Allied Merchant Navy - WWII

Hugh · 01-10-2007, 04:48 PM

Given that the U-boat threat was the one thing that Churchill really feared, why do you think that the Allied Merchant Navy never got the credit it deserved for its role during the Second World War?

Our sailors, solidiers and airmen all rightly received credit for delivering our nations from the Axis powers. But why did this brave band of men and women get treated so badly.

I would be interested in your thoughts.

Regards
Hugh

Kitty · 01-10-2007, 06:12 PM

PR. They didn't look as flash as the Brylcreem boys, nor did they have they have that grit associated with servicemen in the public eye. Total rubbish of course but the MN wasn't seen as a service and therefore was just part of the civilian effort so why should they get more recognition than, say, the girls in the RO factories?
Its rubbish of course but the MN never had the sparkle of the RN in the public mind.

Antipodean Andy · 01-10-2007, 11:55 PM

They may have been seen as the "targets" and not the ones who "won" the Battle of the Atlantic etc by sinking U-boats.

Brave men one and all.

Adrian Roberts · 02-10-2007, 12:07 AM

I gather that eventually they were issued with a particular lapel badge to try and spare them some of the criticism from those who assumed that Civilian clothes meant someone avoiding fighting.

And in the early days of the war, and throughout WW1, if their ship was sunk, their pay stopped there and then. Churchill put a stop to this practice by making them employees of the Ministry of War Transport rather than the shipping lines.

Kyt · 02-10-2007, 12:48 AM

I think one needs to differentiate between the way that the Merchant mariners were seen during the war and the public perception after the war. I don't think that they were seen as lesser than uniformed men - the propaganda machine in Britain was very active in portraying them in a positive light. The Mercant Marine was one of the few non-military units for whom propaganda booklets were published and distributed. Actually, apart from the, I can't think of any other "civilian" profession who had such a booklet published - all the others that I have seen have been on military units or military campaigns.

However, after the war, their contributions were indeed quickly forgotten. I think this was partly due to the lack of films and programmes about them - whereas there have been a plethora of films about all the other services and campaigns, I can't think of a single post-war film covering the Atlantic convoy system. As the public are pretty fickle about these things, they soon forget.

spidge · 02-10-2007, 04:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kyt

I think one needs to differentiate between the way that the Merchant mariners were seen during the war and the public perception after the war. I don't think that they were seen as lesser than uniformed men - the propaganda machine in Britain was very active in portraying them in a positive light. The Mercant Marine was one of the few non-military units for whom propaganda booklets were published and distributed. Actually, apart from the, I can't think of any other "civilian" profession who had such a booklet published - all the others that I have seen have been on military units or military campaigns.

However, after the war, their contributions were indeed quickly forgotten. I think this was partly due to the lack of films and programmes about them - whereas there have been a plethora of films about all the other services and campaigns, I can't think of a single post-war film covering the Atlantic convoy system. As the public are pretty fickle about these things, they soon forget.

I am unable to think of any post war movies at the moment however I am sure there were a few.

You might also consider that a great percentage would not/did not know there was a difference between the Navy and the Merchant Navy or Merchant Marine. I have had people ask me: "what is the difference"?

I have always been an ambassador to the behind the lines people (not including MN, MM in this of course) Logistics, Cooks, Mechanics etc. People forget sometimes that the support chain enabled the front line to proceed.

Hugh · 04-10-2007, 07:49 PM

Thanks everybody for your replies.

They never did get the recognition they deserved and there are many reasons for that - some of which have been mentioned.

MN Day was officially recognised in 2000 in the UK and is now held annually on September 3rd, the anniversary of the sinking of the ss ATHENIA on the first day of the war. But why did it take 55 years after WWII to get this recognition?

The MN was not invited to march at the Cenotaph for Remembrance Sunday until 1997.

The Merchant Navy's name was in the law courts of our land in 2005 when an attempt was made to get Merchant Navy ships which were sunk with loss of life classified as War Graves. Shouldn't they be recognised as War Graves just like warships are? Why did the Government fight this?

The loss of a seaman's pay when his/her ship was lost was a disgrace.

There is so much more that we could write a book about it.

Thanks again

Regards
Hugh

Antipodean Andy · 04-10-2007, 11:43 PM

Right, Sept 3 is in my diary and marked!

Kyt · 04-10-2007, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

There is so much more that we could write a book about it

Go for it Hugh. I think these issues need to be aired or they will be lost. And if you want to share your thoughts with the forum we'd be happy to read and comment.

Hugh · 05-10-2007, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy in West Oz

Right, Sept 3 is in my diary and marked!

Thanks gents,
I may add to the thread as we go along and please feel free to comment.

Andy,

The UK, Canada and NZ have now recognised Merchant Navy Day on Sept 3rd but your Aussie government is proving to be a tough nut to crack but I know many good folk over there who are working damm hard to get this sorted.

Regards
Hugh