraceful shit. I am sickened by this article, diallogue or not, and embarassed as a Canadian.

Unfortunately I find myself thinking the same most of the time. "Independent" voice of BC is far-fetched when it comes to tripe such as this.

The Poppy is not about war. The Poppy is about remembering thousands of young men and women that never had the chance to become old enough, to remember.

McLeod’s premise is that soldiers are not worthy of remembrance because “wars are never completely black-and-white.” This is an example of “moral equivalence,” of failing to see any distinction between degrees of right and wrong. This is a critical failure, because in the real world, moral choices are always between degrees of right and wrong.

To equate the actions of Hitler with the internment of Japanese Canadians, and the wearing of a poppy with the wearing of a swastika, is to smash one’s moral compass and hide all the pieces.

McLeod claims “Unarguably, WWI was ‘for king and country,’ not freedom and democracy; its causes were rooted in European imperialism and nationalism.”

That view, although fashionable, is indeed quite arguable. It is perfectly reasonable to claim they did, as they believed they did, fight for democracy and that small nations might be free.

But McLeod denies even WWII had any preponderance of morality on either side: “WWII was a complex conflict based in the context of the resolution of WWI. Although that context gave fertile soil to the most notorious example of evil known to history - Hitler and the Nazis - the resulting conflict was more a continuation of imperialist rivalries and nationalistic competition than it was a legitimate battle between good and evil…”

This is double talk. If the most notorious example of evil known to history is on one side, supporting the other side is, necessarily, a moral issue.

Nor did Britain, France, the US, or Russia, manifestly, go to war to expand their empires or crush Germany.

The Korean conflict is McLeod’s coup de grace: “…the Korean War … conclusively demonstrates that we are not just recognizing the efforts of soldiers to protect freedom and democracy.”

Freedom and democracy were not at stake in Korea? Pure hindsight. Whatever his later crimes, Syngman Rhee was a democrat, democratically elected. Kim Il Sung refused scheduled elections, and invaded to seize the South.

Indeed, not even true in hindsight. Compare personal freedom or democracy in North and South Korea today. Would a different result to the Korean War not have mattered, for either?

But for McLeod, even just war is evil: in confronting evil, we should instead use passive resistance.

Does he advocate the same approach for criminal justice? If an armed rapist plies his trade in our stairwell, we ought not call the cops, but go out and bare our breast to shame him into better behaviour? To a child molester, we should offer our own children?

That should work.

And it is a false premise that Remembrance Day celebrates the victory of “freedom and democracy.” (“Remembrance Day uses the veneer of virtues like ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ to glorify military solutions to the world's problems.”) The point of the poppy is that it grew on the graves of the fallen.
If I wanted to promote war as a glorious, good thing, I would not choose the many deaths of WWI as my symbol.
It is a day, rather, for remembering soldiers’ sacrifice.
McLeod wants to commemorate the sufferings of those in the concentration camps. They did not die for “freedom and democracy.” He refuses honour to the sufferings of soldiers, because, he holds, they did not die for “freedom and democracy.” Is this consistent?

The average soldier believed he was fighting and dying for a cause. Isn’t it both illogical and cruel to claim that, if they were mistaken or misled, their sacrifice is less?

“Regardless of whether I'm right or if I'm deluded myself,” McLeod concludes, “the fact is that violence is a never ending cycle.”

This too is delusion. Violence does not self-perpetuate. Germany and Japan have not returned to war due to the violence used against them in WWII. Uganda has not warred because of the overthrow of Idi Amin.
As some wag once observed, “violence never solved anything—except Fascism, slavery, American independence, the survival of the Jewish race…”

well this story should fade before the day ends.
The politicians did their thing at assorted cenotaphs, lots of war stories and a few pages in the papers about good old uncle whomever.
The first world war guys are just about all gone, the second world war guys are getting too frail to sit in their chairs in front of the crowds much longer. And now we are drumming up the new folks from Canada's latest venture in peace keeping.

About tommorrow the old guys will sort of disappear till next year. The government will continue to stall paying their pensions, fighting them every step of the way, and the whole thing will resurface next year with less of them around.
Lots of talk about new aircract and assorted equipment to protect the troops but sadly most of it is talk. Per Ardua Ad Astra

jimjo,

I too was very disappointed with Clay McCleod’s article. However I am even more disappointed with attacks leveled at him as person. Although I strongly believe that he misses the true symbolic meaning of wearing the poppy, I do not see any reason to question his morals and ethics.

I do suggest that Mr. McCleod take a step back and reevaluate his position. There are some imperialistic elements at Remembrance Day ceremonies, but he is looking these ceremonies with a 21st Century eye and judging from his position of comfort.

Although McCleod’s writings are disappointing, yours are running a close second.

you spat….

Hmmmm, almost every school had a Remembrance Day ceremony that was supported and organized by the teachers. I wonder, what percentage of students (and their parents) followed up this school activity up the next day by attending services at the cenotaph.

The connection between today’s students and war veterans is weakening on a monthly basis. If we continue to reduce and equate the acts of sacrifice and remembrance to simple ideology, then we are learned nothing.

No matter what “side” one chooses to be on.

Moat:
That was intelligent, compassionate, and civil.

Go away!

(joke)

Hey, what about Spain, 1936? What about the Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion? Dr Norman Bethune? These were individual Canadians who recognized that the people of Spain had democratically elected a government for all the people, which the West didn't like. They didn't sit idly by, watching Generalissimo Francisco Franco attack the Spanish government. Canadians went to Spain and did what they could, in bloody battle with fascists.

Did the Western nations rush to support "freedumb and demockracy"? No. The civil war went on for 3 years ... with no help except to the wrong side.

When Hitler decided to test his young Luftwaffe by sending them to bomb a helpless Spanish city, Guernica, the war ended with Franco grabbing the role of Spanish Dictator for about 40 years. No complaints from Western governments about that.

In fact, even to this day 60 years later, there's no official recognition for the Mac-Paps. But that was probably the only "just" war in history.

Hey BC Mary

You know, as a huge Chomsky fan, I have often got caught up itemizing the examples of American and European indifference to just causes, and/or outright support of the bad guys.

Where I would differ, with all due respect, is not to forget these shames but to use them as additional motivation for my side (and it is my side, I don't see how it cannot be) to use its powers for good and not evil.

Are we not supposed to learn from our mistakes?

Divisions of opinion into “leftist” and “rightist” miss the boat here. I don’t think we’re doing each other, our enemies or ourselves any good, yapping at each other without trying to find any common ground.

I suspect we are seeing here differences between 2 worldviews based on 2 different personalities. People are talking past each other because they operate from completely different sets of assumptions about the way the world works.

On the one hand, we have pessimistic “realists” who believe the world is full of nutbars against whom we need to reserve the right to crush by force. And on the other, we have optimistic idealists who believe that there is no legitimate use of force and that other means are always possible. Realists calling idealists naïve and idealists calling realists fascists doesn’t really help anyone, people.

If we, as privileged, intelligent, well-off Canadians can’t get along with each other, how will we get along with people totally unlike us?

Speedo: But we are getting along. We are talking, albeit excitedly at times. And, like you say, perhaps past each other a bit, but surely dribs and drabs of our points are always going to be slightly misaimed.

No one has declared fatwa against each other here. Oh, JIm gets knocked around, Allan and I have got into it a bit, but that's just the circus. Isn't the Tyee talkback a sort of debating society? Would be pretty poor sport if we all just held hands.

This poor little ragged poppy has done all it can for 2005, I think.

Yammer commented,

Of course, it was just that this issue really struck at so many different levels. Even though most of us in Canada have never experienced war, it still remains in our consciousness. Many people can say that their father/mother/sister/uncle/aunt/brother/sister/son/daughter/grandfather/grandmother was never the same after the war.

We also have a immigrants from "non-western" countries that have "buried" wartime memories from lesser known conflicts. The theme of sacfrice for the greater good transcends political and ideological boundaries.

Will we be having this same debate 50 years from now?

I hope so, because it will mean that we still "remember".

Yammer,

Re: debating society

Despite Winston Churchill not wishing to speak with Rudolf Hess who had peace proposals quite early in the war, May 1941 (mentioned in an earlir post) many will recall his saying that "It is better to jaw jaw than war war."

He was certainly correct on that one.

Kzhazze, I would agree with you.

I certainly don't agree with war; and this article was nice in that it made me sit and think- Why DO I wear a poppy? Symbolizing "never again" sounds good to me; and because my mother remembers spending her fifth birthday in a shelter while bombs rained down on her homeland, because if Hitler had had his way the Maltese would have been wiped/starved out and I wounldn't be here, because my mum remembers arriving at school and being told that her school friends had been killed.

Because to this day she can't be in a small space without getting scared again; and after hearing all these stories as a child, I finally understand (sort of) how lucky I was to experience a childhood void of these horrors.

And the debate continues on and on and on...

The only bone of contention I have is a previous post that mentions Korea by "sroney".
I don't disagree with most of what you said but the following:

Sorry, Syngman Rhee was not a democrat. HE WAS A DICTATOR! I live in South Korea and I've read my history and talked to Koreans. You won't find anyone who remembers President Rhee in a positive light. He lived most of his life outside Korea and he was installed with US support. When he was finally overthrown he left South Korea a corrupt and poor country. Korea developed into a sweatshop society (until the 1970s). During the Korean War President Rhee sanctioned many massacres of real communists, sympathizers, imagined communists and opponents of his regime. The total numbers are not known. Also, his government provoked the North Koreans (yes, the North did start the full scale war by invading the South) into the Korean War of 1950-1953 with many border provocations. Whereas the later dictator, Park Chung Hee, is not popular among many Koreans he did accomplish more than Rhee. Park Chung Hee started the reconstruction of many important historical sites (Kyeongju, etc.), started the reforestation program and also oversaw the growth of the chaebols (LG, Hyundai, Samsung, Daewoo, etc.).
I'm not saying Kim Il Sung was an angel! Far from it. Look at his son Kim Jeong-Il and North Korea today. However, until the 1970s North Korea had more heavy industry than South Korea and a higher GNP.
So, the Korean War was not a war for democracy at the time it occurred. South Korea was a dictatorship before the war and after. However, if the West did not intervene I'm sure that South Korea would be worse off today.

Now endth the history lesson.

Kevan Hudson

A real low point, Tyee.

First, the article is drivel (not dribble) as so many have pointed out. Wearing a poppy is not glorifying war, it is remembering people like my father-in-law who had NO CHOICE in fighting.

Second, more and more young people are interested in Remembrance Day, and, no, they are not taught sentimental claptrap - they are actually taught "Dulce Et decorum Est" (to ARConn above). The message in the schools around Remembrance Day is pretty anti-war. The National Post gets it wrong again: the numbers are up at ceremonies.

Third, I'm actually seeing fairly few ad hominem attacks on Mr. McCleod (tempting though it is) Most people are making some pretty good points without stooping to the
level of his comments about the Nazis.

Don't publish his work again please,

I can't believe the amount of posters who are advocating censorship...if you can not accept the Tyee's right,indeed duty, to publish articles that do not fall within the parameters of everybody's world then stick with the sun and province.

Tyee...please continue to publish all shades of the spectrum.

gomer.

There are those, little interested in dialogue with any but those of like opinion. They are little better than those that would sabotage this awesome medium.

In earlier times they would have been called book-burners.

agreed ... still one wonders why they bother

Well, those who didn't wear poppies in Canada are not alone. None of the Quebec Bloc wore them either.

It would seem that wearing a poppy means different things to different people. A few of you folks reading this must have read the title as "Why YOU shouldn't wear a poppy" rather than "Why I Don't Wear a Poppy".
When I was starting out in high school, I wrote a poem for the poetry contest that was put on by the local legion. The teacher taking submissions told me that it was the best poem he'd ever recieved for the contest, but it would not win because it didn't glorify the sacrifice of the soldiers. He was right, I didn't even get an honourable mention; the poems that won were flag-waving ryhmes. I did not wear a poppy for many years. I wear one now to symbolise (for me) that the only sure thing you get out of war is blood-red death, and to remember those who've died in such violence.

Political correctness....perhaps the author is right.
After all, we can't say Merry Christmas anymore

The signifigance of wearing the poppy is to honour the soldiers who fought/died in the 1st world war. The poppy symbol was inspired by the poem "Flanders Field" written by John McCrae who died in that war.

Remembrance Day honours the soldiers of WWI WWII The Korean War and the poppy symbol become a way to say 'Thank You' to the men and women who fought so we could have the freedom we have to-day.

That also includes the right to agree to disagree - the right to wear a poppy or no. In some countries there is no choice.

I choose to wear a poppy to remember, that as a Canadian, I do have choices.

Thank you Veterans !!!

Morag

I haven't worn a poppy for years. I can't abide the glorification of the pathetic, abject insanity of war.

Altho' I see little benefit in following most of what they do in the US, I do agree with calling the 11th 'Veteran's Day;' that puts it in the proper arena. And we should have the courage to have a day of equal importance to condemn all wars.

Have I talked to a veteran? You bet I have. My father was an officer in both World Wars and in eight of the major battles in the Somme (and left his younger brother god knows where) that Canadians fought for the English and did what they couldn't do. And I particularly abhor the propaganda that still dupes real people into the whims of power-holders to suffer their man-made horrors.

Incidentally, I love the poppy. The wonderful landscape of colour it splashes across the Euro countryside is wonderful to see.

Peace
Janet

McLeod;
you just shot yourself in thr FACE ( not even your foot). You are a teacher? well let me tell you sweatheart..you would NOT be doing what you like if it were not for our dead.. They saved your ( and our) ass)
Of course you have the right to wear a poppy or not...That is why our brave and courageouse dead went to war.
I hope you do not have a sleepless night for the rest of your life.
My Dad was therte in WW11 saving your sorry ass. I was fortune, my dad made it home.

Mr. McLeod:

It is indeed sad that people like you totally misunderstand Remembrance Day and wearing the poppy. Your ignorance is unbelievably frustrating to the vast majority who understand.

Suffice to say - you are SO-OO-O wrong and SO-OO-O ignorant. You would not even have the freedom to be so ungrateful and ignorant if it weren't for all those we are wearing the poppy for.

Sadly,

Otter

For me wearing a poppy is to remember civilian soldiers who put a hold on their lives 50 plus wears ago in order to answer the needs of a cajoling state to fight wars concocted by the multi corps and their media lackeys. With apologies I do not wear one to commemorate veterans, as such, for many veterans make their living in places like Afghanistan, Bosnia and Mogadishu .
We are fortunate to have the very finest regulars in our country, but they too can be flawed, (TheRoyal-22nd and Brown, Matchlee - Funny, no brass took responsibility). Nonetheless, this quality regiment should never have been disbanded, simply confined to Canada for Canada's defense, where all of our quality military belong.
A country like Canada has no business fighting to justify the motives of greed crazed superpowers. We need the poppy to remind us that the boys in WW I were simple cannon fodder and that it could happen again. This time it might be a western superpower who seeks to dominate the world. In WW II they were told it was the war to end war. Ha! At least it appears to have put an end to conscription for now.
I am proud of our current professional military, but other than as a comrade I see no need to be grateful to them for being warriors. Our people are arguably the best armed forces for their size in the world. However, they are not heroes any more than a doctor, teacher, teacher or merchant who chooses his /her career while entering their business with eyes wide open relative to expectations and working conditions. I can admit that when you are clearly attacked war or slavery is inevitable. I am pretty certain I would not choose slavery.
I am equally certain that no preemptive war /invasion can ever be justified. The worst reality is that our media blatantly use Remembrance Day as an excuse to perpetuate the myth that all wars are fought for glory, or freedom and that all soldiers are there because they are full of patriotic zeal, intent on saving their country for their children, legitimate and illegitimate.

In his inestimable prose Elliot writes:

"is that what you call that cliche-laden drivel?"

But Brother Elliot himself reaches deep for a non-cliche-laden piece of drivel writing:

"dgb; smoke another fatty."

Analyzing Brother Elliot's prose further, one notes that he reduces his analysis to a sound bite:

"another flipped out freak has managed to get his two cents worth. period.

And further:

"what a bunch of clowns."

He finally concludes there is something wrong with the other posters with this pithy piece:

"i sometimes wonder what they're all so angry about."

I note that other posters appear to be writing about the subject matter is the piece. So, my question Elliot is: what is it that you are so angry about?

Hey Wallace; You've got far too much time on your hands. Maybe you should get a job.

I gotta chime in here on the constant "they fought so you could be free" meme that Remembrance Day poppy boosters are parroting.

Lest we forget what? The way I understand it, we're supposed to remember the "Great War" as a pointless exercise in pre-ordained carnage that served no point except serving up millions to a meat grinder. The war to end all wars indeed. The breeding ground for the even bigger catastrophe that followed is all WW1 turned out to be. Doesn't 'lest we forget' mean don't send more boys to the slaughter? Don't rely on violence to solve problems? We haven't learned that lesson yet.

WW2 certainly would seem to qualify as a righteous struggle, but if a few more Germans (and enabling anti-Semites the world over) had been possessed of the sack and the compassion to stand up for what's right instead of what's expedient old Adolf would have remained a frustrated artist and nothing more.

Korea and Vietnam were wars to protect us from some "Red menace" that if the capitalists had been as confident of their economic system as they claim, they could have simply waited the rotten pinkos out and let communism fail of its own accord.

Which is not to say that individual and collective acts of heroism and bravery aren't worth celebrating in and of themselves. But please don't ascribe grand motives to these conflicts. All they were, all most wars have ever been IMO, is the movement of flesh and blood chess pieces by old men more concerned with money and imaginary lines on a map than any grand ideas of freedom and democracy.

Somebody mentioned Stalin up-thread, and how you reconcile the horror of the gulags with Remembrance Day is beyond me.

Another said that Gandhi's tactics would useless against a dictator. I disagree. If you're going to fight to preserve what you believe in, or not-fight for what you believe in, dead is still dead. So, the method of dissent is largely moot. And, a dictator can't kill everyone for fairly obvious reasons. When we all stand together, it gets harder and harder to kill individuals.

So, I'll wear a poppy to honour the war dead if I choose, but give me a picture of the generals and politicians who sent them to their deaths rather than talk out the problem like adults, to spit on, too. Because that's all they deserve.

Wow, yet another piece of cliche-laden drivel from Elliot. Very impressive.

Quote:
"Freedom and democracy were not at stake in Korea? Pure hindsight. Whatever his later crimes, Syngman Rhee was a democrat, democratically elected. Kim Il Sung refused scheduled elections, and invaded to seize the South. "

Kevan Hudson disputes my claim that the Korean War really was fought for democracy, and writes:

Sorry, Syngman Rhee was not a democrat. HE WAS A DICTATOR! I live in South Korea and I've read my history and talked to Koreans.

If I may respond:

No, Syngman Rhee was in principle a democrat, a protégé of Woodrow Wilson at Princeton. He was elected in UN-supervised elections, and had been the head of the Korean government in exile for many years before.

In later years, his regime grew corrupt and political in the worst sense, albeit still parliamentary and democratic in formal terms. But only the period 1948 to 1953 is relevant here.

Rhee was not installed with US support. That is a common myth among anti-American Korean nationalists. Rhee was not the US’s first choice, and he was voted president of an ad hoc provisional government before the first US troops arrived. His provisional government in exile had previously been recognized internationally, including by the Soviet Union.

The fact that Korea was still poor under his regime has no relevance; any more than economic success under Park Chung Hee (or Hitler) makes the latter a democrat.

Neither is it relevant that Rhee bloodily suppressed an insurrection. So did Abraham Lincoln.

Since the release of the Soviet government files from the period, there is no question who started the Korean War.

As to the North being more developed than the South until 1970, this too is not relevant. But it has to do with most of Korea’s natural resources being in the North. At partition, the North was more developed than the South. Its position has declined steadily since.

You offer no added insight here by living in Korea. I was in Korea for six and a half years myself.

Excellent article. Amazing how many people take this as an attack on veterans, when in fact you took great pains in your piece to dispel that notion. People should read more carefully.

Lets not forget the Nazi Party got lots of funding from the US while Canadians were fighting germans off before the US entered the war.

http://www.rense.com/general40/bushfamilyfundedhitler.htm

thats just one example there are alot more.

I am disappointed the Tyee ran this piece. Being controversial, other media got interested. Vancouver's CBC 1 morning show interviewed Clay McLeod, who came across as an armchair leftie, sounding uncomfortable with his feeble, hindsight is 20/20 argument. I turned the radio off after 30 seconds. I encourage people constantly to check out The Tyee as an alternate news source, since CanWest-Global has a near-monopoly on the news business in BC. This piece, and the resulting radio interview, effectively discredit The Tyee.

As for the topic of wearing a poppy, I did not grow up hearing a lot of military stories. My father had health problems (later corrected by surgery) as a young man and did not fight. He worked in a support capacity, so I heard those stories. When I was in high school in the early 1970s we had Remembrance Day assemblies and we did not understand so we behaved disrespectfully. One year our principal was quite upset as he saw many friends die at Normandy. Two things finally awakened me. First, driving around France for three weeks in 1990. It is hard to describe the cumulative impact of seeing acres and acres of immaculately-tended military cemetaries honouring the soldiers who died liberating France. The other was fatherhood. Since I've become a father, Remembrance Day has developed a strong emotional impact for me, recognizing and remembering the loss and the sacrifice of many men and women for our freedom.

The poppy does not glorify or celebrate war. It is a symbol we wear once a year to honour the sacrifice of so many. It is that sacrifice that bought us the freedom to freely express dissent and disagreement. To look at a society ridden with pressure to conform, track down the Dutch-made documentary that ran at the recent Vancouver International Film Festival, "A Day in the life of North Korea".

If it's not too late to comment on this "late" topic. I never lived in wartime (born 1959 Canada), so I can't really relate to the social dynamic of the times. That said, humans have a long history of war and conflict, and we are unlikely to change overnight. But the fact is, deep down we all want peace. Our ignorance is that we have forgotten how to get it. In the mean time our guilt over eons of death and strife make us look for reasons to justify and even glorify war, which is really murder and terrorism in disguise. There are always good reason for war, like preventing an invasion, or overturning fascism. But history shows that in the long run war doesn't really change anything. Did we really get rid of fascism with the fall of Hitler or Stalin? Probably not. If think Lennon was right: Give peace a chance. Have we ever really sincerly done that?...

I commend Mr. McLeod for wearing a peace symbol on Remembrance day. What a pity he can't leave it at that.

If Mr McLeod decides to have poppies represent - for him - something of which he disapproves, of course he shouldn't wear one. However he has no right to assert that his poppy-symbolism is some kind of truth about poppies and the reasons people wear them; or the meanings they ascribe to them. He is intellectually careless if not downright dishonest to do so. I agree with those who are disturbed to see a teacher declaim in this manner.

It also seems clear to me that his comments will be needlessly offensive to large numbers of people and that he would have been well aware of the fact when he wrote them.

Some have suggested that the article was intended to create discussion. I suggest that a more rational commentary would have generated a greater proportion of thoughtful responses. I find much of Mr McLeod's item to be a mixture of rhetoric, supposition, and attitude masquerading as fact - As a single small example: "Unarguably, WWI was 'for king and country.'" What is that supposed to mean? I was about to take issue with the presumptious use of the word "unarguably," but on second thoughts, sure enough, there's nothing there that's clear enough to argue over.

I share Mr Mcleod's "what if" wonderings and his hatred of war. I question whether it's preferable to die fighting than refusing to fight. I question why a compatriot's life is automatically assumed to have more value than an alien's. I question whether, when or to what extent freedom should be given more importance than peace. When remembering WW2 - the only one which has directly affected my life - I feel a great sadness for those of all nationalities who died, were injured or had the course of their lives twisted. But none of this gives me or Mr Mcleod any more knowledge on the practical possibility of avoiding war etc. than anyone else. And it certainly doesn't give us the right to scorn the poppy and call it a symbol of ...... well, we won't go over that again.

"I do insist on exercising my freedom by not honouring .... etc." -- There's really no need for insistence, is there Mr McLeod? The poppy police aren't after you.

Peace.

All that rage can only mean one thing: McLeod is right on. Wearing the poppy asserts war makes sense. "Dulce et decorum est propatria mori."

No mattter how soldiers end up in the trenches, through the naivety of youth, blind chance, a sense of duty, failed leadership... lies told, the unbending will of tyrants...they end up on the fields of hell ultimately alone....in a place none of us would want to be.

The poppy is for them... in remembrance of the sacrifice of life that comes with the horror of war... and whether we want to admit it or not...in the inescapeable complicity that we all share in the failure called War.

Although I agree on many of your arguments against war and for peace, I must disagree with what appears to be your main arguement: the poppy is a symbol which glorifies war.

For me, the poppy has interesting symbolic meaning. From a distance, a field of poppies must look like a field of blood; the poppy in the lapel, like a bullet wound. These are reminders of the terrible price of war, (perhaps a bit outdated in our world of hightech weapons) for either side. Lest we forget!

Secondly, poppies grew exactly there, where the landscape was totally descimated by bombardments, (or amoung the crosses), where there had been much death. Lest we forget!

Finally, anyone who has picked a wild poppy will know that it is a thing of beauty, yet also a fragile plant that wilts quickly; much like a human life. Lest we forget!

Hello "sroney" ^.^

Well, let the debate rage on!

Firstly, I must state that elections by themselve do not equal democracy. Suharto in Indonesia had elections complete with three major parties, and the Communists of the Soviet Union also had elections. I would never call either regime democratic!

Yes, President Rhee spend about four decades in the USA. He did go to Princeton.
However, he was not elected President in 1948 in national elections! He was appointed President by a vote in the National Assembly. The United Nations did not supervise the elections. A committe called UNTCOK (United Nations Temporary Commission on Korea) was sent to OBSERVE the elections.

OK. Let's deal with 1948 to 1953. In the 1948 election most parties and political figures refused to participate (including the centrist Kim Kuy-sik and Kim Ku).In 1952 Rhee declared martial law, arrested 12 members of the National Assembly so he could pass a law for direct Presidential elections. In 1948 there were two rebellions: Suncheon-Yeosu and Jeju. The Suncheon-Yeosu Rebellion was started by soldiers. Over 1,000 people were killed. Between 15,000 to 30,000 people were killed in the much longer Jeju Rebellion. In the 1990s the South Korean government apologized for some of the massacres by the government of the time.

Yes, Rhee was installed with US support. He arrived in 1945 aboard General MacArthur's plane and he was introduced to the Korean public by General Hodge on October 20th, 1945. From 1945 to 1948 the Americans controlled South Korea. The Republic was declared on August 15, 1948 (the first National Assembly was elected on May 10, 1948). Many of Rhee's advisors were Americans like Robert Oliver and Harold Noble. However, much like Chalabi in Iraq Rhee was not the choice of the State Department.

Yes, there is still much debate. What is not debatable is that both sides (North and South) were involved in border skirmishes in 1949. Both sides seemed to be preparing for war by raising monies and support from their respective sponsors.

Hey, I don't remember calling Park Chung Hee a democrat! He was a dictator too!

Well, sadly I have to disagree yet again. I have spoken to many Koreans (icluding History Professors) and I have learned much. You won't find any fondness for President Rhee here, but you will find some for President Park Chung Hee.

Have a good day! AND I'm not a member of the Park Chung Hee Fan Club!

Kevan Hudson

Kevan, you may have spoken to some history professors; I guided historical tours of Seoul, one of which featured both Park Chung Hee's and Syngman Rhee's tombs. I was also, while I was there and for some years after, a regular columnist on Korean history and culture for a variety of Korean publications, including the Joongang Ilbo and the Korea Herald.

UN observers certified the election of Syngman Rhee as legitimate. That is a huge difference from rigged elections in the Soviet Union or Indonesia. To think it is relevant that he was not directly elected, but chosen by the Assembly, is to call the governments of Britain, Canada, and Australia undemocratic.

It was not just the US State Department who did not want Rhee. General Hodge is also on record as opposing his election. This was not a matter of differing opinions within the US government.

Rhgew had been named president in absentia by the ad hoc government that formed before the Americans arrived. The Americans refused to recognize this government. Nevertheles, Rhee emerged again. As to the Americans controlling things in Korea 1945-1950, they had only 472 officers and men, total, in the country when the North attacked in 1950.

Whether Koreans remember Rhee fondly now does not relate to the question of whether he was a democrat, any more than does the level of prosperity under his regime, or whether he suppressed an insurrection.

Nobody wants war. How often we hear that. And how ironic that on the heels of Armistice Day a major daily runs a full-page article on private militia men who "crave combat"

One who rents out these killers admits to having little interest in politics. That's why he's called a mercenary, like the mindless thugs he hires out. Those too much influenced by Hollywood may call them soldiers of fortune.

Then a film maker would have us feel sympathy for a bunch of trained snipers because they are bored out of their skulls for lack of living skulls to eviscerate from their cowardly concealment

As long as such sub-human activity persists, wearing a poppy, or not, seems of little relevance.

20/20 hindsight. During much of the Cold War, the Soviets had numerical superiority with conventional forces. The collapse of Russian communism was not anticipated even in the early 1980s.

What are you talking about? WWII ended German and Italian fascism.

The fact that the west did not stand up to mass-murdering, gulag-building Soviet totalitarianism sooner, in Stalin's lifetime, is a poor reflection on us. Stalin sent millions off to their death in the gulag or through state-sponsored starvation in Georgia and the Ukraine. It amazes me that some people who should know better still do not believe this and act as apologists for the former USSR.

We have lived through such peace and prosperity in Canada for so long that many Canadians have forgotten that the world is still a very harsh place, where there are bad people who would run roughshod over our human rights if we weren't able to defend them.

Hello "sroney" ^o^

It has been fun debating and discussing South Korea with you.

I guess that in the end we should agree to disagree. It seems our definitions of what is a fully functioning democracy differ.
It could be a reflection of our personal ideologies, age, or even where we live/lived in South Korea. I currently live in Suncheon, Chollanamdo.

I do have one request from you. If you could tell me your name I would be interested in searching for some of your articles. After hearing that you wrote some articles for newspapers I must admit that I am curious. I'm sure I will learn something even if I disagree with some points.

I bet you miss some of the good Korea food, eh ?

Kevan Hudson
(this is my real name as you can google it and find that I was an activist in the Richmond/Vancouver area)