Remembrance Day has long stood as a moment of quiet reflection in Britain, a day for honouring those who gave their lives in wars, notably the two World Wars, to protect freedom, democracy, and human dignity. However, in recent years, this solemn observance has taken on a distinctly political edge, particularly as some individuals on the right have co-opted the poppy as a litmus test for patriotism. These voices often proclaim that anyone who chooses not to wear a poppy or fails to publicly display allegiance on Remembrance Day is somehow un-British or disrespectful to veterans. Their fervor, while ostensibly about respect for the fallen, frequently reveals underlying contradictions in their ideology; contradictions that call into question whether they genuinely uphold the values for which so many lives were sacrificed. In reality, their rhetoric and actions, especially in relation to immigrants, welfare recipients, and issues of national identity, align far more closely with the divisive, authoritarian ideals of the very regimes Britain once stood against than with the compassionate democracy for which British soldiers fought.
The poppy has always held a place in British culture as a symbol of remembrance and sacrifice. But the emphasis on its visibility and symbolism has, of late, morphed into a cultural battleground, where wearing a poppy is less about personal reflection and more about projecting a particular brand of nationalism. Many who vocalise the importance of the poppy year-round seem equally vocal about political issues like Brexit, immigration, and the supposed “scourge” of benefit dependency. In their narratives, these topics are presented not as societal challenges to be addressed with empathy but as threats to the British way of life that must be eradicated. Ironically, the fervor with which they denounce these groups bears an uncomfortable resemblance to the scapegoating rhetoric used by far-right movements of the past, including the Nazi regime. The selective compassion that they reserve for veterans or those they deem as “real Brits” belies a disturbing lack of empathy for anyone who does not fit neatly into their narrow vision of Britishness.
Much of this hypocrisy is evident in the rhetoric surrounding immigration. Many of those who proudly flaunt the poppy as a badge of patriotism are often the first to demonise migrants, labelling them as criminals, freeloaders, or threats to British jobs and culture. Social media is flooded with posts railing against immigrants, portraying them as invaders who leech off the system and disrupt the lives of “ordinary” Britons. Yet these same individuals fail to acknowledge the fundamental irony of their position: British soldiers fought and died in wars that were, at least in part, about resisting regimes that thrived on xenophobia, militaristic nationalism, and the demonisation of outsiders. In seeking to demonise migrants, these individuals perpetuate the same kinds of divisive ideologies that the Nazis employed to dehumanise Jews, Romani people, and other marginalised groups. While they profess to honour those who fought against fascism, their actions betray a disturbing embrace of its underlying principles.
The hostility towards immigrants is frequently accompanied by support for hardline policies that restrict asylum, deport undocumented migrants, and even withdraw from international agreements that ensure human rights protections. Brexit, which many of these poppy “patriots” vocally supported, was in part motivated by a desire to curb immigration and reclaim “British sovereignty.” However, this so-called sovereignty has come at a high price, with countless reports indicating that post-Brexit Britain is struggling with labour shortages, inflation, and decreased international standing. The migrants they so eagerly exclude are often the very people who would contribute to the economy, care for the elderly, and take on jobs that many Britons are unwilling to perform. Yet the poppy-wearing, anti-immigrant crusaders remain unmoved by these realities, content to blame immigrants for perceived cultural threats without acknowledging the economic and social benefits they provide. This selective blindness is not patriotism; it is prejudice, wrapped in the guise of national pride.
Equally problematic is the disdain these individuals show for those who rely on social welfare. Their language is peppered with terms like “scroungers” and “benefit cheats,” casting welfare recipients as parasites draining resources from hard-working Britons. They rally against what they see as a “culture of dependency” and argue that social benefits should be cut to discourage laziness. Yet their supposed reverence for veterans ignores the fact that many former servicemen and women, particularly those with physical or mental disabilities, rely on these very welfare systems to survive. The same people who claim to honour veterans by donning the poppy are often the loudest opponents of the social programs that support them. This paradox reveals a fundamental hypocrisy in their worldview: they idolise the military and revere the concept of “sacrifice,” but only insofar as it can be used to prop up a particular vision of Britishness that excludes the vulnerable and the needy.
In their year-round denouncements of the so-called welfare “scrounger,” these individuals adopt a punitive approach to poverty that echoes the very principles of authoritarian regimes. Rather than addressing the systemic factors that contribute to poverty, such as wage stagnation, lack of affordable housing, or underfunded public services, they prefer to individualise blame. They promote the notion that poverty is a moral failing, a sign of laziness or lack of character. This view, which aligns with the ideology of “survival of the fittest,” dehumanises those in need and ignores the structural inequalities that perpetuate poverty. British soldiers did not fight and die to uphold a society that punishes the poor while rewarding the wealthy. Yet this is precisely the society that many of these self-proclaimed patriots seem to envision, one in which compassion is selective and social support is contingent on arbitrary standards of “deservingness.”
Furthermore, the narrative surrounding Remembrance Day has become increasingly entwined with a sense of British exceptionalism. Those who publicly lambast others for not wearing the poppy or for insufficiently honouring veterans often use this display as a way of asserting Britain’s moral superiority. This exceptionalism, however, is frequently accompanied by a deep-seated hostility towards any form of international cooperation. These individuals are quick to dismiss the European Union, the United Nations, or any foreign entity that challenges Britain’s self-perceived independence. This attitude, amplified in the rhetoric around Brexit, mirrors the isolationist policies that authoritarian regimes have used to consolidate power by framing the outside world as an enemy. British soldiers fought in coalition forces alongside allies from numerous nations; they fought for the preservation of alliances and cooperation. Yet those who claim to honour their sacrifices often advocate for a narrow, insular vision of Britain that disregards the principles of unity and collaboration.
At the core of this hypocrisy is an unsettling reality: many of those who proclaim the loudest love for Britain and its values fundamentally misunderstand or willfully ignore what those values represent. They wield the poppy as a weapon, using it to police patriotism and silence dissent. Those who dare question British foreign policy, criticize the government, or advocate for the rights of marginalised groups are accused of being “un-British” or disrespectful to veterans. This policing of patriotism, this demand for unquestioning loyalty, is eerily reminiscent of the tactics used by authoritarian regimes to suppress dissent. In a democracy, freedom of expression and diversity of opinion are essential. Yet the self-appointed guardians of Remembrance Day seem intent on creating a climate in which only a narrow version of British identity is permissible. Their behaviour is not only hypocritical but deeply anti-democratic, betraying the very freedoms that soldiers fought to defend.
Remembrance Day should be a time for unity, a moment when people of all backgrounds come together to reflect on the costs of war and the importance of peace. Instead, it has been co-opted by those who use it as an opportunity to sow division, to draw arbitrary lines between the “true patriots” and those they deem insufficiently loyal. This divisive rhetoric does a disservice to the memory of those who gave their lives in service of a better world. It reduces Remembrance Day to a shallow exercise in virtue signalling, where the wearing of a poppy becomes less a symbol of remembrance and more a means of asserting moral superiority.
The irony is that those who most vocally advocate for the sanctity of Remembrance Day often embody the very traits that Britain once stood against. They promote nationalism over inclusivity, punishment over compassion, and isolationism over cooperation. Their vision of Britain is one that is closed, fearful, and hostile, a Britain where compassion is conditional and democracy is weakened by the relentless policing of patriotism. This is not the Britain that soldiers fought to protect; it is a betrayal of their sacrifice.
The challenge, then, is to reclaim Remembrance Day from those who would use it as a tool for division. We must resist the urge to reduce patriotism to a set of rigid symbols and instead embrace a more nuanced, inclusive vision of what it means to be British. True remembrance honours not only those who fought but also the ideals they fought for: freedom, justice, compassion, and democracy. Wearing a poppy should be a personal choice, a reflection of individual values and respect. It should not be a test of loyalty or a badge of superiority.
As we remember the fallen, we must also remember the principles for which they gave their lives. We must challenge those who would co-opt their sacrifice for purposes of division and exclusion. True honour lies not in the symbols we wear but in the actions we take to build a society that reflects the values for which so many have sacrificed. Let Remembrance Day be a time to reflect not only on the past but on the future we wish to create; a future rooted in compassion, unity, and the unwavering commitment to democracy.
