BS: Jingoism or Commemoration

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 06:04 AM

but for years you have been ridiculing me for accepting the historians' findings.

I think you will find I addressed that point 22 Nov 15 - 08:36 AM and on many occasions before.

I don't know how many different ways I can say this. I am sure that the British public did agree the need to stand. I am sure that the German public did agree the need to invade. I an sure that they could not both be right. There are two (or more) sides to every issue.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 05:56 AM

Dave, the confusion arises because you now say you accept the historians' findings, but for years you have been ridiculing me for accepting the historians' findings.

The historians are clear that the British Public agreed the need to stand against the invading German armies.
You will find none that contradict that.
Do you accept or reject the findings of the historians on that Dave?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 05:40 AM

...and how come you are still arguing with me seeing as I never bring anything germane to these debates? Are you daft?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 05:37 AM

Why Gnome?

Well, I assumed that seeing as you asked me to refer to a folk singer who's words were simply a parody of anothers, then it would be OK for me to refer to people who far more involved in atrocities than Mr Suffet. Still, I suppose that, like Keith, you have your rules for these things that the rest of us are not party to.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 05:34 AM

So Keith has formed an opinion?

I thought he said historians do that for him and if you think you know more than historians you are deluded?

Mind you, reading the prosaic and sometimes hilarious howlers from Keith and Teribus, you get an impression of how simple people get dragged into other people's wars.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 05:24 AM

"I haven't yet seen so many people who admit that they "VERY LITTLE" about a subject have so many opinions and argue about it."

Should of course read:

"I haven't yet seen so many people who admit that they "KNOW VERY LITTLE" about a subject have so many opinions and argue about it."

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 05:21 AM

"Maybe we should ask the people of the Belgian Congo if they thought 'brave little Belgium' was worth all the effort? "

Why Gnome? If you think for one instant that they would have been better off under German domination - then you had best think again.

As Keith A has stated I haven't yet seen so many people who admit that they "VERY LITTLE" about a subject have so many opinions and argue about it. If I started out "knowing very little" I would try to educate myself before entering the discussion. I originally came to these WWI threads in response to you and your friends unremitting bullying and mobbing of Keith A who as I read and understood his posts was putting forward fairly good points for discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 05:10 AM

It's one of his traits Dave, he said I said things you didn't say either.

Never did get the apology.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 05:03 AM

Rag and Dave,
The history you profess to read is just ONE picture of that period.

I have said no such thing. Nor is the subsequent conversation anything to do with me. Why are you ascribing things that others have said to me, Keith?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 05:00 AM

Jim,
You have put up just a few words of what she said

Yes, and it is unequivocal.
They do not contradict themselves elsewhere. How could they?

Pennell, "myths have built up that suggest ordinary British and Irish people backed the war because they were deluded, brainwashed and naïvely duped into supporting the conflict. My research shows that this was simply not the case."

Margaret Macmillan said, "Britain certainly thought it had legitimate reasons for going in, and I think it did," she says. "

Quite unequivocal Jim.
They reject your view completely, and you will find not one single historian who challenges either of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 04:56 AM

Rag and Dave,
The history you profess to read is just ONE picture of that period.

OK, but it is the one picture that all the historians writing about WW1 paint.
If you reject it, you are claiming to know more than the historians.

Some people, that is those with any degree of intelligence, read absorb and decipher the information presented and consider ALL the available data.

That is the job of historians.
I read their findings and that forms my views.
On what grounds do you refuse to accept them?

To dismiss any historian is extremely foolish, but sadly we have come to expect no more of you.

I do not, but historians now reject the views of some who wrote decades ago without the benefit of evidence now available.
There used to be some with different views on those points I have put, but now they are discredited and debunked.

You have been left behind.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 04:33 AM

Several points Teribus.

1. You did state very recently you would not respond to any of my questions.

2. The questions were specifically put to the professor.

3. At no point did I mention any dates for the propaganda, in fact I only placed links to articles that I though even the professor would acknowledge (last 20 years, real historians etc)

4. We know the figures regarding volunteers v conscription I put them on another thread some months ago. The question is if support for the war was still so strong why was conscription necessary.

5. Let the professor answer.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 04:28 AM

Keith

You had just been shown that the historians said that their views were not influenced by lies and propaganda, but were carefully thought and sensible. You clearly rejected all that.

No I have not rejected it. I have simply expanded it to include all sides. Considering that both sides could not be fighting a just war then one of them must have been fighting an unjust one. The people of one country must therefore have been influenced by lies and propaganda to support it.

Teribums

I am sure Keith is quite capable of answering for himself but, seeing as you have brought up the subject of Belgium, twice, I think we could well expand your idea of asking other people what they thought was right. Maybe we should ask the people of the Belgian Congo if they thought 'brave little Belgium' was worth all the effort?

Both - I am not arguing history here but humanity. Something that you both appear to lack.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 04:25 AM

"That statement of yours above Gnome certainly shows that on this particular subject "that you know very little".
More unqualified proclamations - you say no evidence has been provided - where is yours?
If the soldiers thought they were fighting a just cause - they were duped into a lie - 10 million dead and millions more disfigured Congloese testify to that fact
There was nothing "just" about the brutality of Empire.
When are you pair of establishment arse-lickers going to address that fact.
It was a war to defend a predatory, murderous system and the British people went in, made their sacrifice, and ended up no better at th end of it.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 04:22 AM

Ah Jom, when was it that I was a "galley swabber" as you put it? Or did your little troll feed you that little piece of "Made Up Shit"? If you believe it then it simply proves my belief that you will believe anything on the basis of no supporting evidence as long as it falls in with your tooth-sucking, biased and bigoted "class-warrior" agenda.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 04:09 AM

"You agree that most people believed they were fighting a just war. Yes? So, approximately 50% of the combatants were duped. Logic dictates that if one side were fighting a just war, then the other side were fighting an unjust one. How did the German government fool their soldiers into believing they were fighting a just war if they were not? Or were the British people more intelligent that the Germans? I really am curious." - Dave the Gnome.

That statement of yours above Gnome certainly shows that on this particular subject "that you know very little".

"One side fighting a just war the other fighting an unjust one"

Now I can see instantly why it would be considered just to come to the aid of a small country whose sovereignty has been guaranteed and whose existence as a free and independent nation is seen as being vital to my own country's national interest. Now explain to me how on earth it could in any way shape or form be viewed as right or justified to attack and invade that country and threaten total annexation just to fulfill your country's war aims.

By the way as explained in a previous post of mine the German Army as mobilised in 1914 was a citizen army that was already formed, their soldiers Gnome did not have to duped and lied to, all the German High Command had to do was to order them to attack, how the individual soldier in the German Army felt about it was of no consequence I do not believe that at any time he was consulted.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 03:55 AM

"Questions for you professor, seeing as you have such a grasp of the subject:

1. Why if everyone thought is was a bloody good idea to go fight the Hun did the government put out so much propaganda.

2. Why did they then introduce conscription." Asks Raggytash

In answer to your first question, between August 1914 and December 1914 over 1,200,000 men volunteered to join the British Army during a period where the British Expeditionary Force [80,000 strong out a total Army strength of 440,000] came close to being wiped out in Belgium and in France. So great was the response for men that the Army recruiting centres and training depots were completely overwhelmed. As to propaganda? All of the combatant nations churned out propaganda Raggy and do please go back to your examples and give us dates for them - because at the moment you are trying to put the incorrect idea across that they all date from August 1914. The propaganda campaign was not only targeted for home consumption - it was directed at countries that were so-far "neutral" primarily the United States of America in an attempt to convince THEIR politicians and populations of a need to become involved.

In answer to your second question. In 1914 Britain had a professional army of 440,000 men, by 1918 that Army had expanded to some 3,000,000 men [During the course of the war 2.6 million men volunteered and 2.7 were conscripted - all who joined the fight on the British side from Ireland, Canada, Newfoundland, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa and India - were ALL volunteers], to undertake such an expansion in time of peace would have been difficult enough for any organisation, to do it in time of war when your forces are being hard pressed makes those difficulties ten times more daunting. The fact that it was accomplished and that the British Forces not only remained intact but went from being seen as "a contemptible little army" to the armed force that represented the greatest danger to the Germans on the western front indicates just how well led and trained Britain's first citizen army was. On the other hand since Napoleonic times France, Prussia(latterly Germany), Austro-Hungaria and Russia all had possessed citizen armies that relied on mass conscription. In 1914 the British Army had only light field artillery, the Germans had extremely good medium artillery to support initial attacks, the French had excellent field artillery and the thing that saved them in 1914 the best heavy artillery in the world. So Britain had to design, build and create all medium and heavy artillery, Haig "junked" two thirds of his cavalry divisions to create the Machine Gun Corps and the Royal Tank Corps - by 1916 when conscription was introduced the British Army needed men and needed to be able to assign those men to where they were needed - much easier with conscripts than with men who volunteer for service in a particular Regiment, Corps or Service. So in introducing conscription Britain just joined the rest.

No mutinies at the front during the entire course of the war, no riots or strikes at home during the entire course of the war, the same cannot be said for the Germans, the French or the Russians. That too indicates that most of the people of Britain, her Commonwealth and her Empire supported the Government in the struggle.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 03:20 AM

"did most people believe that they were supporting a just cause or were they lied to?" - Gnome - you are asking the wrong person the question - With apologies to Mr Suffet and to quote from his excellent song:

"Ask the people of Belgium, or Alsace-Lorraine,
If my life was wasted, if I died in vain.
I think they will answer when all's said and done
That they welcomed this young man with a tin hat and gun."

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Nov 15 - 03:05 AM

Has anyone noticed that GUEST is quoted by Keith as having said x y and z?

Apparently the many who don't wish to have Teribus find irrelevant bits about them to bully them with and those whose cookie had crumbled, not to mention those who forget to put a name and lastly those who want text not author to be considered all say the same thing!!!!

In a way that's true I suppose. Not everybody works on the same intellectual level as Keith A of Hertford and his fascination with his toy soldiers.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 04:21 PM

"Only trouble with that Greg is that Jim Carroll and usual suspects can't come up with any facts -"
Bit rich for someone who makes pronouncements with no verification - ever - we are expected to take the arrogant pronouncements of a galley swabber - c#um a#wannabe soldier
You have been given the facts and you dismiss them as lies and urban legends - even when they are passed on by people who were there - "liars all"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Raggytash
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 04:19 PM

You flatter yourself Teriblunder. If you care to read my remark again I think you will find that no names are mentioned. It must be your immense ego at work ....... again.

I also see to recall that only recently, a day or two ago that you said that you would not engage with me again. I do wish you would stick to that.

Are your promises as good as your map reading.

I live in hope.


Bye for now.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 04:00 PM

Raggy somewhere along the line you forgot to supply any detail to back up this little contribution of yours:

"where Raggy have you ever read anything that I have stated that leads you to believe that I BELIEVE IN THE TEACHING OF THE BIBLE WRITTEN 2000 YEARS AGO"

As to discussing historians whose speciality is the First World War:

Those who studied, researched and wrote about it in the period 1972 to the present day had far more comprehensive information than those who wrote about it in the period 1929 to 1969. Perhaps you might dispute this but any grounds you might have for believing that would be very shaky indeed as the premise flies in the face of commonsense and logic - If A has more information from more varied sources than B, then A's work on the subject will be far more detailed and far more reflective and representative of reality than B's work on the same subject.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Teribus
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 03:47 PM

"None of them are wholly correct but some are more humane than others.

Not to mention that some are more fact-based than others."

Only trouble with that Greg is that Jim Carroll and usual suspects can't come up with any facts - the best they can come up with is rumour, hearsay and fairytales - God knows they have been asked often enough to provide substantive details to support the things they contend but as now they have failed singularly to do so.

Jim Carroll just havers on in his bigoted , biased, "class warrior", Wolfie-Smith persona way while Shaw, Gnome and Raggy just like mobbing Keith A - it would appear to be their sole purpose in life - odd then that none of them have ever managed to take Keith to task on any details that he has provided

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 03:15 PM

DO YOU DISPUTE THEM?

No, I don't and never have, as you well know. Instead you keep harping on about my ego and how I dispute what the experts say. I don't.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 03:10 PM

"What she actually said,"
You have put up just a few words of what she said
There is actually a greeat deal of what she said on line and a talk by her - you are selecting a few words out of context and once more making the term "historian" a laughing stock, not to mantion yourself.
In fact every historian available on line contradicts what you have to say oif you read it in full - you have edited your selections by missing out the bulk of what they have to say - as is your wont
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Greg F.
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 03:00 PM

22 Nov 15 - 02:24 PM : ...the findings of the historians.

WHICH historians, Professor? The live ones or the dead ones? All historians of every nationality all over the world, or just the ones whose works are available in British "real bookshops"? The ones you have actually read (< zero) or the ones you quote by way of out-of context clips from the internet? & etc

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 02:47 PM

Once again professor you have demonstrated your complete inability to understand the written word.

The history you profess to read is just ONE picture of that period. They are not and cannot be the WHOLE picture.

Some people, that is those with any degree of intelligence, read absorb and decipher the information presented and consider ALL the available data.

We do not dismiss historians merely because we do not agree with their politics or that their books are not sold in High Street bookshops or because they wrote more than 20 years ago or they have an axe to grind. We accept that and judge their work accordingly.

To dismiss any historian is extremely foolish, but sadly we have come to expect no more of you.

Thesis, antithesis, synthesis. It's really quite simple.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 02:30 PM

Rag,
Thus when one person says THIS historian or THIS group of historians are correct we look at the other information we have gathered and think perhaps the TRUTH is somewhere in between.

On the points that I have defended, no historian has been found by any of us with a contradictory view.
You and your little group say you disagree with all of them.
You must believe that you know more about history than the historians!

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 02:24 PM

Dave,
I have never disputed any of their findings. I cannot because I do not know enough about it.

I have only ever expressed 3 opinions about WW1, the first two being that Britain had no choice but to fight, and that the people supported that.

You have just been shown, again, that those are the findings of the historians.

DO YOU DISPUTE THEM?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 01:56 PM

I will attempt to put this as simply as I can.

Any historian, right, left, centre, published in popular bookshops or newspapers or the Internet paint A picture of WW1 not THE picture of WW1.

Most people accept this and glean information from it. Most people do not accept as "Gospel" the things that are written.

We apply the knowledge we have gained from other books and treatises and deal with the new information accordingly.

We do not accept that the particular historian is 100% correct, we apply a degree of logic to the things we read.

Thus when one person says THIS historian or THIS group of historians are correct we look at the other information we have gathered and think perhaps the TRUTH is somewhere in between.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 01:55 PM

Which you haven't read - and you are still ignoring what she actually said -

What she actually said,
"myths have built up that suggest ordinary British and Irish people backed the war because they were deluded, brainwashed and naïvely duped into supporting the conflict. My research shows that this was simply not the case."

By the way, nobody on here has not accepted the findings of a single historian.

Yes they have, including you.
The historians agree that British people believed the war to be a necessary evil, and all but one agree that they were right about that.

worshipping Hastings
Huh??

And are you ever going to give us any evidence of my having said that I know more about anything than anyone on here?
Do I need to?
My views are just those of the historians, and you have been challenging me over them for years now.

Earlier you asked
So, most people knew they were doing what had to be done did they? What if they were lied to? As described above. Were they doing what they knew had to be done or doing what they were told had to be done?

You had just been shown that the historians said that their views were not influenced by lies and propaganda, but were carefully thought and sensible. You clearly rejected all that. You must have believed you knew better.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 01:33 PM

I do dot deny the findings of all those historians.
I accept them.
Do you?

Yes I do. I have never disputed any of their findings. I cannot because I do not know enough about it. Something I have stated time and time again. Which is why, I suppose, instead of addressing my points you imply that I do dispute them and cast erroneous aspersions on my character.

So, let us get back to the point. If the popular opinion in Britain was that we were fighting a just war, which I have never disputed, how was public opinion manipulated in such a way that both us and our our European neigbours believed the same thing and yet fought to the death about it? Does it not make you wonder about popular opinion and how it can be shaped? How it is still being shaped today, as was pointed out earlier.

And are you ever going to give us any evidence of my having said that I know more about anything than anyone on here? Or are you just going to continue on that track whenever you feel threatened?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 01:14 PM

British opinion was mixed. Education was not as good as it was up till recently and people borrowed their views from what they read far more readily than now.

That said, being encouraged to fight and doing so willingly is very different to understanding the reasoning behind it. Imperial ambition and carving up territory meant little to a postman from Barnsley, but being told a German will rape his sister possibly had an effect.

You can only look at now with people thinking further bombing of Syria will make the nasty people go away. That's a popular opinion, shared by readers of most newspapers and shallow politicians, so anyone looking at it in a hundred years might mistake it for reasoned assessment by the masses.

By the way, nobody on here has not accepted the findings of a single historian. Perhaps Keith might find a friend to explain the difference between evidence and judgement? Overview and assessment? Fact and fiction? Hypothesis and conclusion?

Although this discussion is stupid anyway. Most of the historians Keith refers to give a broader assessment than his cherry picking anyway and only a couple venture into personal opinion, and then contradicting each other.

Mind you, dismissing Ferguson because of his political views whilst worshipping Hastings gave me a chuckle.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 01:09 PM

"She knows that based on her extensive researches."
Which you haven't read - and you are still ignoring what she actually said - suits your jingoist case to do so.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 12:49 PM

Before we discuss German public opinion, which I know nothing about, I would like to establish that British public opinion was that the war needed to be fought.

I have been unable to find a single historian who has expressed a different view, and none of you have either.
I have only found one historian, Niall Ferguson, who thought that Britain did not need to fight, and that was because of his far right views on Empire and Britain remaining a leading world power.

I do dot deny the findings of all those historians.
I accept them.
Do you?

And Rag, do you really think that historians specialising in WW1 are unaware of propaganda and conscription, and that they would change their views if only they knew what you know?
Really Rag?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Greg F.
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 10:09 AM

I do not believe that I was born knowing everything

Perhaps not, Professor, but you sure as shit think you know everything now.

knowing more about history than the historians.

WHICH historians, Prof? The liveones or the dead ones. All historians, or just the ones whose works are available in "real bookshops"? he oners you have actually read (< zero) or the ones you quote by way of out-of context clips from the internet? & etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 08:36 AM

As to I actually find it hilarious that people like you come on here and set themselves up as knowing more about history than the historians.
You even ridicule people for learning their history from history books

Well, I have never said I know more about history than anyone and well you know it. I have ridiculed you on many occasions, but not for learning about history. Just for being a pompous ass. (From 'Urban Dictionary: Pompous Ass. A person who seems full of themselves and who grabs every opportunity to let others know of their feelings of superiority.) Seems to fit rather well.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 08:30 AM

I do not have a vast ego to compare with yours Dave.
I do not believe that I was born knowing everything

Where did that come from? The only thing I have ever said that I know for certain is that I know very little. I am a constant student and fully understand that, even on those subjects that I may know a something about, I will never know everything. Please show me where I have claimed superior knowledge on anything or desist from such foolery.

Anyhow, back to the main thread rather than spurious claims. You agree that most people believed they were fighting a just war. Yes? So, approximately 50% of the combatants were duped. Logic dictates that if one side were fighting a just war, then the other side were fighting an unjust one. How did the German government fool their soldiers into believing they were fighting a just war if they were not? Or were the British people more intelligent that the Germans? I really am curious.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 07:57 AM

Questions for you professor, seeing as you have such a grasp of the subject:

1. Why if everyone thought is was a bloody good idea to go fight the Hun did the government put out so much propaganda.

2. Why did they then introduce conscription.

(just for your benefit) Propaganda:- "information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view"

Please use the OED Definition of propaganda and not YOUR definition.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 07:47 AM

Do you believe that most people believed that they were fighting a just war? Not an historian's opinion.

Yes I do.
I do not have a vast ego to compare with yours Dave.
I do not believe that I was born knowing everything.
I have not spent years doing research on original sources and I am not over a hundred years old, so I form my opinions on historical periods by reading history books.

I actually find it hilarious that people like you come on here and set themselves up as knowing more about history than the historians.
You even ridicule people for learning their history from history books instead of just imagining how things might have been and demanding that you empty head whims be given equal authority!

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 07:40 AM

Sorry - Misformated. Italics should be off after the first line.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 07:35 AM

Based on nothing but your extensive ego, you are suggesting she is deluded

I have suggested no such thing. In fact, of your quote, I specifically said "I have no doubt at all of the veracity of this statement." If I have suggested she is deluded, show me where and I will apologise.

I am asking a question of you. Do you believe that most people believed that they were fighting a just war? Not an historian's opinion. Not anyone else's opinion. Do you, Keith A of Hertford, believe that most people who fought in WW1 believed that they were fighting a just war?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 07:22 AM

You have pointed out that that reason was an Imperial one - part of one of your cut-'n-pastes.

No I have not.
The government and most British people wanted Britain to keep out of the building conflict right up until the German armies swept into neutral Belgium.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 07:19 AM

Dave,
What myth am I desperately clinging to?

The myth that people did not understand or know what it was about, what they were fighting for, that they were deluded, duped and manipulated.

Pennell, "myths have built up that suggest ordinary British and Irish people backed the war because they were deluded, brainwashed and naïvely duped into supporting the conflict. My research shows that this was simply not the case."

She knows that based on her extensive researches.

Based on nothing but your extensive ego, you are suggesting she is deluded, as are all the other historians who have separately and independently come to the same conclusion!

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 05:38 AM

"Britain certainly thought it had legitimate reasons for going in, and I think it did," she says."
You have pointed out that that reason was an Imperial one - part of one of your cut-'n-pastes.
It is not the job of historians - and historian - to pronounce whether that was legitimate - that is a moral, ethical or philosophical question, not a historical one.
Empire was about exploiting entire nations and using people and natural wealth for the benefit of the most powerful - go back in history as far as you want.
The British Empire collapsed under its own excesses a few decades after WW1   
If the war was one over colonies it was wrong - immoral - unethical.
The British people didn't benefit from any victory - we got nothing for the slaughter of our youth.
Things returned pretty much to the way they were at the beginning of the slaughter and before the twenties were out men were marching the streets demanding bread for their families.
The war never brought the improvements promised to those who fought - so which historian is qualified to say it was right - and why?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 05:29 AM

So, did most people believe that they were supporting a just cause or were they lied to?

What myth am I desperately clinging to?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 05:06 AM

The government was not lied to.
They went to war over the invasion of Belgium and Britain's treaty obligations.
That was not a lie.
The people supported that, and most historians think they were right to.
No-one is lying to the historians.

Margaret Macmillan said, "Britain certainly thought it had legitimate reasons for going in, and I think it did," she says. "

The myth you all desperately cling to is discredited and debunked.
Rubbished.

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Nov 15 - 03:51 AM

Well said, achmelvich.

So, most people knew they were doing what had to be done did they? What if they were lied to? As described above. Were they doing what they knew had to be done or doing what they were told had to be done? Were all their lives given for the just cause they believed they were frighting for?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST,achmelvich
Date: 21 Nov 15 - 03:02 PM

if we are wondering about the effect of propaganda etc 100 years ago why not look at it from today's perspective? surely we can have a better understanding of that? foreigners all suspect or worse. immigrants attacked. and the fascist press calling on our government to bomb someone - anyone- to make our ignorant, pathetic, little englander government look as if it is doing something positive. depressing, innit?

Subject: RE: BS: Jingoism or Commemoration
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Nov 15 - 10:25 AM

Dense lady tuppence.