IS IT APRIL THE FIRST? (1 Viewer)

Deleted member 5849 said:

This response kind of proves my point.

Now FWIW I find McClean's reasoning slightly uncomfortable myself. However, if it wasn't institutionalised so that it was expected he wore a poppy, then he wouldn't have to step back and have to give his own viewpoint.

This particular argument is, to me, in microcosm what seems to be a recent disturbing trend where there is a compulsion to wear a poppy. This, incidentally, is a tendency towards fascism, to take away the individual right to choose what to do. As this happens, it actually makes me less disposed to wear a poppy. My own view can respect the people involved, regret the savage loss of life... despair at how World War One was the last vestiges of imperialism, and the desire to impose ideologies on the world, where the individuals, the true heroes, were caught up in a needless, stupid argument between power-crazed states.

So... I could always go with a poppy when it appeared to be an individual choice and an understated mark of respect... to the soldiers that died. Once it gets hijacked by insititutions however, it starts echoing that which it should be trying to warn against. As such, *I* won't be wearing a poppy. That in no way makes me want to stop others wearing a poppy, because I can see enough behind it to see why an individual might want to support the cause. I might even give some cash to an appropriate charity myself. I, personally, am always uncomfortable in showing for the sake of showing however. That's just me, and others will differ.

The individual mark of respect is how it has been, as far as I'm concerned. But... with such institutionalised compulsions as per the FA 'debate', then I would have to go against the grain to do that were I an English International footballer, and I would have to open my views (that otherwise can remain private) to a public trial... or wear it for an easy life. The latter is insincere however, and such gestures such always be made with personal sincerity in my view.

So, this whole situation takes away from the meaning of armistice day, for me. It should be quiet respect - a minute's silence could have sufficed, to remember the dead, and enough could have been done around the game without making this an unseemly drama that takes the focus away from what it should be.

Click to expand...

CJ_covblaze said:

Also if the Star of David and the Moon & Crescent aren't Religious symbol, what is? I don't have any problem with with Israel, Turkey and others having one of the above on their shirts but that's another example of double standards.

Click to expand...

Deleted member 5849 said:

This response kind of proves my point.

Now FWIW I find McClean's reasoning slightly uncomfortable myself. However, if it wasn't institutionalised so that it was expected he wore a poppy, then he wouldn't have to step back and have to give his own viewpoint.

This particular argument is, to me, in microcosm what seems to be a recent disturbing trend where there is a compulsion to wear a poppy. This, incidentally, is a tendency towards fascism, to take away the individual right to choose what to do. As this happens, it actually makes me less disposed to wear a poppy. My own view can respect the people involved, regret the savage loss of life... despair at how World War One was the last vestiges of imperialism, and the desire to impose ideologies on the world, where the individuals, the true heroes, were caught up in a needless, stupid argument between power-crazed states.

So... I could always go with a poppy when it appeared to be an individual choice and an understated mark of respect... to the soldiers that died. Once it gets hijacked by insititutions however, it starts echoing that which it should be trying to warn against. As such, *I* won't be wearing a poppy. That in no way makes me want to stop others wearing a poppy, because I can see enough behind it to see why an individual might want to support the cause. I might even give some cash to an appropriate charity myself. I, personally, am always uncomfortable in showing for the sake of showing however. That's just me, and others will differ.

The individual mark of respect is how it has been, as far as I'm concerned. But... with such institutionalised compulsions as per the FA 'debate', then I would have to go against the grain to do that were I an English International footballer, and I would have to open my views (that otherwise can remain private) to a public trial... or wear it for an easy life. The latter is insincere however, and such gestures such always be made with personal sincerity in my view.

So, this whole situation takes away from the meaning of armistice day, for me. It should be quiet respect - a minute's silence could have sufficed, to remember the dead, and enough could have been done around the game without making this an unseemly drama that takes the focus away from what it should be.

Click to expand...

CJ_covblaze said:

Strange that Ireland were allowed to wear a shirt to remember a political event not so long ago but the Poppy isn't allowed. It's an absolute disgrace.

Click to expand...

chiefdave said:

Did they have permission for that as FIFA have now started disciplinary proceedings against Ireland.

Click to expand...

chiefdave said:

BBC are getting shit now, probably from Daily Mail readers, for putting a poppy on the Cookie Monster. The RBL said they weren't fussed about it but apparently that's not good enough.

Click to expand...