Conscientious objectors in the 20th century

A is someone who refuses to fight in war for moral reasons. A change in legislation led to this becoming a crime during two 20th-century conflicts.

World War One

A propaganda poster showing a girl reading a book on her father's knee and a little boy playing with soldiers on the floor. There is a question at the bottom; Daddy, what did you do in the Great War? — Figure caption,
Propaganda was used in World War One to encourage men to volunteer

At the start of World War One, the government relied on volunteers to fight. Over 1 million men signed up after a recruitment drive. However, as the war continued and the number of casualties increased, the government introduced

Examples of those exempt from conscription were the medically unfit, clergymen, teachers, and some labourers, miners, farmers and industrial workers. Some men refused to fight for the following reasons:

Some men refused to fight due to their religious beliefs. Many Christians justified this using the commandment ‘Thou shalt not kill’.
Some men argued that the war was a disagreement between the ruling classes of Europe rather than the ordinary people. They did not believe it was right to fight.
Some men refused to fight but did volunteer to support the army in non-combat roles, including as stretcher bearers, ambulance drivers or distributors of food.
Some men refused to fight for political reasons, disagreeing with the aims of the war.

Those who were against the war completely were called and were most likely Those who were not prepared to fight but did support the war effort in other ways were called alternativists.

Treatment of conscientious objectors

The majority of the British people supported the war effort and so were hostile to conscientious objectors. Some members of the public accused conscientious objectors of cowardice and physically attacked them. The government response included:

Around 16,500 conscientious objectors had to present their reasons for not fighting to local tribunals, which were special courts made up of retired soldiers and unsympathetic individuals.
Men who refused to accept the decision of the tribunal were imprisoned and experienced hard labour and long sentences.
Some men were given alternative work at home that supported the war effort.
Some men were punished by being sent to the front lines of the war in France. If they refused to follow orders, they were again sentenced by a military court.
A small number were sentenced to death. However, the prime minister stepped in and reduced the sentence to 10 years’ imprisonment.
After the war, conscientious objectors were not allowed to vote until 1926.

World War Two

In 1939, conscription was introduced again. However, conscientious objectors were treated differently by the government in World War Two:

Tribunals continued but did not include ex-soldiers on the panel that made decisions.
There were some court cases against conscientious objectors, such as members of the Peace Pledge Union, a pacifist organisation. However, these were usually dismissed by judges.
More emphasis was placed on providing conscientious objectors with alternative work that supported the war effort, such as roles in munitions factories and farming.
was used to build support for government action.
Conscientious objectors were imprisoned as a last resort.

The British public’s attitudes towards conscientious objectors were similar during World War Two to what they had been during World War One. Conscientious objectors were attacked in newspapers, openly accused of cowardice and attacked in the streets. Many lost their jobs with employers who disagreed with their actions.

Crime and punishment in modern Britain, c.1900 - EdexcelConscientious objectors in the 20th century