Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
ArbitraryC
Jan 28, 2009
Pick a number, any number
Pillbug

hosed-Up Little Dog posted:

What an odd thing to feel the need to do now.

Yeah what's the story with this? Is it just a response to the general political climate out there or what.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

ArbitraryC
Jan 28, 2009
Pick a number, any number
Pillbug

Conch Shell Corp posted:

They had absolutely no problem starting world war one, and most historians assign the lions share of the blame to them for initiating it due to unconditionally supporting Austria, which invoked that chain of alliances. This is the key link in the chain, as Austria would not go to war with Russia and Serbia alone.

The only thing that directly led to WW2 was France not wiping the Germans off the face of the earth.

I dunno about "most historians", from what I recall in my history classes ww2 basically was a ww1 aftershock and the climate that facilitated hitler's rise to power was p much entirely because of treaties following ww1.

ArbitraryC
Jan 28, 2009
Pick a number, any number
Pillbug

Conch Shell Corp posted:

read the effortpost above. the peace treaty was exceedingly lenient considering half of the French men of fighting age died in the war, and is probably the most lenient peace treaty in history considering what the victors sacrificed to win.

I'm not a history major I'm just saying what I learned, I can't personally counter the unsourced effort post because I'm not an expert in the field. I was simply disagreeing with the idea that historians were rallied around the idea that nazi germany came about because germans were cartoonish villains, the books and lectures I received as part of my history education in school all generally pointed to the idea that germany was experiencing hard economic times related to the treaties following ww1 and rallied around nationalism as a way out.

Not saying that's an accurate portrayal of how things went down just that it's a common enough view among the people who write the books and teach the classes.

ArbitraryC
Jan 28, 2009
Pick a number, any number
Pillbug
maybe we could have avoided all the trouble in the middle east and africa if we just exterminated everyone and colonized it ourselves, really makes you think

ArbitraryC
Jan 28, 2009
Pick a number, any number
Pillbug

Randarkman posted:

You want me to provide footnotes and a bibliography to GBS post? Are you insane?

Most general history education is simplified and also builds upon older scholarship. Alot of that scholarship, which takes the harshness of the Versailles Treaty at face value and emphasizes that and German economic hardship, is built very heavily upon work by German and British historians of the 20s and 30s who were very sympathetic to this interpretation. Alot of modern scholarship has come to view this differently as I have laid out.

As for where I have read stuff, it comes from alot of different sources and at this point it is mostly from memory. But I'd say these two books have been the most important in forming my views and interpretation on the matter.

The First World War: Volume I: To Arms by Hew Strachan
The Wages of Destruction by Adam Tooze

I would also recommend The Berlin Baghdad Express by Sean McMeekin for something that goes alot into German war aims and war conduct during WW1, albeit focusing on the Middle East. I also remember the first chapter of Antony Beevor's book about WW2 as a whole containing a pretty good discussion on the origins and start of WW2 and extreme nationalism in Germany and Europe.
Nah I wasn't trying to dig at you just saying that I don't have the personal expertise to critique it. I was mostly disagreeing with the post that suggested historians were mostly agreed on this interpretation, as that goes entirely against what most people learn in school regarding the situation.

Wouldn't be the first or last time our history education led us astray because it was more convenient than the reality of the matter but it's just not gonna win anyone any credit to pretend like it's just common undisputed fact.

It's interesting insight and I appreciate you going through the effort to write about it.

  • Locked thread