The following Christmas, machine gun barrages were deliberately timed to drown out any sound of carol singing to prevent spontaneous truces happening again.

  • Wahots@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    1 year ago

    Makes my heart ache reading that. It’s good that soldiers still saw the humanity in others on that day in 1914.

    • Maalus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      ·
      1 year ago

      They went back to war, because they feared punishment. Even the christmas truce didn’t repeat itself. The officers quickly made sure of that. Remember, this was the first year of the war too.

      Ultimately, very rarely does a regular person want to go to war. They want to live a peaceful life, unbothered by anyone, doing their stuff. This truce came about because people were so close, that when they started singing carols, the other side sang the same ones, in their language. That is enough to make you stop and think “wait, those are people in there, same as us”.

      • illi@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Also, correct me if I’m wrong but there wasn’t any underlying idology in play, like with Nazis is WW2. So it wasn’t as “good vs evil”.

    • FireTower@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      1 year ago

      The German army was conscripted and the British soldiers of the day were men sold on the idea of traveling the world and becoming a hero or a ‘true man’ by cutting down their nations enemies in noble warfare.

      It basically was just a job at the start of the war for many. They shot at the enemy because they were soldiers and that’s what soldiers do.

      But when their officer told them “You’ll be shot for dereliction of duty” they went back to fighting.

      WW1 was a senseless and sad war, driven by the desires of aristocrats.

    • Kepabar@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s well documented that the leadership of both sides had some difficulty getting their soldiers to go back to fighting after the truce.

      The average soldier did not want to fight. Leadership had to threaten charges of desertions and treason to get them back to fighting.

      • ██████████@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        modern people are able to so easily access excellent multimedia propaganda nowadays that just isnt needed anymore

        Hate is so easy to propogate with film

        And almost impossible without it

  • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    An interesting book somewhat related to this is Poilu, the notebooks of a French soldier who served through most of the war. He was an avowed socialist who never fired his weapon at the enemy and encouraged the soldiers under him (when he was a corporal) to do the same. One of his stories was about a period later in the war when the soldiers on both sides of the trenches in his area had reached an “accommodation” where they refused to shoot at each other. One day a high-ranking officer visited, saw the situation, picked up a soldier’s rifle and shot dead an enemy soldier lounging in full view across no-man’s land. This precipitated a resumption of “normal” warfare in the area but almost got the officer killed - by his own soldiers.