Stunning photos of London's new WWI memorial

[Brazen]

Errr, WW1 is not the bloodiest conflict in human history. It is not even the second bloodiest conflict in human history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_by_death_toll

The bloodiest European-centric war up to that point in history then. Are you going to comment on the advert or argue the toss? No need to answer. 

Can we ban Mart again?

[Martinus]

Errr, WW1 is not the bloodiest conflict in human history. It is not even the second bloodiest conflict in human history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_by_death_toll

The bloodiest European-centric war up to that point in history then. Are you going to comment on the advert or argue the toss? No need to answer. 

Can we ban Mart again?

Why so much hostility? The advert is ok. Would be better as a comedy.

[Razgovory]

Sainsbury's Christmas advert made in partnership with the British Legion. Conflicted. Very touching and not in-your-face commercial, but I'm not entirely sure the bloodiest conflict in human history should be used to sell anything.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWF2JBb1bvM

Errr, WW1 is not the bloodiest conflict in human history. It is not even the second bloodiest conflict in human history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_by_death_toll

That list is very problematic.

[grumbler]

Errr, WW1 is not the bloodiest conflict in human history. It is not even the second bloodiest conflict in human history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_by_death_toll

The bloodiest European-centric war up to that point in history then. Are you going to comment on the advert or argue the toss? No need to answer. 

Can we ban Mart again?

Just because Mart thinks Wikipedia is an authoritative source that can be cited in an argument is no reason to ban him.  Laugh at him, sure, but banning is going too far.  If he pays attention to how professionals, like most of the lawyers here, handle citations, he may learn something.

[The Minsky Moment]

To take one example, the wiki list says it includes: "the wartime/war-related deaths of civilians, which are the results of war induced epidemics, diseases, famines, atrocities, genocide etc" which is both debatable and makes the measurement far more difficult and imprecise, especially for the earlier conflicts.  However, despite this policy, the WWI numbers *exclude* the related influenza deaths.  If those were added, WWI would probably rise close to #1.

[Zanza]

But it'd be interesting to know about how other countries are marking the centenary, especially France, Germany and Russia.

No official remembrance in Germany, especially as this isn't the centenary, but just the 96th anniversary, right? There was a bit back in August.

November 9th is a much more important date here (Proclamation of the Republic, Reichskristallnacht, Fall of the Wall).

[Admiral Yi]

A date for Germans to feel even more neurotic than normal.

[Syt]

But it'd be interesting to know about how other countries are marking the centenary, especially France, Germany and Russia.

No official remembrance in Germany, especially as this isn't the centenary, but just the 96th anniversary, right? There was a bit back in August.

November 9th is a much more important date here (Proclamation of the Republic, Reichskristallnacht, Fall of the Wall).

And Hitler Putsch!

[garbon]

But more to the point: Remembrance Day in the UK is not (solely) about remembering the end of WW1, it's about remembering the fallen British/Commonwealth soldiers of wars in general.

Then why make a memorial that commemorates specifically the number of dead in WW1?

It was made after WW1. Then after WW2 people who felt mourning was probably not appropriate on VE or VJ day also remembered their dead (and the wounded marched) on Remembrance Day.

Should each conflict have its own specific remembrance day? You'd have a rolling popularity contest of veterans as fewer people turned up for the Suez Remembrance Day than the Falklands Remembrance Day which would be something.

I don't think anyone is disputing that. But if this is the reason for remembrance, then after 100 years it is probably a time to move on. If the point instead is to honour one's veterans of all wars, then it is fine but then stop making most of it singularly about WW1.  If the point is to make a post-modern statement about pointlessness of all wars - as mongers seems to think it is - then don't do it with the prime minister and top brass of the military that even now are keeping soldiers fighting wars of dubious sense or necessity across the globe.

Can't you do all of those things simultaneously, on one day?

Also does that 100 year expiry date go for all things? The Yanks should stop celebrating 4th of July or the French Bastille Day? I mean right now we're planning a (largely American funded) set of events for the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta

Unlike Mart, it doesn't really bother me if the Brits (or anyone) want to look back at WWI. What I do find interesting though is how from an outsider's perspective - talk of WWI does seem to loom large in the ceremonial for Remembrance Day. In contrast, I'd say that the origin points for Memorial Day and Veterans Day in the US have been nearly entirely eclipsed by their modern symbolism.

[Malthus]

Unlike Mart, it doesn't really bother me if the Brits (or anyone) want to look back at WWI. What I do find interesting though is how from an outsider's perspective - talk of WWI does seem to loom large in the ceremonial for Remembrance Day. In contrast, I'd say that the origin points for Memorial Day and Veterans Day in the US have been nearly entirely eclipsed by their modern symbolism.

For the UK and Canada, WW1 looms larger in terms of sorrow as shared memory considers it a largely pointless sacrifice.

In numbers, for example, WW1 killed a larger number of Canadians in absolute terms than WW2 - and of course larger in relative terms (aprox. 64K in WW1, or close to 1% of pop., versus 45K in WW2, or close to 0.4% of pop).

The main difference, however, is the perception that the dead in WW1 largely died for no good reason, while the dead in WW2 died in a good cause. Also, WW1 was the first real experience Canadians had of the horrors of modern warfare - the romantic mythology of war was largely and traumatically shattered by this conflict; by WW2, few had such illusions.

Also, WW1 inspired a lot of mournful iconography and poetry, which shaped the tone of rememberance.

[The Brain]

The endless poetry has indeed reinforced the perception of WW1 as the greatest pointless horror of human history.

[crazy canuck]

Unlike Mart, it doesn't really bother me if the Brits (or anyone) want to look back at WWI. What I do find interesting though is how from an outsider's perspective - talk of WWI does seem to loom large in the ceremonial for Remembrance Day. In contrast, I'd say that the origin points for Memorial Day and Veterans Day in the US have been nearly entirely eclipsed by their modern symbolism.

For the UK and Canada, WW1 looms larger in terms of sorrow as shared memory considers it a largely pointless sacrifice.

In numbers, for example, WW1 killed a larger number of Canadians in absolute terms than WW2 - and of course larger in relative terms (aprox. 64K in WW1, or close to 1% of pop., versus 45K in WW2, or close to 0.4% of pop).

The main difference, however, is the perception that the dead in WW1 largely died for no good reason, while the dead in WW2 died in a good cause. Also, WW1 was the first real experience Canadians had of the horrors of modern warfare - the romantic mythology of war was largely and traumatically shattered by this conflict; by WW2, few had such illusions.

Also, WW1 inspired a lot of mournful iconography and poetry, which shaped the tone of rememberance.

All that is accurate but I would also add that WWI changed everything and we remember it for that in addition to all the other reasons you listed. 

[jimmy olsen]

The endless poetry has indeed reinforced the perception of WW1 as the greatest pointless horror of human history.

[garbon]

WWI changed everything?

[Jacob]

WWI changed everything?

For Canada it did, at least. And Australia, and the UK.

Which are some of the primary WWI Remembrance countries.