Why is WWII taught so extensively in most countries yet WWI is just glossed over?

[Sticky Squid]

I understand how WWII is more recent, however, WWI was the lead up to WWII as without it Germany wouldn't have been crippled.
Is it due to the grey and gray morality surrounding the events with no country truly being in the right?
Is it simply because most of the western front was bogged down in trenches?

 

[Jamash]

Define "most countries".

When I was at school, WW1 was taught as extensively (if not more) than WW2.

We learnt about WW1 in detail, briefly touched on the Great Depression, but concentrated mostly on post-WW1 reparations and the League of Nations, then went on to WW2. In fact, the first half of the 20th Century was really taught as one subject, since WW1 influenced everything else.

I even remember WW1 being taught more extensively than WW2 at primary school, with great importance being placed on "The Great War" and what we remember on Armistice Day, the sacrifices, the horrors and the "Lions Led By Donkeys".

 

[Myskomunken]

It would seem the threadmakers country need better education. Where I live both were taught fairly equally.

 

[Chamale]

World War I led to World War II, which led to the Cold War. World War II was bigger, and a better story for the Western Allies, because they were clearly in the right and the Axis was clearly in the wrong. I suspect that French and British schools teach World War I a lot more than American schools do, because America wasn't fighting in World War I for nearly as much time as World War II.

 

[Sticky Squid]

The first 2 responses surprise me, other people I had talked to just said that they got taught the bare bones of it then skipped to WWII.

 

[electric_warrior]

It was taught quite extensively to me

I don't know what you're talking about, maybe it is in your country but that doesn't mean it is in all countries.

 

[NickCooley]

I'd say it was about equal. However the British involvement was looked at in much more detail. Battle of Jutland/Somme etc.

 

[Dimitriov]

We learn WWI in great detail here in Canada... I haven't tried learning it anywhere else. Anyhoo we Canadians are pretty proud of our wartime contributions in WWI, as in we are proud of how bravely those young boys fought not proud of the war itself.

But every Remembrance day when I was in school I remember the "Great War" being covered probably more than WWII.

But I digress, Vimy Ridge, the Somme, the triple alliance and triple entente, the assassination of archduke Ferdinand. Yep, all covered.

 

[FFHAuthor]

WWI has always been much more intriguing to me than WWII, but my schools never got to it, the same with WWII, Korea and Vietnam. They ran out of time in the school year.

 

[raankh]

I hope it isn't, the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire is of such immense historical proportions. In particular considering the West is waging war in those very areas today.

 

[auron200004]

I was taught both fairly in-depth. Honestly, we covered the events LEADING to WW1 more than we did for WW2. It was probably because WW1 was the direct cause of WW2, more or less. Either way, we learned quite a bit about both.

I'm American, by the way. The public education system (at least in our country) is decided a bit nationally, but for the most part the individual states have different requirements. I live in Missouri, and I learned a few things differently than people in California, for example.

 

[Turing]

Actually I'd say WWI was taught more extensively when I went to school as the classes covered most of the factors of WWI while WWII was mostly about the Nazis and the division of Germany by the allies and the consequences thereof.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

We got taught about World War 1 and 2, but you have to remember that all education now is governed by exams, and we learned the events chronologically, so WW1 was taught for our key stage 3's, at which the focus was more on examining and evaluating sources, so there was less emphasis on dates, in depth discussion and events. The Rise of the Nazis was taught in our A level years, and it was properly in depth because the exam focused on events, reasons for Hitlers power etc. And more was expected from us at that point. But we didn't really learn in depth about any battles or campaigns of WW2, because they weren't on the exams.

 

[jprf]

Where do you live? WW1 was taught extensively at my school (in the UK).

 

[destiny_1989]

I spent almost my entire 10th grade studying World War I in my History class, whereas World War II got a semester, at most (I don't quite remember the time frame exactly but it's somewhere along those lines). I think that less attention is given to World War I because it didn't really come as a surprise. Everyone knew it was going to happen sooner or later; someone just needed an excuse to wage war (which showed it's head with the assassination of the heir to the Austria-Hungary throne). World War II probably has a more emotional resonance because of all the Nazi atrocities but, then again, I can't really read any minds and find out exactly why one war would be treated more thoroughly than the other.

 

[Kaytastrophe]

It is a misconception that the western front was static. In fact there were many brutal battles fought throughout the western front. I think the reason why WWII is taught more heavily (though not much more in Canada) is that World War II changed the world in so many ways; ways still felt to this day. During World War II (I say WWII period loosely including everything after WWI) we saw the rise of fascism and/or (depending how you view it) Nazism. African countries used a lot of the rhetoric put forth by the Allied leaders about free states to choose government as a means to gain independence. We saw the first bits of the cold war during WWII. We developed so many technologies during WWII (radar, jets, rockets, etc). As terrible as it is Nazi experiments and research performed by Nazis like Mangal furthered our understanding of the human body regarding things like hypothermia and such. We also saw rise of nuclear energy. World War II had a more significant impact on the worlds history in comparison to World War I at least, that is what my research and understanding of World War II has me believe.

 

[Duffeknol]

Because WWI was fucking boring. Nothing happened except a few million casualties, trenches going nowhere, fronts barely shifting, the Dutch getting filthy rich by staying neutral, Hitler getting his arse nearly mortar'd off, the Germans sending Lenin to destabilize the Russian tsar's regime, the introduction of front line journalism, the first dogfights, weaponized gas being used, the Ottoman Empire pretty much vanishing, Austria-Hungary going away, the treaty of Versailles setting the stage for WWII... yeaaaah...