Syllabus Edition
First teaching 2016
Last exams 2025
The Treatment of Conscientious Objectors in the First & Second World Wars: Case Study (Edexcel GCSE History)
Revision Note
Written by: Rosanna Killick
Reviewed by: Bridgette Barrett
The Treatment of Conscientious Objectors in the First and Second World Wars: Case Study - Timeline
The Treatment of Conscientious Objectors in the First and Second World Wars: Case Study - Summary
When the First World War began, over one million men signed up to fight. As the war went on and casualties rose, the government introduced conscription. This made it a crime to avoid actively participating in the war.
There were some exceptions to conscription. Clergymen, the medically unfit and those with jobs essential to the war effort were exempt. Some conscientious objectors (COs) were also exempt. However, even those who faced tribunals successfully received harsh treatment from the public. The government was similarly quite harsh on COs. It deprived them of their voting rights and punished a great number.
When the Second World War began, conscription was reintroduced. Around 60,000 conscientiously objected. This was an increase of around 44,000 from the First World War. Though public attitudes to COs remained negative, the government’s response became softer. On the whole, COs were afforded better treatment in the Second World War than in the First World War.
Why did People Conscientiously Object?
People conscientiously objected for many reasons
Table of reasons why people conscientiously objected
Political reasons | Moral reasons | Religious reasons |
Some saw war as an imperialist conflict between Europe’s ruling classes. They thought it was wrong for ordinary people to fight over a dispute that did not concern them | Some believed that war was simply wrong in all cases. These people were absolutists and tended to be pacifists. Others, known as alternativists, volunteered for non-combat roles | Some saw war as a violation of God’s law. They believed in the sanctity of life and cited one of the Bible’s Ten Commandments: “You shall not kill” |
Treatment and Punishment of Conscientious Objectors in the First World War
Public attitudes and government responses determined how COs were treated and punished in the First World War
Table of public attitudes and government responses to COs in the First World War
Public attitudes | Government responses |
Public opinion was largely hostile towards COs. Because most people supported the war, they thought of COs as unpatriotic traitors | Authorities were also hostile to COs. They saw them as harmful to the war effort. Casualties on the front line were very high. Those in charge of recruitment thought that pacifist ideas would dissuade men from becoming soldiers |
Some, especially those who had friends or family who had been injured or killed fighting, saw COs as unmanly. They sent COs hate mail or white feathers to symbolise their cowardice | The government banned COs from voting for the duration of the war and five years after it ended |
Many COs also faced physical attacks, job losses and negative press | COs had to face local tribunals, which were often unfair. Local authorities selected the judging panel, so they varied widely across different areas. Most were made up of retired soldiers, who were highly unsympathetic to COs |
Change and Continuity in the Treatment of Conscientious Objectors in the Second World War
In the Second World War
Public attitudes to and treatment of COs continued to be hostile
The government’s response to COs changed
The diagram below highlights changes in the government’s response to COs in the Second World War
Worked Example
Explain one way in which the treatment of conscientious objectors changed between the First World War and the Second World War
4 marks
Answers:
In the First World War, the government punished conscientious objectors quite harshly. (1) Over 6,000 served lengthy sentences in prison, where they faced solitary confinement and hard labour (1). In the Second World War, the government was much more lenient in its punishment of conscientious objectors. (1) As alternative work was more freely given, prison was only used as a last resort (1).
Examiner Tips and Tricks
The exam might ask you to compare the treatment of conscientious objectors with that of another group, such as the Tolpuddle Martyrs. If so, remember to look at both the similarities and differences between them.
Last updated:
You've read 0 of your 5 free revision notes this week
Sign up now. It’s free!
Did this page help you?
