In the run up to Remembrance Sunday a disturbing number of myths have been doing the rounds – all seemingly motivated by racist views. A snap shot includes Poundland, Body Shop and Birmingham Council. If you search Google for terms such as ‘poppies banned’, ‘staff banned from wearing poppies’ etc you find very little – yet these rumours circulate via social media. It is true a member of staff at Poundland was asked to remove her poppy as it did not comply with the uniform; she then chose to leave work in protest. She wasn’t sent home she left. The manager was doing what mangers everywhere tend to do (and I advise them not to in my classes). He was applying the company’s policy literally; it did not specify poppies just adornments to uniforms. Of course the company now makes an exception for poppies. Body Shop has never even come close to such a rule; people have confused it with the store Bodycare (a store I had never heard of). Like Poundland Bodycare had a policy of no adornments, no charity badges or other such items. In other words it has nothing to do with PC, with offending people or with appeasement – it does have a lot to do with Corporate Social Responsibility and employment rights – two things that seem to be eroded daily. So the question is not why did the store ban poppies but why are staff restricted in what they wear and what employment law rights protect them. This is a whole other debate.
As for the Council, well they have a policy of licensing charity collections and avoiding having too many on any one day – ask yourself whether you have ever been annoyed by charity collectors and you see the motivation. As it turns out, and clearly an oversight by the Council, Shelter and The Anthony Nolan Trust (cancer charity) had already booked that week. Both now have retracted their bookings to allow the RBL to collect instead. Of course Shelter actually do a lot of positive work for ex-servicemen and woman as it happens, but of course can collect all year. Not exactly a ban – more an oversight on licenses.
The whole debate got me thinking about war and casualties though. I asked the question ‘what did the Second World War cost’ in terms of life. The data is alarming (in descending order of total deaths):
Total
% of population
Soviet Union
23,400,000
13.88
China
10,000,000 to 20,000,000
1.93 to 3.86
Germany
6,630,000 to 8,680,000
Poland
5,620,000 to 5,820,000
16.1 to 16.7
Dutch East Indies
3,000,000 to 4,000,000
4.3 to 5.76
Japan
2,620,000 to 3,120,000
3.67 to 4.37
India (British)
1,587,000 to 2,587,000
0.42 to 0.68
Yugoslavia
1027000
6.67
French Indochina
1,000,000 to 1,500,000
4.07 to 6.1
Romania (within 1939 borders)
800,000
4.01
Hungary
580,000
6.35
France
567,600
1.35
Philippines
557,000 to 1,057,000
3.48 to 6.6
Italy
457,000
1.03
United Kingdom
450,900
0.94
United States
418,500
0.32
Korea
378,000 to 483,000
1.6 to 2.06
Lithuania (within 1939 borders)
350,000
14.33
Czechoslovakia
325,000
2.12
Greece
320,000 to 805,100
4.44 to 11.15
Netherlands
301,000
3.45
Burma
272,000
1.69
Latvia (within 1939 borders)
230,000
11.78
Austria
120,000
Malaya
100,000
2.28
Ethiopia
100,000
0.6
I ended the table at 100,000 – the total loss is estimated between 62 and 78 million people. In other words approximately the population of Britain today. Some countries suffer greater civilian than military losses – mostly of course occupied ones like Poland. Poland lost 240,000 (66,000 initially defending Poland then after its fall the rest fighting alongside allies – mostly Britain) fighting men and 5.5 million civilians. At the time its population was 34 million so it lost almost 1% to fighting and 16% civilians. The UK on the other hand lost 383,000 fighting men and 67,000 civilians (0.7% of population fighting). The USSR’s losses were almost 50/50 fighting men and civilians. India, one of many commonwealth countries that fought alongside Britain, lost between 1.5 and 3 million – mostly civilians. Germany lost between 6.8 and 8.6 million people, again, mostly fighting men but also between 1 and 3 million civilians, its allies also suffered heavy losses.
I hope we remember all the losses this weekend, from this and the many other conflicts that have happened and are happening, and hope we start to learn that war is not the answer to our problems.
As for the Council, well they have a policy of licensing charity collections and avoiding having too many on any one day – ask yourself whether you have ever been annoyed by charity collectors and you see the motivation. As it turns out, and clearly an oversight by the Council, Shelter and The Anthony Nolan Trust (cancer charity) had already booked that week. Both now have retracted their bookings to allow the RBL to collect instead. Of course Shelter actually do a lot of positive work for ex-servicemen and woman as it happens, but of course can collect all year. Not exactly a ban – more an oversight on licenses.
The whole debate got me thinking about war and casualties though. I asked the question ‘what did the Second World War cost’ in terms of life. The data is alarming (in descending order of total deaths):
Total
% of population
Soviet Union
23,400,000
13.88
China
10,000,000 to 20,000,000
1.93 to 3.86
Germany
6,630,000 to 8,680,000
Poland
5,620,000 to 5,820,000
16.1 to 16.7
Dutch East Indies
3,000,000 to 4,000,000
4.3 to 5.76
Japan
2,620,000 to 3,120,000
3.67 to 4.37
India (British)
1,587,000 to 2,587,000
0.42 to 0.68
Yugoslavia
1027000
6.67
French Indochina
1,000,000 to 1,500,000
4.07 to 6.1
Romania (within 1939 borders)
800,000
4.01
Hungary
580,000
6.35
France
567,600
1.35
Philippines
557,000 to 1,057,000
3.48 to 6.6
Italy
457,000
1.03
United Kingdom
450,900
0.94
United States
418,500
0.32
Korea
378,000 to 483,000
1.6 to 2.06
Lithuania (within 1939 borders)
350,000
14.33
Czechoslovakia
325,000
2.12
Greece
320,000 to 805,100
4.44 to 11.15
Netherlands
301,000
3.45
Burma
272,000
1.69
Latvia (within 1939 borders)
230,000
11.78
Austria
120,000
Malaya
100,000
2.28
Ethiopia
100,000
0.6
I ended the table at 100,000 – the total loss is estimated between 62 and 78 million people. In other words approximately the population of Britain today. Some countries suffer greater civilian than military losses – mostly of course occupied ones like Poland. Poland lost 240,000 (66,000 initially defending Poland then after its fall the rest fighting alongside allies – mostly Britain) fighting men and 5.5 million civilians. At the time its population was 34 million so it lost almost 1% to fighting and 16% civilians. The UK on the other hand lost 383,000 fighting men and 67,000 civilians (0.7% of population fighting). The USSR’s losses were almost 50/50 fighting men and civilians. India, one of many commonwealth countries that fought alongside Britain, lost between 1.5 and 3 million – mostly civilians. Germany lost between 6.8 and 8.6 million people, again, mostly fighting men but also between 1 and 3 million civilians, its allies also suffered heavy losses.
I hope we remember all the losses this weekend, from this and the many other conflicts that have happened and are happening, and hope we start to learn that war is not the answer to our problems.
RSS Feed
