Memorial Day Weekend

[JagFarlane]

Memorial Day was officially proclaimed on 5 May 1868 by General John Logan, national commander of the Grand Army of the Republic, in his General Order No. 11, and was first observed on 30 May 1868, when flowers were placed on the graves of Union and Confederate soldiers at Arlington National Cemetery. The first state to officially recognize the holiday was New York in 1873. By 1890 it was recognized by all of the northern states. The South refused to acknowledge the day, honoring their dead on separate days until after World War I (when the holiday changed from honoring just those who died fighting in the Civil War to honoring Americans who died fighting in any war). It is now celebrated in almost every State on the last Monday in May (passed by Congress with the National Holiday Act of 1971 (P.L. 90 - 363) to ensure a three day weekend for Federal holidays), though several southern states have an additional separate day for honoring the Confederate war dead: January 19 in Texas, April 26 in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and Mississippi; May 10 in South Carolina; and June 3 (Jefferson Davis' birthday) in Louisiana and Tennessee.

 

[JagFarlane]

A few of the more famous posters from WWII:

http://www.propagandaposters.us/wecando.jpg

http://www.propagandaposters.us/sacrific.jpg


http://www.propagandaposters.us/dec7.jpg

 

[JagFarlane]

Broken Promises?

The Next Greatest Generation?

 

[starrkers]

Memorial Day was officially proclaimed on 5 May 1868 by General John Logan, national commander of the Grand Army of the Republic, in his General Order No. 11, and was first observed on 30 May 1868, when flowers were placed on the graves of Union and Confederate soldiers at Arlington National Cemetery. The first state to officially recognize the holiday was New York in 1873. By 1890 it was recognized by all of the northern states. The South refused to acknowledge the day, honoring their dead on separate days until after World War I (when the holiday changed from honoring just those who died fighting in the Civil War to honoring Americans who died fighting in any war). It is now celebrated in almost every State on the last Monday in May (passed by Congress with the National Holiday Act of 1971 (P.L. 90 - 363) to ensure a three day weekend for Federal holidays), though several southern states have an additional separate day for honoring the Confederate war dead: January 19 in Texas, April 26 in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and Mississippi; May 10 in South Carolina; and June 3 (Jefferson Davis' birthday) in Louisiana and Tennessee.

Aah, so your Memorial Day is like our Anzac Day (March 25 - the day the ANZAC forces landed on Gallipoli Peninsula in WW1).

 

[JagFarlane]

Aah, so your Memorial Day is like our Anzac Day (March 25 - the day the ANZAC forces landed on Gallipoli Peninsula in WW1).

-nods- Quite similiar

 

[sr71plt]

You and sr have both chosen a phenomenally stupid moment for this debate. I'm far from a rah-rah flag-waving my-country-right-or-wrong American; neither am I shy about political debates, on this or any issue. But your timing is appalling. Memorial Day is about the dead and those who grieve for them. Period. To enter the thread with an attitude that is dismissive of such a holiday, and then complain when you get an antagonistic response, is disingenuous at best. And no, you don't need to remind me that your attack isn't "personal." If you attacked me personally, I wouldn't give a damn. Since I haven't personally died in battle, or lost an immediate family member in one, I don't take it personally. That doesn't make it any less offensive.

You should both be ashamed of yourselves. Grow up.

BTW, there is a "US equivalent" of your missing fence posts. Food and fuel were rationed; people were asked to give up a lot of what had been considered necessities, for the sake of the war effort. But Memorial Day isn't a remembrance of discomfort and sacrifice on the home front, in that or any war. It's about the people who died. A lot of them died over there. Show some respect, or shut up.

Again, Memorial Day is about honoring those who gave their lives in combat; it's not about reconciliation--and my postings were reaction to the postings of someone who wanted to denigrate the meaning of the event on a Memorial Day thread.

And, again, who elected you Judge Joe Brown?

 

[Trombonus]

I had the most amazing weekend of my life. I played in an alumni band for the retiring director of my old community college. It was so great playing in that old music room and seeing all my old friends who had flown over from all across the world. We sat down and played our hearts out, and it was like we'd never left. We just picked up right where we left off. Then we'd go and hang out after rehearsals which was awesome. We'd talk about what we were doing these days, and about memories from our days at this school. Then we played the concert. Let me tell you, this was the best band BY FAR that I've ever played in. I must have stepped up my game ten levels because I had never played so well in my life. It was a fun and very emotional weekend, and I'm sad to see it end so soon.

As for today, well I have to catch up on all the work I was supposed to do this weekend. I have to wash my car, start and finish a project that's due tomorrow, and unpack my stuff. It'll be a long day.

 

[fifty5]

Memorial Day was officially proclaimed on 5 May 1868 by General John Logan, national commander of the Grand Army of the Republic, in his General Order No. 11, and was first observed on 30 May 1868, when flowers were placed on the graves of Union and Confederate soldiers at Arlington National Cemetery. The first state to officially recognize the holiday was New York in 1873. By 1890 it was recognized by all of the northern states. The South refused to acknowledge the day, honoring their dead on separate days until after World War I (when the holiday changed from honoring just those who died fighting in the Civil War to honoring Americans who died fighting in any war). It is now celebrated in almost every State on the last Monday in May (passed by Congress with the National Holiday Act of 1971 (P.L. 90 - 363) to ensure a three day weekend for Federal holidays), though several southern states have an additional separate day for honoring the Confederate war dead: January 19 in Texas, April 26 in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and Mississippi; May 10 in South Carolina; and June 3 (Jefferson Davis' birthday) in Louisiana and Tennessee.

Thanks for the details, Jag - and more thanks to John Logan for giving honour to the dead from both sides.

To me the awesome aspect of that is that it recognises that above and beyond the cause in question, sacrificing one's life to the cause is noble.

I find it hopeful that some European Remembrance Day ceremonies have also started to include the 'enemy' in their scope - honouring the axis dead as well as the allied ones.

In doing so, the sacrifice made by Private Joe (and Johann) - often conscripts - is recognised and transcends issues of the virtues and otherwise of the causes for which they died. That's a totally different issue.

And to me the honour is due no matter whether the corpse wears a uniform or not - that has as little relevance as the specific cause. The civilian dead in Coventry, Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki (and more recent examples in the Balkans, Africa and Arabia) also deserve the same honour.

As I say, I find that awesome. I still think it's only a halfway house. I yearn for the day when such sacrifice is no longer necessary. War is simply wrong (though when the enemy is SO evil, sometimes still occasionally necessary).

To mention the unmentionable - it would be equally right to honour those sufficiently misguided to be suicide-bombers. Just as with the American Civil War, they might be fighting for the wrong thing, but they still make the ultimate sacrifice.

John Logan was a greater humanitarian than most of us achieve 140 years later.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

A few of the more famous posters from WWII:

http://www.propagandaposters.us/wecando.jpg

http://www.propagandaposters.us/sacrific.jpg


http://www.propagandaposters.us/dec7.jpg

Some years back Smithsonian magazine did an article on WWII propaganda posters. There was one that showed scenes from a romanticized America around the edges. It was entitled "This We'll Defend!" I think and in the middle was Uncle Sam buckling on a gunbelt with hogleg. Awesome! Unfortunately, I've never seen a copy of it since. If anyone has a line on a copy or a repro of it, I'd love to hang it over my guncase . . .

 

[shereads]

T
To mention the unmentionable - it would be equally right to honour those sufficiently misguided to be suicide-bombers. Just as with the American Civil War, they might be fighting for the wrong thing, but they still make the ultimate sacrifice.

Oh yes. We need to encourage more brave men and women to strap bombs to themselves and detonate them on public buses and in schoolyards and crowded shopping centers, by honoring those who have gone before. Just because a person targets civilians doesn't mean his own sacrifice required any less gumption.

What are you on, anyway? I want to jot down the names of your meds so I can avoid them.

Seriously, fif: even courage, when it is misdirected, can be mean, stupid, and beneath contempt. Hitler, too, can be said to have died for his beliefs. Let's not have a parade for him, though.

 

[fifty5]

Oh yes. We need to encourage more brave men and women to strap bombs to themselves and detonate them on public buses and in schoolyards and crowded shopping centers, by honoring those who have gone before. Just because a person targets civilians doesn't mean his own sacrifice required any less gumption.

What are you on, anyway? I want to jot down the names of your meds so I can avoid them.

Seriously, fif: even courage, when it is misdirected, can be mean, stupid, and beneath contempt. Hitler, too, can be said to have died for his beliefs. Let's not have a parade for him, though.

Remember that the A-bombs dropped on on Hiroshima and Nagasaki also targeted civilians, schools and hospitals - just as did Bomber Harris's raids on Dresden (and Hitler's on Coventry). However much we may hate it, that approach has been used by both US and UK governments - just more effectively than Germany's and Japan's equivalent. Napalm in Vietnam and cluster bombs and land mines have been used more recently - and neither of those weapons show any discrimination about their victims.

And I don't know how to categorise the servicemen that were used as guinea-pigs for the effects of radiation from A-bomb tests...

Sure the ideals for which contemporary suicide bombers and kamikaze pilots are and were wrong, but they were responsible for their personal sacrifice, while they weren't responsible for the cause for which they died. All of them are victims (whether misled or even mentally disturbed). Read Catch-22 for an extended discussion of sanity versus insanity in this context.

Yes, you are right that suicide bombing is evil, but the way to combat this evil is to transcend it. Face it, there isn't a practicable punishment for a suicide bomber. The only solution is to show them that WE aren't as evil as they think. If, just like the original Memorial Day, we can show that we can throw out the cause for which they die and simply honour the death, that just might be the way to show the next generation that this isn't the way.

The effectiveness of telling extremists they are wrong has already been demonstrated - it doesn't work. Telling them that their enemy honours their dead, despite it being enemy action, attacks their belief system at its core.

Killing is very, very rarely a solution - dying may be. Cold-bloodedly taking the risk of dying always shows courage - and actually making that sacrifice is worthy of honour. The cause for which people risk and suffer death is something entirely separate.

The American general who instituted Memorial Day did transcend the cause for which those who died did so - even though one side died for the right to own slaves. I think he was right. I think, if you take time out to consider it in depth, you might too.

 

[oggbashan]

Memorial Day is US-Specific, as ANZAC day is to Australia and New Zealand.

I am grateful to the US service people who died or were injured defending our freedoms, and to the ANZACs, and to other British UK, Empire and Commonwealth forces including those from countries that are no longer "British". I am proud to have known some US citizens who landed in France on D-Day, as well as many UK citizens who were there. As far as possible I have thanked them personally.

Og

PSs
As an aside I think the Eureka Stockade memorial has the right balance. It commemorates those who died "for freedom" and those who died "for law and order"...

I disagree with fifty5 above. The US Civil War was far more complex than about slavery. As with all Civil Wars, the pain on both sides takes a long time to heal.

 

[JagFarlane]

I disagree with fifty5 above. The US Civil War was far more complex than about slavery. As with all Civil Wars, the pain on both sides takes a long time to heal.

The US Civil War had more to do with economics and ways of life than with slavery. Yes, it was a factor, but nowhere near as large a factor than many want to believe. The war tended more to have to do with the fact that the North was more industrial whilst the South was more into farming. This would be one of the reasons why the North won, much like in WWII, it was being able to produce vast quantities of equipment at a faster rate. The South had alliances with Britain, whom aimed for things like cheap cotton, and was supplied by Britain. But even this help wasn't enough to help them overcome the massive industrialization of the North.

 

[oggbashan]

The US Civil War had more to do with economics and ways of life than with slavery. Yes, it was a factor, but nowhere near as large a factor than many want to believe. The war tended more to have to do with the fact that the North was more industrial whilst the South was more into farming. This would be one of the reasons why the North won, much like in WWII, it was being able to produce vast quantities of equipment at a faster rate. The South had alliances with Britain, whom aimed for things like cheap cotton, and was supplied by Britain. But even this help wasn't enough to help them overcome the massive industrialization of the North.

We Brits were ecumenical - we supplied BOTH sides. British rifle muskets were used by North and South. Why not? We'd supply arms to anyone who'd pay.

An unusual incident during the US Civil War is that cotton workers in Lancashire refused to work cotton imported from the South because of their abhorrence of slavery. It was one of the first examples of a poor workforce being willing to make personal sacrifices for others.

Og

 

[sr71plt]

We Brits were ecumenical - we supplied BOTH sides. British rifle muskets were used by North and South. Why not? We'd supply arms to anyone who'd pay.

An unusual incident during the US Civil War is that cotton workers in Lancashire refused to work cotton imported from the South because of their abhorrence of slavery. It was one of the first examples of a poor workforce being willing to make personal sacrifices for others.

Og

Aw, yes, (the United States is ecumenical in that way now--we supply much of what is used against us around the world, not to mention domestically). But it is true, I think, that England needed/wanted much more back from the American South in the American Civil War than from the American North, so their sympathies were with the South.

I thought the southerners had recovered by now from the Civil War, but I had a discussion about this with a former lover a couple of days ago while standing on the river walk in Charleston and looking out at Fort Sumter (the first shot of the war). I wasn't convinced until we were walking through Savannah yesterday and jostled by a belligerent little guy wearing a Confederate cap and looking quite ready to go off to fight the North again. I was happy to get the rear view of him, however; there was a bullet hole on the back of his cap.

 

[JagFarlane]

Aw, yes, (the United States is ecumenical in that way now--we supply much of what is used against us around the world, not to mention domestically). But it is true, I think, that England needed/wanted much more back from the American South in the American Civil War than from the American North, so their sympathies were with the South.

I thought the southerners had recovered by now from the Civil War, but I had a discussion about this with a former lover a couple of days ago while standing on the river walk in Charleston and looking out at Fort Sumter (the first shot of the war). I wasn't convinced until we were walking through Savannah yesterday and jostled by a belligerent little guy wearing a Confederate cap and looking quite ready to go off to fight the North again. I was happy to get the rear view of him, however; there was a bullet hole on the back of his cap.

No, actually having lived in the South briefly, I can say they are still very proud of their heritage and of being known as rebels. As one t-shirt emblazoned with Civil War flags stated "Rebel born, Rebel Bred, and when I die, I'll be Rebel Dead". Someone I worked with, was extremely proud of this heritage, to the point he hated $5 bills and pennies [Lincolns image], and imported water known as "Dixie Dew" just because it had the Confederate flag on the label.

 

[sr71plt]

No, actually having lived in the South briefly, I can say they are still very proud of their heritage and of being known as rebels. As one t-shirt emblazoned with Civil War flags stated "Rebel born, Rebel Bred, and when I die, I'll be Rebel Dead". Someone I worked with, was extremely proud of this heritage, to the point he hated $5 bills and pennies [Lincolns image], and imported water known as "Dixie Dew" just because it had the Confederate flag on the label.

I live in Central Virginia in the heart of it all. We've recovered from that (although my immediate area probably never ever got past Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe to begin with). But then we are a blue dot in a sea of red.

 

[fifty5]

PS I disagree with fifty5 above. The US Civil War was far more complex than about slavery. As with all Civil Wars, the pain on both sides takes a long time to heal.

I agree with you, Ogg, but the full detail isn't germane to the point I was trying to argue. Slavery was one significant factor and it could thus be argued that this was a bad cause. My praise is for the General who deliberately put that issue aside and honoured the dead on both sides of the conflict, deliberately including those who, presumably, had been his enemies.