Anzackery
I have just come across a word that is new to me, which probably belongs in my thread in the Lounge section of BE called "new words in my life". However, it's a peculiarly Australian word, so I'll put it here. Am I the only member of BE for whom it is new?
"Anzackery" is explained in this Guardian article from a couple of years ago. Any comments? https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-and-anzackery |
Re: Anzackery
Originally Posted by Gordon Barlow
(Post 12240844)
I have just come across a word that is new to me, which probably belongs in my thread in the Lounge section of BE called "new words in my life". However, it's a peculiarly Australian word, so I'll put it here. Am I the only member of BE for whom it is new?
"Anzackery" is explained in this Guardian article from a couple of years ago. Any comments? https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-and-anzackery |
Re: Anzackery
Not heard the word either. However Anzacs and Gallipoli is one quite contentious issue if you scratch the surface. It's where the anti Brit feeling really comes to the fore, it's also a case of a hugely misinformed Australian public.
Australians almost to a man do not know that there were 3 times as many Brits killed and wounded at Gallipoli as Australians.... Point this out to them stand back and watch the disbelief rise complete with quite a lot of inward and on occasion outward rage. They've been fed a falsehood with this and point this out at your own peril. They really do believe everyone else was a bit player at Gallipoli. It's one area where I'm not exactly integrated, as I cant help myself when push comes to shove and they carry on about British generals and colonial cannon fodder. |
Re: Anzackery
Originally Posted by ozzieeagle
(Post 12240898)
Not heard the word either. However Anzacs and Gallipoli is one quite contentious issue if you scratch the surface. It's where the anti Brit feeling really comes to the fore, it's also a case of a hugely misinformed Australian public.
Australians almost to a man do not know that there were 3 times as many Brits killed and wounded at Gallipoli as Australians.... Point this out to them stand back and watch the disbelief rise complete with quite a lot of inward and on occasion outward rage. They've been fed a falsehood with this and point this out at your own peril. They really do believe everyone else was a bit player at Gallipoli. |
Re: Anzackery
Originally Posted by ozzieeagle
(Post 12240898)
Not heard the word either. However Anzacs and Gallipoli is one quite contentious issue if you scratch the surface. It's where the anti Brit feeling really comes to the fore, it's also a case of a hugely misinformed Australian public.
Australians almost to a man do not know that there were 3 times as many Brits killed and wounded at Gallipoli as Australians.... Point this out to them stand back and watch the disbelief rise complete with quite a lot of inward and on occasion outward rage. They've been fed a falsehood with this and point this out at your own peril. They really do believe everyone else was a bit player at Gallipoli. It's one area where I'm not exactly integrated, as I cant help myself when push comes to shove and they carry on about British generals and colonial cannon fodder. It's probably worth remembering why the number of Australian casualties in Gallipoli had, and continues to have, such an impact on us. Our total population was 5 million, and over 28,000 young men were killed or wounded. However, ANZAC Day commemorations aren't a competition about who had the most casualties by number or percentage, nor is it about praising or knocking any other nation, friend or foe. It's simply a day when we remember our own. Lest We Forget. |
Re: Anzackery
Originally Posted by ozzieeagle
(Post 12240898)
Not heard the word either. However Anzacs and Gallipoli is one quite contentious issue if you scratch the surface. It's where the anti Brit feeling really comes to the fore, it's also a case of a hugely misinformed Australian public.
Australians almost to a man do not know that there were 3 times as many Brits killed and wounded at Gallipoli as Australians.... Point this out to them stand back and watch the disbelief rise complete with quite a lot of inward and on occasion outward rage. They've been fed a falsehood with this and point this out at your own peril. They really do believe everyone else was a bit player at Gallipoli. It's one area where I'm not exactly integrated, as I cant help myself when push comes to shove and they carry on about British generals and colonial cannon fodder. etc Gallipoli is no different |
Re: Anzackery
Originally Posted by Amazulu
(Post 12240932)
I agree that there is a lot of misinformation out there about the Gallipoli campaign - but you find that with every war story in every country. Take the Battle of Britain. If you believe the mainstream opinion then the UK was on its knees, the RAF was virtually finished and an invasion would have been a walkover. The reality was that Fighter Command got stronger as the battle continued and an invasion would have been physically impossible. The general attitude in the UK is that America did little in WW2 and basically their soldiers came to the UK and swanned around, flashing their cash and shagging their women, yet 30000 of them died bombing Germany - an incredible sacrifice. Douglas Haig is widely seen as the butcher of WW1 because of the UK casualties that occurred under his command but he was trying to win in a hopeless situation that was not of his making
etc Gallipoli is no different And of course people forget the Eastern Front and millions of Russians. It took years for the Brits and Allies to open a front after Dunkirk. |
Re: Anzackery
Never heard of the term, suspect it's a media beat-up.
I have attended every local ANZAC Day ceremony here for the time I've been in the country for the reason it is not to score points but to mark the sacrifice others have made to maintain their collective freedom. In fact, the soldier who made the key speech this year did such a good job to this effect that we needed to email our support of the leader of his unit. My daughter is picked by her Girl Guides division to give their address at the service and I'm proud of her doing so. Lest We Forget (all that have lost their lives) |
Re: Anzackery
Originally Posted by DeadVim
(Post 12241085)
Never heard of the term, suspect it's a media beat-up.
I have attended every local ANZAC Day ceremony here for the time I've been in the country for the reason it is not to score points but to mark the sacrifice others have made to maintain their collective freedom. In fact, the soldier who made the key speech this year did such a good job to this effect that we needed to email our support of the leader of his unit. My daughter is picked by her Girl Guides division to give their address at the service and I'm proud of her doing so. Lest We Forget (all that have lost their lives) My step-Dad of over 40 years passed away a few months ago. As a 15 year old Austrian he was conscripted into Hitler Youth, towards the end of WW11. He rarely talked about it, and always with great emotion, but he saw active duty. Some time after he emigrated to Australia after the war ended, he approached his local RSL to see if he could be of any use to them. He never forgot the welcome and acceptance he received there. He was this RSL's supply officer for decades, one of his duties was setting up the annual dawn service at King's Park. |
Re: Anzackery
I think we should distinguish between soldiers who defended their countries and those who invaded others' countries. Of course soldiers have to follow orders, or they will be shot; so if they're ordered to kill peaceful villagers (for instance), they had better do it or forfeit their own lives. But I think that the word "Anzackery" was probably invented to say that it's morally wrong to laud the killers of unarmed villagers as "war heroes", as seems to be the custom these days. Not every soldier in every war deserves to be honoured.
Patriotism can so easily slide into blind tribalism, where tribal leaders order the slaughter of foreigners in the name of self-defence. For instance: in my very young days I learned that the infamous execution of "Breaker" Morant in the Boer War was a wicked unfairness; yet according to his Wiki entry I may have been misled. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breaker_Morant Just on spec, I Googled the words Gallipoli war crimes, and to my horror found some quite disturbing entries. Have a look and you'll see what I mean. Invading countries was severely frowned on during the Nuremberg war trials; and during the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights too. And yet, it still happens. That, we should be ashamed of. |
Re: Anzackery
Originally Posted by ozzieeagle
(Post 12240898)
Not heard the word either. However Anzacs and Gallipoli is one quite contentious issue if you scratch the surface. It's where the anti Brit feeling really comes to the fore, it's also a case of a hugely misinformed Australian public.
Australians almost to a man do not know that there were 3 times as many Brits killed and wounded at Gallipoli as Australians.... Point this out to them stand back and watch the disbelief rise complete with quite a lot of inward and on occasion outward rage. They've been fed a falsehood with this and point this out at your own peril. They really do believe everyone else was a bit player at Gallipoli. It's one area where I'm not exactly integrated, as I cant help myself when push comes to shove and they carry on about British generals and colonial cannon fodder. As for the Anzackery word, I've never heard of it. The Guardian reporter found a made up word by a reporter from 50 odd years ago and GB's friend repeated it whilst everyone else gave it the consideration it deserves ie none. |
Re: Anzackery
Originally Posted by Gordon Barlow
(Post 12242500)
I think we should distinguish between soldiers who defended their countries and those who invaded others' countries. Of course soldiers have to follow orders, or they will be shot; so if they're ordered to kill peaceful villagers (for instance), they had better do it or forfeit their own lives. But I think that the word "Anzackery" was probably invented to say that it's morally wrong to laud the killers of unarmed villagers as "war heroes", as seems to be the custom these days. Not every soldier in every war deserves to be honoured.
Patriotism can so easily slide into blind tribalism, where tribal leaders order the slaughter of foreigners in the name of self-defence. For instance: in my very young days I learned that the infamous execution of "Breaker" Morant in the Boer War was a wicked unfairness; yet according to his Wiki entry I may have been misled. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breaker_Morant Just on spec, I Googled the words Gallipoli war crimes, and to my horror found some quite disturbing entries. Have a look and you'll see what I mean. Invading countries was severely frowned on during the Nuremberg war trials; and during the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights too. And yet, it still happens. That, we should be ashamed of. The theory you've constructed is about as valid as your pulled from nowhere word 'Anzackery', which no one apart from you seems to have heard of. I do, however, note that it rhymes with knackery, which in my opinion is where it belongs. |
Re: Anzackery
Originally Posted by spouse of scouse
(Post 12242622)
You seem to have got it into your head that ANZAC Day is a proud, nationalistic celebration of war. You couldn't be more wrong, and unless you're willing to take your rather patronizing 'you need educating' hat off and listen to people you'll never get it.
The theory you've constructed is about as valid as your pulled from nowhere word 'Anzackery', which no one apart from you seems to have heard of. I do, however, note that it rhymes with knackery, which in my opinion is where it belongs. |
Re: Anzackery
Originally Posted by spouse of scouse
(Post 12242622)
You seem to have got it into your head that ANZAC Day is a proud, nationalistic celebration of war. You couldn't be more wrong, and unless you're willing to take your rather patronizing 'you need educating' hat off and listen to people you'll never get it.
The theory you've constructed is about as valid as your pulled from nowhere word 'Anzackery', which no one apart from you seems to have heard of. I do, however, note that it rhymes with knackery, which in my opinion is where it belongs. It's what we do in the west - honour our military people and war dead |
Re: Anzackery
It always amazes me that when entering discussions on Gallipolli, people are genuinely shocked to hear the number of British, Irish, Belgian and French casualties which were in many instances in excess of the Australian. (Not to mention the Turks). In fact there is a genuine surprise when the French are raised!
But I guess this spoils the ANZAC story. TD |
Re: Anzackery
Originally Posted by Toe Dipper
(Post 12243444)
It always amazes me that when entering discussions on Gallipolli, people are genuinely shocked to hear the number of British, Irish, Belgian and French casualties which were in many instances in excess of the Australian. (Not to mention the Turks). In fact there is a genuine surprise when the French are raised!
But I guess this spoils the ANZAC story. TD It happens in every country Nature of the beast |
Re: Anzackery
Originally Posted by Toe Dipper
(Post 12243444)
It always amazes me that when entering discussions on Gallipolli, people are genuinely shocked to hear the number of British, Irish, Belgian and French casualties which were in many instances in excess of the Australian. (Not to mention the Turks). In fact there is a genuine surprise when the French are raised!
But I guess this spoils the ANZAC story. TD |
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:56 pm. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.