Epigram
10.11.2014
10
Commemorating the centenary of WW1 Jonathan Harding Features Writer
Photo credit: flickr/Boss Tweed
On Sunday 9 November, hundreds gathered at the Bristol Cenotaph to pay their respects to the soldiers who lost their lives in the First World War. Since 1920, the Cenotaph has annually served as the focal point for the city’s Remembrance Day parade on the final Sunday before the anniversary of the armistice. This year is no different, but carries a further level of poignancy, as it is the centenary of the start of the First World War. The service that followed the parade offered a collective and fitting testament to the nature of the sacrifice made by British infantry in The Great War. Joined by honorary officials and current servicemen and women, the people of Bristol stood as one to pay their respects to the bravery of those lost, with Mayor George Ferguson leading the parade from the Mansion House to City Hall before coming to a stand at the central monument. On the first day of the Battle of the Somme in July 1916, 60,000 British soldiers lost their lives, with 420,000 dead by the end of the battle. This bloodbath was the credence behind the phrase ‘never again’ - though of course, the War to End All Wars was not even nearly the last time Britain waged warfare. Each wreath of poppies laid at the base of the Cenotaph offers homage to their sacrifice: it is a symbol of unity and respect which, irrespective
of the origins of the conflict and the hell that soldiers endured, acts as an acknowledgement of the sheer gravity of war. The event afforded the opportunity for reflection. The Cenotaph will continue to act as a central figure, as hundreds unite around it in solemn remembrance, as they have been doing in London with ‘The Watch’; a round-theclock pairing of a public figure and a soldier to watch over the Cenotaph in aid of the poppy appeal. The monument, like the impact of the war, is immutable, unaffected by time. In this way, it signifies our continued acknowledgement of the sacrifice of some 700,000
British men and our unalterable respect for the values they fought for, and the hardships they were forced to endure. It is this willingness to remember that will, in the words of Rupert Brooke, enable the memory of those who sacrificed their lives to live on ‘under an English heaven.’
Manvir Basi Features Writer ‘Learning about the First World War is now more important than ever’ were the words of Sir Max Hastings speaking exclusively to Epigram.
Sir Max was in Bristol talking at the Annual Colston Research Lecture about the origins of war and promoting his new book Catastrophe, a brilliant account of the beginning of World War I. Sir Max firmly believes that the First World War is just as important as the Second World War. He argues that Kaiser Wilhelm II, the emperor-like ruler of Germany in 1914, would have imposed a draconian peace similar to what Hitler would also have established had he won in 1945. During the interviwew, he revealed the aim of Catastrophe: rejecting what he called the ‘Poet’s version of the war’, referring to the words of people
including Siegfried Sassoon and Wilfred Owen. Such poets, he believes, created the idea that we should somehow be ashamed of the British role due to the slaughter in the Somme and Ypres. The horror of World War I pales in comparison with other conflicts, such as Napoleon’s invasion of Russia in 1812, and the Eastern Front in 1941-42. I bring up my reading of Barbara Tuchman’s wonderful Guns of August, and the extensive amount of books written on the subject, including those by the vilified Niall Ferguson, author of The Pity of War. Sir Max affirms his contempt for Niall Ferguson, branding him a ‘sensationalist’ for his remarks
Honouring the Bristol Bus Boycott Becky Morton Features Writer
“ What today seems like a blatant example of racism was perfectly legal in 1963
In response to this discrimination, Stephenson, a local youth worker of African background, organised a job interview with the company for one of his Jamaican pupils, Guy Bailey. As expected, when he mentioned Bailey was black the interview was immediately cancelled. Inspired by the ongoing civil rights movement in the US, protestors began a four month long campaign of non violent direct action, boycotting buses and organising pickets, blockades and sit ins. The boycott succeeded in gaining wide support from the public, including University of Bristol students who led a
protest march to the Bus Station on 1 May. Finally on 28 August 1963, the Bristol Omnibus Company agreed to ‘complete integration’ on buses, ‘without regard to race, colour or creed.’ Fittingly, this was the same day Martin Luther King led a march of 250,000 protestors to Washington and delivered his monumental ‘I have a dream’ speech, highlighting the influence of the US civil rights movement on the Bristol protests. In September the company hired its first nonwhite bus conductor, an Indianborn Sikh, Raghbir Singh, and the employment of several black conductors soon followed. The boycott has become a significant part of Bristol’s heritage, with a plaque commemorating the event unveiled in August 2013 and the Union’s recent recognition of Stephenson as a notable figure in the city’s history. As recently as March 2013, coinciding with the 50th anniversary of the Boycott, Unite in Bristol publicly apologised for the role of the Transport and General Workers’ Union in supporting the colour bar of the Bristol Omnibus Company.
At the time, the movement gained the support of Labour Opposition leader Harold Wilson, who denounced the Bristol Omnibus colour bar at an Anti-Apartheid Movement rally in London. After becoming Prime Minister, Wilson passed the Race Relations Act of 1965 which made ‘racial discrimination unlawful in public places.’ This was extended by the 1968 Race Relations Act which made it illegal to refuse housing or employment on the grounds of race. The Bristol Bus
Boycott played a significant role in highlighting the enduring issue of racism in Britain and contributed to the passing of legislation to tackle this. The continued recognition of the Bristol Bus Boycott as central to the movement against racial discrimination in Britain is vital to promote further racial harmony in Bristol and beyond.
• The Bristol Bus Boycott occurred in 1963 • It was sparked by the Bristol Omnibus Company’s refusal to employ black or Asian bus crews
Photo credit: flickr/Paul Townsend
The University of Bristol Students’ Union has recently announced that it will name one of the rooms in the new Richmond Building after Paul Stephenson, a leading member of the 1963 Bristol Bus Boycott. Although the boycott is recognised by the local community as an important event in the city’s history, it is not widely-known outside Bristol, despite its national significance. The boycott began just over 50 years ago when a Jamaican Bristol resident, Guy Bailey, was refused a job with the Bristol Omnibus Company on the grounds that ‘we don’t employ black people.’ What today seems a blatant example of racism was, in fact, perfectly legal in 1963. In the early 1960s there were around 3000 West Indian people living in Bristol, largely concentrated in the deprived area of St Pauls. Black residents suffered discrimination in housing and employment and not one nonwhite driver or conductor had
ever been employed by the Bristol Omnibus Company.
that a Kaiser-run Europe would have been similar to the EU. For Sir Max, the culpability of the conflict resides with Germany, as it had the power to prevent it from becoming a global phenomenon. YetitisSirMax’sfinalstatement that holds deep meaning in this year of Remembrance: ‘All the problems in the 21st century merely pale in comparison to those of the 20th Century.’ Perhaps this is something that today’s politicians should think about as we remember the 100 years since the First World War began.