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

[mrdude2010]

they were taught fairly equally in my school... but we spent a lot more time on the lead up to WWII, which involved a lot of post WWI stuff

 

[crystalsnow]

It was taught fairly equally at my school, but my guess in your case is that it's a war most people would simply like to forget about? Nobody was particularly proud about it (okay maybe the U.S. a LITTLE bit because we're dicks but that's not the point) and it was for the most part a fairly gruesome existence inside a hole for 4 years.

 

[mrdude2010]

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?

i imagine because ww1 is out of human memory, and there are no super-weapons involved or video documentaries

Just to note "no super-weapons" is quite false here. WWI saw the introduction of large scale chemical warfare (despite being banned by treaty, but there was a loophole). The German versions being designed by Haber (who you might know for the Haber cycle. He made modern mass-produced fertiliser, he's also considered a war-criminal by a lot of people.)

We were always taught both fairly evenly in Ireland, though there was a slight emphasis on WWI in my education since so many Irish served in the English army and we were neutral in WWII.

also the tank and the portable machine gun first saw widespread use in WWI. and artillery became much more advanced when compared to 1800's era artillery

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

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?

WW2, for the US at least, is much easier to spin as a good vs. evil, America saves the day, hooray for the land of the free winning the patriotic war that starred John Wayne. The battles were more dramatic and dynamic, we have many, many, many more veterans kicking about (the amount of WW1 veterans has just reached to the amount of fingers you have, and I doubt their will be any by the year's end), and it was fondly remembered for bringing in the golden days of the 50's. It is hard to defend the Nazi's and Hitler has, in everybody minds, become equal to Satan, thus everything we did in it was noble and just.

WW1 on the other hand is hard to spin as anything else than the mudding, terrible, political land mine of WW1. Between the poison gas (which both sides used might I add) that if it didn't blind for the rest of one's life, it killed you in the most horrible ways imaginable. Thousands died over (some times literally) inches with the use of Civil War era strategies against machine guns and mortor fire. Their was no "good" or "bad" side, it was just everybody jumping into a confused brawl to fight out all the political stresses that has been building up in the continent since the time Bismark stepped down. America only really got into the war during it's last year, turning the tide since both sides were just at the brink of running out of men, ammo, guns, and shoes to throw at each other.

 

[LikeDustInTheWind]

In Canada we learn about it pretty much equally because we played a major part in both. If you're in the US you probably learn more about WW2 because that was your biggest military victory.

WW2 is just easier to teach, you have a bad guy (axis)and the good guys (allies). It's much simpler the understand.

Also this.

 

[cheywoodward]

If this is the case outside of America I would guess that it stems both from the fact that World War II established the current state of the world more than anything else except for possibly the Cold War, which WWII caused anyway, and that, unlike in WWI, the allies were obviously the good guys in WWII and it's easier to study historical topics when your country wasn't the gigantic dick in the situation.

If you're talking about America then I would say it stems from the above reasons and the fact that America's involvement in WWII follows a classic story arc with the country being hit at its lowest point (Pearl Harbor) after falling to that point from a pretty great height (Roaring '20s to Great Depression) and then finding a way to rise back up and defeat the evil of the main villains (the Axis Powers).

 

[Mr.Mattress]

If you've barely been taught about WWI, I think I know why: Most of it's boring. It was Trench warfare in the Western and Italian Fronts, Arab Revolts in the Middle East Front, and the Germans beating the crud out of Russia in the Eastern Front. All relatively boring when you think about it, and it didn't really solve anything, because World War 2 was basically caused by World War 1.

 

[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?

From my experience of schools in England we seem to learn mostly about WW1, and touch on the subject of Nazi Germany. But very rarely go beyond that into WW2.

Really, I am English and we went in depth of the second war, the build up, the effects, economies during the war and stuff like that.
However, WWI only gave us people's opinions on Haig and asked whether or not we agreed with them.

 

[Sariteiya]

In Canada we learn about it pretty much equally because we played a major part in both. If you're in the US you probably learn more about WW2 because that was your biggest military victory.

Totally true. In our school (in Ontario) we actually learned a whole lot about WWI, namely things like Vimy Ridge and Ypres. WWI was viewed as some as the first time Canada developed it's identity as a country. Not to mention Canadian troops were viewed as one of the most feared fighting forces involved in the war. So it's a pretty big part of Canadian history.

 

[Dyme]

WW1 was a war. ~17 million casualties.

WW2 was 50 million to over 70 million fatalities. Many civilian casualties. It was holocaust, it was nuclear weapons. The biggest human conflict in our history.

Is it due to the grey and gray morality surrounding the events with no country truly being in the right?

Austria/Germany clearly started the war. They wanted war.

 

[OldGus]

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".

I learnt about it at school, but at a guess I would say it's because WW2 had more lasting direct repercussions.

I believe by "most countries", he means America, maybe Canada, and pretty much any country only involved in the second one (for example, China and Japan... and there it's pretty much only to keep that rivalry alive.) And as for reasons... the countries, borders, and nationalities resulting from WW2 are pretty much the same as now (Cold War aside), more countries were directly involved in WW2, WW2 was what directly led to the independence of some British colonies, like India, and the redefinition of American colonies to "anything but 'colonies'", like Puerto Rico and Guam, most recent great victory and "clear enemy", first and last use of nuclear weapons in war (which many incorrectly credit with the start of the Geneva Convention to define war crimes), the Holocaust... long, long list.
That being said, I have this strange feeling you're from Europe, possibly Britain. Just an educated guess.

 

[teebeeohh]

funny enough, WW1 was taught extensively while we had almost nothing on WW2. The actual wars, we covered reasons and consequences(and let's face it that the only thing relevant unless you aspire to be a military historian). We only covered actual fighting for the impact that the applications of then modern industry had on people. Also you need of lot of time in Germany to point out why our first try at democracy failed so miserably.

 

[LikeDustInTheWind]

In Canada we learn about it pretty much equally because we played a major part in both. If you're in the US you probably learn more about WW2 because that was your biggest military victory.

Totally true. In our school (in Ontario) we actually learned a whole lot about WWI, namely things like Vimy Ridge and Ypres. WWI was viewed as some as the first time Canada developed it's identity as a country. Not to mention Canadian troops were viewed as one of the most feared fighting forces involved in the war. So it's a pretty big part of Canadian history.

Also we were called Stormtroopers and that is pretty damn badass.

 

[redisforever]

We were taught mostly about WWI, actually. Depends on the school system I guess. I'd have preferred a longer history course, but there wasn't enough time. I love my history.

 

[mikespoff]

Yeah, we learned plenty about both, but focussed on the causes and consequences rather than the actual wars. From an historical perspective those are the more interesting bits; the actual details of the conflict are more relevant to military historians and patriotism inflation. Except, of course, when the specific battles and campaigns had major social repercussions on the country in question (as with Australia, for instance).

 

[Hero in a half shell]

WW1 was a war. ~17 million casualties.

WW2 was 50 million to over 70 million fatalities. Many civilian casualties. It was holocaust, it was nuclear weapons. The biggest human conflict in our history.

Is it due to the grey and gray morality surrounding the events with no country truly being in the right?

Austria/Germany clearly started the war. They wanted war.

Actually Great Britain and France announced war on Germany, Hitler never wanted to fight France or Britain, he wanted Poland and some of Russias land, for living space for the German people, he wasn't interested in Britain/France and was reluctant to go to war with them. It was also pretty grey at the time, only after the war did the details of the holocaust become publicly known, most Nazi soldiers didn't have anything to do with the holocaust, in fact they were the ones being attacked by Britain/France etc.

Sorry bout that, I had this stuff drummed into my head for A-level history, by a history teacher who loved to play devil's advocate.

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

WWI was hardly glossed over in my school seeing as we devoted a month and a half to it if I recall correctly. However, it is hard for me to remember just how much of the reading I was doing was school assigned and the reading I was enjoying on my own time.

 

[internetzealot1]

WWII resolved the problems left by WWI.

 

[Mechanix]

I was taught both equally, or maybe that's just because I was in Honors History, since you can't really get into the details of WWII without understanding WWI. Maybe you just don't remember being taught WWI because to most, it's more boring than WWII. In all kinds of movies, games, books, etc, WWII is glorified and shoved in your face all the time, and learning about it was probably a bit memorable. The only book, movie, or game that comes to mind about WWI is All Quiet On The Western Front. Great movie, but a loner of a movie for sure.