Anzac Day wreath

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32588, 23 April 1971, Page 8

Anzac Day wreath

Sir, —Your editorial says that the students’ wreath may cause distress to “fellow citizens who have suffered fat more from the consequences of war than they are ever likely to suffer.” This is an amazing thing to say to the generation which has grown up under the shadow of nuclear bombs, already stockpiled sufficiently for a fivebld “overkill” of the entire human race and still being developed. This madness is itself a consequence of war and is better comprehended by the young than by their elders Anzac Day has always promoted the military idea in old-fashioned terms, and was never purely a day for commemoration and mourning. These latter aspects call for our full respect; but dwindling attendances reveal that most of us who have been bereaved prefer to remember and moum in private.—Yours, etc., ELSIE LOCKE. April 22. 1971.

Sir, Remembrance of those who lost their lives in the World Wars is not reserved to relatives only. Relatives and returned servicemen will surely agree that you don’t need a special day to remember friends, husbands, and sons. The tragedy is that they died for country, family, and friends; but any real show of appreciation of the ideological reason for their sacrifice is scorned by the surviving. The students wreath wording is worth more than all the pomp and show of those attending parades. Young men died that the future young may have a good life. Give today’s young the opportunity to honour the unpayable debt. The wording is honest. . It shows more appreciation of the price paid than all the jealous guarding of freedom of speech and press imposed by the contemporaries of those fallen. Did they die just for more young healthy idealist men to be killed for the same cause? —Yours, etc., S. J. MARSHALL. April 22, 1971.

Sir, —Many of the letters miss the point of our proposed action. As Mr Caygill has repeatedly said, no disrespect is intended to those who fought in past wars, or indeed who are fighting the present one in Indo-China Previous generations have felt justified in going to war, and we do not dispute their action. We are grateful to them and fully realise what we owe to their sacrifice. It is this very realisation which compels us to make some effort to ensure that their sacrifice for peace is not in vain by registering our protest at a continuing war we consider unjustified. Surely, then, Anzac Day, a solemn day on which war and its consequences are uppermost in people’s minds, is the most appropriate occasion. It is in this spirit, that we will attend the Anzac service and support the laying of the wreath on our behalf.— Yours, etc., MARGARET A. FLANAGAN, Executive member, Students’ Association, LINDA EVANS. April 22, 1971.

Sir,—As rational, thinking, students, can Mr Caygill and his executive honestly claim to be as sincere in their denouncement of war as R.S.A. men are about grief from the loss of mates and relatives in the World Wars? There is a time and place for everything, and I, along with the majority of other students, agree with Brigadier Burrows that the Anzac parade is neither the time nor the place for an anti-war protest wreath.—Yours, etc., W. B. SANDREY, Lincoln College, April 22, 1971.

Sir, Brigadier Burrows wishes to preserve Anzac Day purely for remembrance. Yet this remembrance has been combined in the past with the pleasure of reunion with former comrades. Why should it not be combined today with the remembrance of the horrors of war and with a determination to fight for peace? The remembrance

side of Anzac Day will have less personal significance in the future for the majority of New Zealanders. As a day on which we pledge ourselves to work for peace, it would have more meaning for more people and be a more fitting memorial to those New Zealanders who died in a war which was supposed to end wars. The Christchurch branch of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament plans to join the students in laying a wreath in remembrance of 1 human sufferings in war and in an urgent plea for an end to all wars.—Yours, etc., ALISON NEALE, Secretary, Christchurch Branch, C.N.D. April 21, 1971.

Sir, —There cannot be much news to publish if for two consecutive days the main item on your front page concerns a students’ wreath.— Yours, etc., A. B. HARMAN. April 22, 1971.

Sir, —The old, conservative, and hypocritical is giving way to the new, dynamic, and realistic world that is emerging with today’s idealistic youth. Their philosophy is right, dead right. The future is black, chaotic, and hopeless unless they prevail, for all our so-called moral and social code consists of is cynicism, double-talk, antagonism, with plunder as its material basis. The youth is moving from destructive competition to constructive cooperation. No veneer can longer hide the jungle struggle from the penetrative and critical eyes of the young. If they don’t change things they become warped and twisted, too, believing and acting a lie. The world, socially, materially, and morally, is rotten ripe foi change and if the youth don't fight then there will be absolutely nothing left for their inheritance but an empty shell. It is now or never. I also support and honour the students’ Anzac message, fot what it conveys to us all.— Yours, etc.,

W. J. COLLINS. April 22, 1971.

Sir, —I am one of the thousands of ex-servicemen who lost many service mates and members of our great family; Anzac Day and Battle of Britain Day are the two most important days whereby one can remember and commemorate our war dead. Anzac Day was officially set aside to commemorate New Zealand’s and Australia’s fallen comrades so that we may live in peace. May 1 remind some of these students that if they dared to lay a wreath on a Russian cenotaph commemorating the Russian enemy dead they would be regarded as traitors and shot without a trial. In conclusion, I earnestly hope that the authorities will see to it that these students do not belittle Anzac Day.—Yours, etc,.

W. J. D. H. McFAUL. April 21, 1971. Sir,—“No ulterior motive”? Is he quite sure they don’t want to show off?— Yours, etc., L.G.P. April 22, 1971. Sir, —I wish to protest against the high-handed action of the students* executive. I fail to see the relevance of a protest wreath at a ceremony which is, in essence, a commemorative one. In other words, the executive is elbowing its way into a matter that does not concern it. I suggest that if the Students’ Association wish to protest by the laying of a wreath, let them do it at a protest meeting and with the consensus of the student body whose opinions they are supposed to reflect. It is an ironic fact that the executive’s stand exemplifies an attitude of selfishness and lack of feeling for others that underline the reasons for any war.—Yours, etc., VARSITY STUDENT. April 22, 1971.

Sir. Briga d i e r Burrows should remember that Hitler tried to dictate his terms to the world and did dictate within

his own country. Everyone is familiar with the end result. For Brigadier Burrows to suggest a change in the wording of the Canterbury Students’ Association message on their proposed wreath, with the underlying threat of a “collision course,” is another method of continuing a war which he allegedly was fighting against. Many or most New Zealand soldiers were conscripts (after the volunteers ran out, which was not long) and to presuggest that they went to the front willingly is nonsense. As an ex-volunteer serviceman I am constantly disgusted by the ready involvement of the R.S.A. in matters like this. Any returned serviceman worthy of his salt does not need any Anzac Day to remind him of his fallen friends and other associated memories.—Yours, etc., DIEU ET MON DROIT. April 21, 1971.

Sir, —I endorse and commend the Canterbury students’ message on their wreath for Anzac Day. We are now in a new age in which wars and capitalist exploitation will be completely obsolete, so let us get to work now and eliminate the causes of war, such as in the present Indo-China war of annihilation. Professor Buchanan has made a good start in his enlightening article in “The Press,” <f April 20, and the students, too, with their message. No man’s life should be sacrificed to give others free education, freedom of speech, etc. These freedoms are inherent human rights.—Yours, etc., NEW AGE. April 22, 1971.

Sir, —Modem youth stands for two things—universal freedom and intelligent thinking. To use Anzac Day for the purpose of presenting theii views denies both. Anzac Day belongs to the 1914-18 generation, and should not be interfered with by any faction of the community. Whatever the intention of the students, their actions shows appalling ignorance of social history and social development, both essential for appreciation and understanding. On any other day of the year, the students would receive concentrated hearing, but let those who built the affluent society and material luxury enjoyed today keep one day for their memories. If students would spend a little more time in learning and considering facts before expressing opinions, and learning to appreciate and understand the work of past generations, they would be much more successful in attaining their objectives.—Yours, etc., SEVENTY-SIX. April 22, 1971.

Sir, —I would like to express my deep concern and strong disapproval of Brigadier Burrows’s unfortunate rejection of the university students proposed move. As the young and the future protectors of our free country they have every right to express their deep regret for the past, and concern for the future. The twentieth century is one of record human suffering caused by the futility of war. Not only must we remember the past victims, but look to the future and try to prevent more suffering. Gratitude is felt for those who fought, but there are still people fighting and will continue to do so if we do not stop dwelling on the past and lend our thoughts and action to the future.Yours, etc., DON’T BE SELFISH. •. April 22, 1971. ’

Sir,—l am 100 per cent permanently war disabled and I prefer the message from the Students’ Association to the one proposed by Brigadier Burrows. I also resent the apparent selfrighteousness evident in the Brigadier’s proposed message. I believe in the sincerity of our young people. Why knock them? Accept the proposed wreath in the spirit in which it is offered and ask them to live up to their proposed sentiments.— Yours, etc., ALSO STH BRIGADE. April 21, 1971.