Conscientious Objectors were pacifists that refused to join the war as it went against their own beliefs and morals (their conscience), that fighting was wrong no matter what and peace could be found through non-violence. The government obviously did not like this as they needed people to join the war and these ‘Conchies’ (nickname for Conscientious Objectors/COs) posed a threat to the bravery and patriotism of Britain’s young generation and were shunned due to their “cowardice” by the general public and Government alike, and the wave patriotism amplified by the propaganda led to extreme discrimination to the very few that escaped harsh punishments such as prison sentences when even the tribunal (a trail on whether to be pardoned or sent to war) which was extremely biased and broke many Conchies’ beliefs about the war. There were two types of conscientious objectors, absolutist who were against any involvement in the war and non-combat, who were against combat but did help with the war and as such did enlist on the war as medic and stretcher barer which was ultimately the most terrifying and tragic experience and put in the centre of danger in no man’s land. Over the course of the years, Conchies were starting to be recognised as brave individual people for standing up against the belief of many for their own beliefs. These are the two major beliefs about Conscientious Objectors. A historian that may be studying conscientious objectors may need to use interpretation (a point of view on something) to figure the reason as to why the person wrote this and gives deeper insight into the source and the events that are occurring in the source. An interpretation is the opinion of a certain person, group, or even of society on a certain ob... ... middle of paper ... ...ered reasoning as desolate. An example of this is when the CO says that “God alone has the right to take life and that war is immoral” where TM 2 retaliates by saying that “he is accusing his son of murder for participating in the war to protect the likes of him”. The whole tribunal only lasted no more than a few minutes, meaning that the tribunal was quick to determine the cowardice of the Conscientious Objectors. The purpose of source B8 is to record a conversation between tribunal and CO, this proves itself to be helpful as it supports the argument that Conscientious Objectors were cowards because the tribunal ended in a few, which could allude to the fact that COs simply wanted to get out of the war and did not truly uphold their beliefs. The source is also very reliable as it is a primary source and therefore gives an accurate point of view on COs in the 1920s.
Humes’ novel is about the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act of 1944, dubbed the G.I. Bill of Rights, and contains stories of several men and women whose lives were changed because of this bill. Humes expresses how some individuals disliked the G.I. Bill, but not he. Throughout the novel, Humes expresses how the G.I. Bill was good for the country and presents those opposed in a negative light. For example, Humes writes,
Overall McPherson’s reasons for the soldiers motivations were clear and concise, easy to follow and understand allowing for easy interpretation of the book. McPherson also includes multiple quotes from various letters and diary entries to support his statements which gives his statements credibility. The reasons for motivation presented in the book were convincing and were supported by numerous quotes.
Overall, I believe that the war was responsible for impacting four main social attitudes – the morale of the public, the class barriers, the crime rate and the status of women. Even though society attempted to go back to normal after the war, it could not go back completely. People had seen women work, they had felt what it was like to work together with the community, and although it took years and years after the war for it to happen, attitudes eventually changed for the better. The war, just happened to instigate this transformation of the views of society.
When the United States entered WWI in 1917, Congress passed a law called the Espionage Act. The law stated that during wartime obstructing the draft and trying to make soldiers disloyal or disobedient were crimes against the United States (Schenck v. United States). Almost 2,000 people broke this law; they were accused of violating this law and were put on trial. Charles Schenck was one of them; he was against the war, and was the general secretary of the Socialist Party of America. He believed that the war had been caused by and would benefit only the rich, while causing suffering and death for the thousands of poor and working-class soldiers who would do the actual fighting in Europe. He mailed thousands of pamphlets to men who had been drafted into the armed forces. The government looked at this as a threat to the country and also to the people. These pa...
Later in the book, he again reflects on the war. He catalogs the proofs that he has been given — injured and half-starved countrymen — but persists in his existential doubt. He notes, “So we knew a war existed; we had to believe that, just as we had to believe that the name for the sort of life we had led for the last three years was hardship and suffering. Yet we had no proof of it. In fact, we had even less than no proof; we had had thrust into our faces the very shabby and unavoidable obverse of proof…” (94). Because he has not seen the battles, he has difficulty acknowledging the reality of war.
Jus ad bellum is defined as “justice of war” and is recognized as the ethics leading up to war (Orend 31). Orend contends that an...
Barnett, Correlli. World War II: Persuading the People. Orbis Publishing Limited, 1972. Pgs. 76 -- 102.
Miller’s passive attitude toward the war has been described by Orwell as “a declaration of irresponsibility” because Miller acts in a way to of “extreme pacifism, an individual refusal to fight, with no apparent wish to convert others to the same opinion” (Orwell, 1). Orwell shows he senses irresponsibility in Miller’s point of view because Miller exclaimed it was “sheer stupidity” to “mix oneself up in such things from a sense of obligation” if there were no “purely selfish motives” in a conversation he had with him (Orwell, 1). The endorsement of “selfish” demonstrates Miller’s “individualism,” because he’s not expecting anyone to be anything more than a rational egoist, or someone who has acts to “maximize one’s self-interest” [1]. Furthermore, his refusal to “mix oneself up” shows the passivity in his stance; it shows how he “hardly wishes to control” the “world-process” (Orwell, 1). The war is also a force that is outside one man’s control. Orwell also gets the impressi...
A true war story is never moral. It does not instruct, nor encourage virtue, nor suggest models of proper human behavior, nor restrain ...
...s, demonstrated through the author's talent, are denouncing the authority figures who were supposed to guide his generation into adulthood but instead turned the youth against each other in the pursuit of superficial ideals. The soldiers were simply the victims of a meaningless war.
...r believes that no one will understand anyway. He is also able to make the point that unless you have experienced war first hand like the speaker did, one will never understand and one has no right to convince innocent men to go to war or to promote it. Owen describes war so vividly that no one would wish it on even their worst enemy. Through heavy use of irony in the lines “It is sweet and right to die for one's country.” (Poem and Notes) he is also able to make dying for one’s country in war not seem quite as honorable as the promoters of the war made it out to be.
Conscientious objectors normally don't go into warfare and many aren't important or take a stand, but when Desmond Doss was born, he would make a change forever in human history. As a conscientious objector, he didn't have a clue that he was going to be enlisted into the United States army. His religious freedoms and his will to protect the testament is undoubtful as he saved men on numerous Japanese islands, most notably Okinawa. Hacksaw Ridge is commonly known where Doss took his stand against the Axis powered Japanese at the area of the island. Doss propelled religious aspects of life while in war to his fellow soldiers that made him become more correspondent to the religion. Doss represented his religion socially, politically, and
In document A, it shows all the soldiers who died. In that way a soldier would not quit because he would not want a soldier to die for nothing. In the estimated deaths, the percentage was was less than fifty percent which means that more than fifty percent of the soldiers survived. In document C, it shows how much hardship the soldiers went through at camp. All the soldiers suffered through the winter there. With the support of their fellow soldiers, most of the soldiers stayed to keep on fighting for independence. In the camp Valley Forge there is a doctor there to try to keep the soldiers healthy and safe. In document C, it says and paints a picture of all hellish experiences they went through. All those soldiers went through so much, they were too far in the war to quit. In that way, a soldier would stay to carry on those who lost their lives in
The book “Guests of the Nation” clarifies the fact that morals is not in present in such an environment. No matter how close the relationship of the soldiers and the prisoners had grown, they both had a goal to accomplish. Because of the death of the soldier’s allies, killing the prisoners symbolized revenge. Without revenge, the morale of a battalion would decrease. In the state of war, this could mean the difference of a win or lose. As a result, the soldiers are faced with a dilemma: follow their duties to achieve their goal or follow their morals risking the achievement of the goal. To accomplish the goal of winning the war, all soldiers must put aside their morals and fulfill their duties.
The war scarred the soldiers permanently, if not physically then mentally. After the war the soldiers usually never recovered from the war. Two of the most common side affects of the war were shell shock and stir crazy. When suffering from shell shock a soldier’s brain doesn’t function properly and the man is a “vegetable”. This means the man is alive but he can’t do anything because he is in a state of shock because of the war. Stir crazy is a mental illness caused by the firing of so many bullets that when no bullets are heard by the victim he goes insane. Everyone was scared to go to war when it started. Young recruits were first sent because the veterans knew they were going to come back dead. "When we run out again, although I am very excited, I suddenly think: “where’s Himmelstoss?” Quickly I jump back into the dug-out and find him with a small scratch lying in a corner pretending to be wounded.” (P 131) Even the big men like Himmelstoss are scared to go fight. They too go through the mental illnesses like stir crazy and shell shock. “He is in a panic; he is new to it too.