As some of you might already know, Dan Cooper, acting
President of University of London Union – who represents around 120, 000
students in London – decided to boycott a remembrance service in London last
Sunday, refusing to lay a wreath on behalf of our fallen servicemen (and
women). This is particularly sickening considering the latest British victim of
the war in Afghanistan was a UCL graduate, Lieutenant Edward Drummond-Baxter.
Some may argue that Cooper has the right to freedom of
speech, and the right to boycott that which he does not agree with. Fair
enough; I understand that. However, if you’re supposed to be representing a
large group of people – if it is your JOB to take these peoples’ views into
account – then it is also your job to ensure that they are all comfortable with
your stance.
The point of Remembrance Day is not to share political
views. It is not to vilify war, or those who have chosen to fight. Remember,
many servicemen during the World Wars did not choose to fight – there was
mandatory conscription, and it could have been anyone’s brother, father or
uncle who fell. We take one day a year to thank them for their contribution,
for ensuring Britain remains a free land, one where you can be gay/black/Jewish
without fearing for your life. We are one of the most cosmopolitan countries in
the world – and we owe that, in large part, to the courage and bravery of those
who fought in the past century.
For Dan Cooper, the representative of many, to refuse to
participate in this one day of thanks purely for his own political views, is
disgraceful. If he were to have boycotted just himself, sending a different ULU
representative in his place, that might have been forgivable. However, it was
unconscionable to decide to disallow ULU to send a delegate. It was not his
place to declare that ULU does not support our fallen troops.
I cannot stress enough how disgusted I am. Although I am
fortunate to say that none of my immediate family has lost their life to war,
my Father was a Captain in the British Army for several years, and even now
works for the Territorial Army. He has never been to war, but he knows many who
have, and many who have given their lives to protect the weak.
What do you think? Do you support Cooper’s right to free
speech? Or do you think that, as a representative of a massive student body, he
should have consulted the members of the union before making such a bold
statement? Is Remembrance Day even relevant now? Let me know your views: theyoungladysguide@gmail.com
Love,
Blaise
Useful Links:
he didn't boycott sending a delegate. one was sent. forgivable now? probably best to do a little more research before you lay on such a strong condemnation. i'd also like to make the point that I view it as a lot more dangerous to inhibit democratically elected people from exercising their own opinions simply due to a majority consensus on one issue. cooper was elected as vice-president, it stinks more of political opportunism to harangue him to such an extent for this, than it does for Dan to make this point. after all, if these soldiers fought for our freedom, is it not fair to say we should have freedom in how we remember them? the wreath laying ceremony is seen by many as apolitical, including me. dan however didn't think so, and instead opted to remember the fallen in a way more befitting his personal beliefs. rationally speaking, as far as i can see, there is very little that is hugely controversial in this, provided you acknowledge the fact that laying a wreath can be concieved to have political and historical connotaions, which even the slightest level of research (which we've determined you struggle with) would make you aware of. for the most part i agree with you, were i him i would have participated, but i am not him, and nor are you, nor are we elected to exercise our beliefs. i believe the phrase is "pipe down".
ReplyDeleteHi Paul! Thanks for leaving a comment :) I'm sorry, I didn't realise he had actually sent a delegate - in all the material I read for this post, I never saw anyone say that that had actually happened. So I apologise for that.
DeleteI agree entirely with your points. If Dan had been asked to lay a wreath without being Vice-President of ULU and had declined, that would be fair enough. However, Dan wasn't asked to lay a wreath. The Acting President of ULU was asked, as a mark of respect. Whoever filled that office should have asked his constituents before making a bold statement that those who he represented did not necessarily agree with. That's the point I was making, and if that didn't come across then I can only apologise for my poor penmanship.
Once again, thank you for commenting!!
Hey, i get that and its fair enough. sorry for coming across as harsh in my comment its just frustrating when there's so much anger directed at him under false pretences. i think mine and your opinion differs over what his role actually is. i see it as once he has been elected, he has the mandate to exercise his personal beliefs, even if this is in an acting capacity. you seem to be making the point that you feel he should be representing the students of ULU at that ceremony, as most of them would in all likelihood want him to be there. as far as i'm aware there is no specific rule that Dan, once elected, is obliged to do anything contrary to his personal beliefs unless otherwise stated in the ULU's constitution. as it stands this was not stated, and as he did say he would mourn and respect those who died, but in a way he views doesn't taint their memory, i think he is completely within his right to do this. out of interest, would you rather he had gone, as an elected official of the union against his personal beliefs simply due to mass pressure? in light of the fact he sent a delegate i'm not sure i can find any grounds to criticise him on, other than my opinion being different to his. which irritatingly i seem to have found is not a sound base for attack!
ReplyDeleteNo, I totally understand - the amount of backlash that he must be facing is pretty daunting, so I respect you for standing up for him even thought you don't know/necessarily totally agree with him.
DeleteI think you're probably right. In my opinion, an elected figurehead sometimes has to do stuff he doesn't like/want for the good of the country. For example, whether or not David Cameron agreed with the laying of a wreath on Remembrance Day, he would still be expected to do it, and would be facing this much criticism for failing to do so. Do you see what I mean? Yes I understand that that might not be in the official job description; yet where in the 'job description' of Obama does it say that he has to commemorate 9/11, or President's Day, or any of that? Yet, as far as I know, he does it without complaining, no matter his beliefs. Not that I'm saying Obama doesn't believe in all that stuff - I'm just saying that whether he truly does or not is irrelevant.
In answer to your question, I would rather that he had sent a letter or email out to the members of ULU saying that he didn't agree with it, and would rather not go, and asking them if it was okay for him to send a delegate, rather than just putting it on his blog. Do you think that would have been fair?
I'm not trying to attack him; I'm just expressing my opinion that he should have consulted with the members of ULU before making that statement, when his views are supposed to reflect ours too. Yes, it's something I feel quite strongly about, since, as I said, my family has ties with the Armed Forces; so perhaps I've been a bit vehement in my espousal. So, Dan Cooper, if you're reading this, I'm sorry - you're probably not a dick, you just made a dick move (in my opinion).